· CITY OF WINDSOR AGENDA 7/13/2020 City Council Meeting Date: Monday, July 13, 2020 Time: 10:00 o’clock a.m. Location: Council Chambers, 1 st Floor, Windsor City Hall Clerk’s

CITY OF WINDSOR AGENDA 7/13/2020

City Council Meeting

Date: Monday, July 13, 2020 Time: 10:00 o’clock a.m.

Location: Council Chambers, 1st Floor, Windsor City Hall

Clerk’s Note: All members will be participating electronically and will be

counted towards quorum in accordance with Procedure By-law 98-2011 as amended, which allows for electronic meetings during a declared emergency. The minutes will reflect this accordingly.

MEMBERS:Mayor Drew Dilkens

Ward 1 – Councillor Fred Francis

Ward 2 – Councillor Fabio Costante

Ward 3 – Councillor Rino Bortolin

Ward 4 – Councillor Chris Holt

Ward 5 – Councillor Ed Sleiman

Ward 6 – Councillor Jo-Anne Gignac

Ward 7 – vacant

Ward 8 – Councillor Gary Kaschak

Ward 9 – Councillor Kieran McKenzie

Ward 10 - Councillor Jim Morrison

Council Agenda July 13, 2020 Page 1 of 413

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Item # Item Description 1. ORDER OF BUSINESS

1.1. In the event of the absence of the Mayor, Councillor McKenzie has been Appointed Acting Mayor for the month of July, 2020 in accordance with By-law 176-2018, as

amended.

2. CALL TO ORDER

3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

4. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

5. NOTICE OF PROCLAMATIONS

6. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

7. COMMUNICATIONS INFORMATION PACKAGE (This includes both Correspondence

and Communication Reports)

7.2. Council Question CQ 31-2019 - City Wide (C 110/2020)

8. CONSENT AGENDA

8.1. Community Safety and Wellbeing Regional Plan - City Wide (S 87/2020)

8.2. Forest Glade Splash Pad Funding - Ward 7 (C 128/2020)

8.3. Appointment of Drainage Engineer - Little River Steel Walls (Wards 6 and 7) (C 125/2020)

8.4. Appointment of Drainage Engineer - Talsma and Janisse Drains (Ward 10) (C126/2020)


CONSENT COMMITTEE REPORTS

8.5. Updates to the Archaeological Management Plan (SCM 186/2020) (S 71/2020)

8.6. Zoning By-law Amendment Application for 4100 7th Con. Rd.; Applicant: MAA AshaPuri Enterprises Inc.; File No. Z-020/19, ZNG/5980; Ward 9 (SCM 187/2020) (S 42/2020)

8.7. OPA & Rezoning – Responsive Group – 3175-3215 Banwell - OPA 131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 -Ward 7 (SCM 188/2020) (S 74/2020)

8.8. Approval of a Plan of Condominium with Exemption under Section 9(3) of the

Condominium Act –Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc. 737 Ouellette Ave. – CDM 001-20 [CDM-6041] ; Ward 3 (SCM 189/2020) (S 75/2020)

8.9. Approval of a Plan of Condominium with Exemption under Section 9(3) of the Condominium Act – Piroli Construction Inc. 850 Wyandotte Street W – CDM 002-20 [CDM-6053]; Ward 3 (SCM 190/2020) (S 76/2020)

8.10. Response to B3/2020 Directing Administration to Report Back with a Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program and List of Funded CIPs (SCM 191/2020)

(S 68/2020)

8.11. Application by the Registered Owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.) of 3311 Peter Street for an exemption from Demolition Control By-law 20-2007 and an application for Financial Incentives under the Sandwich Community Improvement Plan (Ward 2) (SCM 192/2020) (S 69/2020)

8.12. Close the Westerly 6.1m Portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard ROW and 4.87m wide East/West Alley, Abutting the Property Known as 7467 St. Rose Avenue - Applicant: Glenn Murray - SAA/5550 - Ward 6 (SCM 193/2020) (S 227/2020)

8.13. Minutes of the International Relations Committee of its meeting held February 26, 2020 (SCM 194/2020) (SCM 97/2020)

8.14. EWSWA Annual Report - Essex-Windsor Residential Waste Diversion 2019 (dated March 31, 2020) (SCM 199/2020) (SCM 175/2020)

8.15. EWSWA Regular Board Meeting Minutes February 4, 2020 (SCM 200/2020)

(SCM 176/2020)

8.16. Traffic Calming - Adapting to COVID-19 Emergency - City-Wide (SCM 201/2020)

(S 64/2020)

8.17. Riverside Drive at Ford Boulevard - Speed Review - Ward 6 (SCM 202/2020) (S 78/2020)

8.18. Revised 2021 Road Rehabilitation Program - City Wide (SCM 203/2020) (S 81/2020)


9. REQUEST FOR DEFERRALS, REFERRALS AND/OR WITHDRAWALS

10. PRESENTATIONS AND DELEGATIONS

11. REGULAR BUSINESS ITEMS (Non-Consent Items)

11.1. Response to CQ11-2020 regarding Open-Air Burning (C 136/2020)

11.2. Declaration of Vacant Lands Municipally Known as 0 Grand Marais Road East and Part

of Closed Grand Marais Road East Surplus and Authority to Offer for Sale-Ward 10 (C 123/2020)

11.3. Capital Variance Report – May 31, 2020 - City Wide (C 91/2020)

11.4. COVID-19 2020 Year-End Financial Projections - City Wide (C 134/2020)

12. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS

12.1. (i) Report of the Special In-Camera meeting or other Committee as may be held prior to

Council (if scheduled)

13. BY-LAWS (First and Second Reading)

14. MOVE BACK INTO FORMAL SESSION

15. NOTICES OF MOTION

16. THIRD AND FINAL READING OF THE BY-LAWS

17. PETITIONS

18. QUESTION PERIOD


19. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

20. UPCOMING MEETINGS

Regular City Council – CANCELLED & RESCHEDULED TO JULY 13, 2020

Monday July 6, 2020 1:00 a.m. (meeting held electronically)

Diversity Committee

Tuesday July 7, 2020 9:30 a.m., Teleconference Community Services and Parks Standing Committee – CANCELLED

Wednesday July 8, 2020

9:00 a.m. Regular City Council

Monday July 13, 2020 10:00 a.m. (meeting held electronically)

Development & Heritage Standing Committee Monday July 13, 2020

4:30 p.m. (meeting held electronically)

21. ADJOURNMENT


Page 1 of 3

Council Report: C 110/2020

Subject: Council Question CQ 31-2019 - City Wide

Reference:

Date to Council: July 13, 2020

Author: Mark Nazarewich Senior Legal Counsel

519-255-6100 ext 6427 [email protected] Legal Services, Real Estate & Risk Management

Report Date: May 29, 2020 Clerk’s File #: AB2020

To: Mayor and Members of City Council

Recommendation:

That Council RECEIVE the response to CQ 31-2019 for information.

Executive Summary:

n/a

Background:

At the Council meeting of November 18, 2019, Councillor Bortolin asked the following question:

CQ 31-2019

Assigned to City Solicitor

Asks that Administration review By-laws that deal with dumping on private property.

Currently we do not have By-laws restricting dumping on private property if done so with permission. Asking that legal come back with options to create a By-law not allowing dumping on vacant properties in any way.

Discussion:

Section 127 and Section 128 of the Municipal Act, 2001 provide municipalities the authority to pass by-laws restricting dumping on private property.

Section 127 of the Municipal Act, 2001 states that a municipality may:

(a) require the owner or occupant of land to clean and clear the land, not includingbuildings, or to clear refuse or debris from the land, not including buildings;

Item No. 7.2


Page 2 of 3

(b) regulate when and how matters required under clause (a) shall be done;

(c) prohibit the depositing of refuse or debris on land without the consent of the

owner or occupant of the land; and

(d) define “refuse” for the purpose of this section.

Section 128 of the Municipal Act, 2001 states that a municipality may:

(a) Prohibit and regulate with respect to public nuisances, including matters that, in the opinion of council, are or could become or cause public nuisances; and

(b) The opinion of council under this section, if arrived at in good faith, is not subject to review by any court.

City of Windsor By-law 3-2006, “A By-Law To Establish Standards Respecting Yard

Waste & Exterior Property Maintenance And To Prohibit Littering In The City Of Windsor” (sometimes called the “dirty yard by-law”) is a by-law that, amongst other

things, addresses the depositing of refuse on private property.

The by-law aligns with the language of s. 127 and 128 of the Municipal Act, 2001 and utilizes all of the tools therein to address the issue of depositing refuse on private

property.

We have surveyed the refuse by-laws of several other Ontario municipalities to review

their language with particular regard to whether their by-laws prohibit anyone from depositing refuse on private property even if they have the permission of the owner or occupant to do so.

Most by-laws we surveyed use the language of the Municipal Act, 2001, or something similar, and only prohibit anyone from depositing refuse on private property i f done so without the consent of the owner or occupier – see by-laws of Toronto, London,

Kingston, Hamilton, Thunder Bay, Waterloo, Cambridge, Vaughan.

The by-laws of Ottawa, Sudbury and Markham prohibit depositing of refuse on land,

with or without the consent of an owner or occupant.

Council has the option of amending the City’s current by-law to include that depositing refuse on private property even with the consent of an owner or occupant is prohibited.

Risk Analysis:

See companion P & C memo.

Financial Matters:

There are no financial impacts associated with the receipt of this report.

Consultations:

Bill Tetler, Manager of By-law Enforcement


Page 3 of 3

Conclusion:

The City’s dirty yard by-law comports with the authority granted to it to control refuse on private property except that the City’s by-law does not prohibit depositing refuse on private property if done with the consent of the owner or occupant. Council could amend

the by-law to prohibit depositing refuse or waste on private property even if an owner or occupant gives consent.

Approvals:

Name Title

Mark Nazarewich Senior Legal Counsel

Shelby Askin Hager City Solicitor and Corporate Leader,

Economic Development and Public Safety

Onorio Colucci Chief Administrative Officer

Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices:


Page 1 of 7

Council Report: S 87/2020

Subject: Community Safety and Wellbeing Regional Plan - City Wide

Reference:


Author: Author: Leonardo Gil Project Manager, Regional Community Safety and Well-Being Plan

519-255-5200 ext. 5432 [email protected]

Sandra Bradt Executive Initiatives Coordinator

519-255-5200 ext. 5354 [email protected] Community Development and Health Services

Report Date: June 19, 2020 Clerk’s File #: MH/13786


Recommendation:

THAT the report of the Community Safety and Well-Being Project Manager BE RECEIVED for information and further;

THAT the deadline in the original Council Resolutions – CR340/2019 and CR543/2019 – BE AMENDED from January 1, 2021 to a date to be determined by the Province of

Ontario.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

In 2019 the Provincial government amended the Police Services Act to mandate every

municipality to prepare and adopt a Community Safety and Well-Being Plan. At their meeting of July 8, 2019 City Council considered this initiative as outlined in Report #S97/2019 and approved, through CR340/2019, that the Commissioner of Community

Development and Health Services (Commissioner) undertake a Community Safety and Well Being Plan. CR340/2019 also required that the Plan be brought to Council in

advance of the Province’s January 1, 2021 deadline and requested that the Commissioner “provide regular updates to the Community Services and Parks Standing Committee over the process of development and implementation of the Community

Safety and Well-being Plan.”

Item No. 8.1


Page 2 of 7

After discussions amongst the regional Chief Administrative Officers proposing a regional CSWB Plan, Report S198/2019 was brought to City Council requesting

authorization to engage the County of Essex and its municipalities to develop a Regional Community Safety and Well-Being Plan (RCSWB).

Through CR543/2019, Administration was directed to bring the regional Community

Safety and Well-Being Plan to City Council and Essex County Council in sufficient time to be considered prior to the Provincial government’s deadline of January 1, 2021.

The deadline of January 1, 2021 was established by the Province prior to the pandemic.

In consideration of COVID-19, on April 14, 2020, the Province passed the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Support and Protection Act, 2020 which allowed an extension to the

deadline past January 1, 2021 to an as-of-yet undetermined date. At their meeting of May 4, 2020, City Council received correspondence from the Office of the Solicitor

General CMC 7/2020, informing Council of the change in deadline. The correspondence was noted and filed.

This report is being brought forward to provide updates to City Council as requested

and formally amend the previous Council Resolutions to reflect that the deadline for the Community Safety and Well-Being Plan has been changed to a date yet-to-be-

determined by the Province.

Discussion:

Community Safety and Well Being (CSWB) Plan Summary

CSWB planning is an integrated approach to service delivery planning by working with representatives from a range of sectors, agencies and organizations to proactively develop evidence-based strategies to address local priorities that are related to crime

and complex social issues.

The CSWB Planning Framework (Framework) is strengths based and focused on

leveraging existing strategies and developing new approaches that promote and maintain community safety and well-being. The Framework emphasizes the use of evidence-based prevention and risk mitigation strategies to proactively reduce identified

risks and instances that require an incident response. The goal of CSWB planning is to achieve a community where everyone feels safe, has a sense of belonging, equitable

access to services and opportunities, and has their needs met across Windsor and Essex County.

RCSWB Planning Process and Governance

The governance structure of the Windsor and Essex County CSWB plan consists of:

(a) the Regional Systems Leadership Table,

(b) an Internal Core Team (Team), (c) Consultants for the County portion of the plan, and; (d) a Data Team.


Page 3 of 7

In alignment with the Provincial CSWB planning framework, the Regional CSWB Leadership Table (RSLT) involves partners from multiple sectors including health and

mental health, education, community and social services, community and social services for youth, custodial services for youth, municipalities, police and public safety, and business. The RSLT is chaired by the City of Windsor’s Community Development

and Health Services Commissioner, the Chief Administrative Officer for the County of Essex, and the Chief of Windsor Police Services. Currently the RSLT consists of 27

partners, including two County CAO representative positions. For a list of member agencies please see Appendix A.

As a consultative body, the RSLT plays several key roles. The RSLT provides strategic

input on the direction and framework of the plan, supports the identification and prioritization of localized risk factors, assists the internal core team in accessing sector

information and data, and facilitates connections with sector partners.

Supporting the RSLT is an Internal Core Team consisting of the Project Manager, staff from the City of Windsor’s Community Development and Health Services Department,

County of Essex and Windsor Police Services. The Team plans and facilitates RSLT meetings, community engagement sessions, and sector network consultations. The

Team is responsible for implementing RSLT action items, managing project timelines, and updating City and County municipalities. To ensure all municipalities are kept informed of the CSWB process, the Team has made itself available as a standing item

for the Regional CAO Table and, prior to the pandemic, began plans to present to all municipal councils.

In order to leverage existing strategies and better inform the CSWB governance on

community risks and protective factors, community conversations with committees and special interest groups from across the region will be completed. These conversations

will involve engaging sector networks to ensure diverse voices, lived or living experiences, and priorities are included in the plan development. These conversations will be in addition to public consultation. To ensure a fulsome and representative

regional plan, appendices specific to each municipality will be included. The appendices will contain community profiles, identified local priority risks and protective factors, and

analyses of data collected from community consultations.

To ensure fulsome community consultation in county municipalities as well as provide support on region-wide data analytics, a Request For Proposal was released to seek a

consultant to assist with the plan. The successful proponent will work collaboratively with the Project Manager and RCSWB governance to jointly create a consultation

methodology, facilitate public consultation sessions and focus groups, analyze consultation data and provide evaluation support.

Ultimately, the CSWB project entails the review of data from across multiple sectors and

disciplines. To ensure the context and implications of sector and organizational data is interpreted correctly, data analysts and stewards from RSLT member organizations

have been brought together to create a Data Team. The primary role of the Data Team is to advise on how to best access and understand sector data. The Data Team will also assist the Project Manager and Consultant to navigate available publicly facing data

sources or organizational data in the most efficient way.


Page 4 of 7

Project Status Prior to COVID-19

The following key milestones have taken place between the last council update

(November 18, 2019) and March 16th, 2020:

• Inclusion of County representation to the internal core team and the development

of a County CAO engagement and update strategy.

• Participation in three Ontario Municipal Social Services Association (OMSSA)

CSWB Working Group Meetings.

• Secured a consultant primarily focused on County of Essex engagement through

RFP #166-19.

• Finalization of the Regional Systems Leadership Table (RSLT) membership

shortlist and Terms of Reference.

• Facilitation of three pilot Sector Network Community Conversations consisting of

81 participants. Pilot community conversations were held with the Windsor Essex

Local Immigration Partnership (WE LIP); We Care for Youth Committee (WCFY);

and the Seniors Advisory Committee (SAC).

• Facilitation of two Regional Systems Leadership Table meetings. The inaugural

RSLT meeting focused on building an understanding of the CSWB planning

framework amongst members, as well as establishing shared expectations and

intent on the planning process. The second RSLT meeting resulted in the

creation of a definition of Community Safety and Well-Being for the region and

agreement on the direction of the planning process.

• Completion of contract negotiations and project scope review with the

prospective consultant (March 9, 2020).

• Facilitation of three additional Sector Network Community Conversations

consisting of 23 participants. Community conversations were held with the

Downtown Windsor Safety and Security Roundtable (DWSSRT); the Ford City

Safety Committee (FCSC); and the Enforcement and Justice Pillar of the

Windsor Essex Community Opioid and Substance Strategy (WECOSS – E&J).

• Meeting with Regional CAOs Table to provide project updates and establish point

of contact with County Municipalities.

• Inaugural meeting with the Data Team and review of possible sector data

indicators for the project.

• Commencement of an interactive regional asset map with the City of Windsor

Geomatics Department based on existing 211 data.

• Finalization of consultant Agreement with the successful RFP proponent.

• Development of project webpage.


Page 5 of 7

• Commencement of an online survey with Data Team members with COVID-19

related questions.

Current Status

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 18, 2020 the RSLT was advised of meeting cancelations and the project was paused. On March 30, 2020 the prospective consultants were advised that, due to the pandemic, there would be delays to the

finalization of the RFP Agreement. Discussions on the likely need to redevelop project methodologies and timelines were broached. The CSWB internal core team was

redeployed to manage COVID related emergencies within their respective organizations.

As noted above, in response to the pandemic, on April 14, 2020, new legislation under

the Coronavirus Support and Protection Act, 2020 allowed for the amendment of a new deadline for the completion and adoption of CSWB plans past January 1, 2021. At the time of writing, a revised deadline has yet to be announced. The Ministry of the Solicitor

General has indicated that it will be working with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the City of Toronto to determine a new deadline. Additionally, the

Ontario Municipal Social Services Association (OMSSA) has indicated to partner municipalities that they would advocate on behalf of members for a measured reintroduction of the CSWB planning process.

Since the announcement of a Provincial extension under the Coronavirus Support and Protection Act, 2020, the following key steps have taken place:

Completion of the RCSWB project webpage, hosted on the City of Windsor website.

Completion and submission of extension letters to AMO and OMSSA. The letters request that consideration be given to the impact COVID-19 may have on resident and community priorities as well as the workloads and responsibilities of

community partners. An amended deadline of January 1, 2022 was suggested.

On June 1, 2020, the CSWB Project Manager returned from redeployment.

Collaboration with the prospective consultants to redevelop project methodologies and timelines is ongoing.

Re-engagement of the RSLT and Internal Core Team has occurred.

As the pandemic has affected the project methodologies and timelines in the Consultant

agreement, the Project Manager sought counsel from the Legal Department. Their opinion is that an amendment to the deadline cited in Council Resolutions CR340/2019

and CR543/2019 is necessary before adjustments to the deadline can be made within the agreement. Considering a new CSWB deadline has yet to be established, it is recommended that the January 1, 2021, deadline be amended in CR340/2019 and

CR543/2019 to “a date to be determined by the Province of Ontario”.


Page 6 of 7

Risk Analysis:

There is a timing risk associated with the finalization of the Consultant Agreement should the City of Windsor not amend the original Council Resolutions to reflect the extension set forth by the Province. As indicated by the Legal Department, an amended

Council Resolution is necessary before amendments to the deadline or project timeline can be made within the Agreement. Further delay would affect the commencement of

work on the County portion of the RCSWB plan by the prospective consultants. Since a new deadline has yet to be determined, this delay also creates a possible risk to each of the county municipalities as they are obligated to deliver CSWB plans under the same

legislative requirements. The RCSWB project team has been working diligently to mitigate the timing risks by working with the prospective consultants to develop modified

project methodologies and timelines better suited for a post-pandemic environment.

There is a financial risk to the Corporation in that City and County Councils have allocated funding to the development of the RCSWB Plan and any extension to the

timeframe impacts those resources.

Financial Matters:

City Council approved costs for the development of the Community Safety and Well-

Being Plan and Project Manager to be charged to the Budget Stabilization Reserve to an upset limit of $200,000. (CR340/2019)

Further to City Council’s approval to undertake a regional planning process,

(CR543/2019) County Council has matched the City’s $200,000 contribution to cover the additional expenses, inclusive of the consultant, necessary to ensure the Plan

addresses the City and all County municipalities.

Of the total $400,000 in one-time funding approved by City and County Councils, $63,915 has been spent as of May 31, 2020. As part of the 2020 year-end process, a

request to carryover the balance of any unspent funding will be brought forward to ensure there is sufficient funding to fulfill the Province’s mandate.

Upon completion of the CSWB plan, and pending further direction from the Province, the City and County will jointly determine next steps and future funding beyond the deadline to be set by the Province of Ontario. Should a need for on-going funding be

identified, a request for annualized funding will be brought forward to City and County Councils during the appropriate budget development process.

Consultations:

Joshua Meloche, Legal Counsel

Paul Davidson, Financial Planning Administrator

Chief of Police, Windsor Police Services

Rob Maisonville – Chief Administrative Officer, County of Essex


Page 7 of 7

Conclusion:

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, progress on the development of the Regional Community Safety and Well-Being Plan was paused between mid March and June. With acknowledgement of the unprecedented circumstances, the Provincial government

has provided an extension to the CSWB deadline to an as-of-yet-determined date. As directed by the Legal Department, Administration requests that City Council approve the

amendments to the previous resolutions regarding Community Safety and Well Being planning in order to finalize the agreement with the successful respondent to RFP #166-19.

Planning Act Matters:

N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

Sandra Bradt Executive Initiatives Coordinator

Stephen Lynn for Leo Gil Project Manager, CDHS

Jelena Payne Commissioner of Community Development

and Health Services, Corporate Leader – Social Development and Health

Joe Mancina Chief Financial Officer and City Treasurer,

Corporate Leader – Finance and Technology


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Erica Bassakos [email protected]

Appendices:

1 Appendix A: Regional Systems Leadership Table - Member Agencies


Appendix A: Regional Systems Leadership Table – Member Agencies

Co-Chairs

• Jelena Payne, Commissioner of Community Development and Health Services, City of Windsor

• Chief Pamela Mizuno, Chief of Police, Windsor Police Services

• Rob Maisonville, Chief Administrative Officer, County of Essex

Membership*

• City of Windsor

• County of Essex

• County CAO Representatives

• Hotel Dieu Grace Health Care

• Erie Shores Healthcare

• Southwest Ontario Aboriginal Health Access Centre

• Windsor Essex County Health Unit

• Canadian Mental Health Association

• Windsor Essex Community Health Centre

• Local Health Integration Network

• University of Windsor

• St. Clair College

• Windsor Essex Catholic District School Board (WECDSB)

• Greater Essex County District School Board (GECDSB)

• Ontario Provincial Police

• LaSalle Police

• Windsor Police Service

• Essex Windsor EMS

• County Fire Chiefs Representative

• Windsor Fire Service

• Southwest Detention Centre

• Windsor Essex Children’s Aid Society

• Youth Justice Division

• Can-Am Indian Friendship Centre

• Workforce Windsor Essex

• South Essex Community Council

• Family Services Windsor Essex

*Membership is subject to change.


Page 1 of 5


Subject: Forest Glade Splash Pad Funding

Reference:


Author: Heidi Baillargeon 519-818-5094

[email protected] Parks Report Date: June 22, 2020

Clerk’s File #: SR/13847


Recommendation:

THAT City Council APPROVE a pre-commitment of $250,000 in 2021 from Community

Parks Rehabilitation Program (PFO-006-12) for the installation of a new splash pad at

Forest Glade Optimist Park; AND further;

THAT the CAO and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to sign a contract with YWI

Landscapes Inc. for the complete construction of splash pad at Forest Glade Optimist Park as per RFP NO. 22-20 in the amount of $212,969.21 (plus HST) which includes a

$10,000 contingency satisfactory in form to the City Solicitor, in technical content to the Corporate Leader of Parks, Recreation & Culture and Facilities and in financial content to the City Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer; AND Further;

THAT the CAO and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to sign and EXECUTE any

contract or agreements necessary to implement the splash pad and washroom facility improvements at Forest Glade Optimist Park provided tendered costs are within the approved project budget, satisfactory in form to the City Solicitor, in technical content to

the Corporate Leader of Parks, Recreation & Culture and Facilities and in financial content to the City Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer.

PROJECT CHARGED:

Forest Glade Capital Improvement Project ID#7191039

Executive Summary:

N/A

Item No. 8.2


Page 2 of 5

Background:

Forest Glade Optimist Park is currently classified as a community park located at 3265 Forest Glade Drive in Windsor. The park is well used year round with a number of community facilities including the Forest Glade Community Centre and Forest Glade

Arena, Forest Glade Branch of Windsor Public Library, 9 outdoor tennis courts, 5 baseball diamonds, a skate park, new sports court added in 2018, a playground and

walking paths. On March 4th, 2020 the City of Windsor Parks Department hosted an open house to collect feedback from the public regarding a new proposed washroom building and splash pad for the park. The meeting was generally well attended and

there was a lot of positive feedback from the community regarding the new improvements.

The 2020 Capital budget approved $500,000 for a new washroom/change room facility for the park and the 2021 budget has an additional funding of $250,000 approved in principle for the splash pad.

The design and consulting for both were undertaken simultaneously utilizing the approved $500,000.

Discussion:

Administration is recommending the pre-commitment $250,000 approved in principle in 2021 to facilitate and construct a new splash pad in unison with the new parks washroom/change room facility at Forest Glade Optimist Park. The pre-commitment of

funds from 2021 will allow administration to take advantage of synergies in planning and construction for the washroom and splash pad which should be developed together.

The infrastructure required for the splash pad will be housed in the new washroom building on site and therefore services must be brought into the building at the time it is constructed. The careful coordination of both projects running concurrently will shorten

the duration the public will be inconvenienced by construction, avoid higher costs by constructing them independently and will allow the park to be operational in a more time

efficient manner. Currently the City has contracted Maged Basilious Architects to prepare detailed construction drawings for the building which is almost 90% complete. In addition, the City sought out an RFP for the design of a splash pad at the park.

Understanding that the total available capital allocation in 2020 was not sufficient to accomplish both the splash pad and washroom improvements administration is

requesting the $250,000 to award the splash pad and complete the project in totality. The new proposed splash pad and washroom facility will become part of the Parks

asset inventory and as such, ongoing operational and maintenance costs will be part of future operating budgets. As part of the asset inventory these items will be monitored

for ongoing operational and capital replacement costs. It is estimated that each new splash pad carries with it approximately $5,000 in annual operational costs including start up and winterization costs and daily/ weekly ongoing maintenance, not including

utilities.

Risk Analysis:

The following items are being identified as potential risks:


Page 3 of 5

a) Resource Risk: It is believed that there are sufficient personal and financial

resources available to complete the new splash pad and washroom change room

facility at Forest Glade Optimist Park. Chances of a lack of resources are considered unlikely and of low impact.

b) Long Term Maintenance, Vandalism Risks- The long-term maintenance of

both the new washroom /change room and Splash Pad from an asset

management standpoint and replacement lifecycle costing should be considered. The lifecycle for a splash pad is approximately 20 years however, vandalism, excessive use and equipment wear and tear are factors for early replacement

costs which could have significant financial costs. Proper planning and a thorough design/build process under which this splash pad is being constructed

will help mitigate this risk as much as possible. In addition, splash pads are inspected on an ongoing basis for potential health and safety and vandalism issues. Currently the City splash pads are being inspected on a regular basis

which helps to mitigate this risk. Sufficient resources are also needed to maintain the city’s splash pads on a regular basis. Every splash pad in the city added to

the system requires inspection and maintenance and will require more resources to properly inspect and maintain them. If resources for maintenance are not addressed it may mean having to take the park equipment out of service earlier

than anticipated, or allowing the splash pad to fall into disrepair incurring the risk of litigation and more costs. This is considered possible to occur and of medium impact.

Vandalism, excessive use of equipment wear and tear are all factors that are considered possible to occur and this is of medium impact.

c) Timing Risks: There is are increased financial implications if the washroom and

splash pad are not completed at the same time in addition to a prolonged period

the park will be disrupted by construction. This is consider likely and is of high impact. In order to mitigate this risk, funding for both the Splash pad and new

washrooms should be approved. Not approving the funding will most likely result in higher financial cost to complete this project in totality.

d) Community Impact Risks: As with any splash pad, there is always a potential

risk of injury to users of the apparatus. Splash Pads are inspected on an ongoing

basis for potential health and safety and vandalism issues which is currently being done by City of Windsor staff to mitigate this risk. This is considered possible to occur and of medium impact.

e) Litigation: As with any procurement, failure to award the contract in accordance

with the terms of the RFP and the Purchasing By-Law could result in liability to the municipality. This is considered unlikely to occur and of medium impact.

Financial Matter

Capital funding for improvements to Forest Glade Optimist Park are identified under Community Parks Rehabilitation program as outlined in Project# PFO-006-12. In 2020,


Page 4 of 5

$500,000 is identified for a new washroom facility and 2021 has approved in principle funding for the splash pad in the amount of $250,000 as identified below:

Year and Description of Expenditure Amount

2020 – Planning /Design and construction costs for the Washroom facilities and Design Services for the Splash Pad at

Forest Glade Optimist Park (not yet tendered)

$500,000

2021 Construction of Splash Pad at Forest

Glade Optimist Park contract amount includes ($10,000 contingency)

$212,969.21

Project administration, Non-Recoverable

HST, Temporary Financing Costs and Landscape restoration costs

$37,030.79

Forest Glade Optimist Park Total $750,000

Administration is recommending the pre-commitment of funds from 2021 in order to complete the splash pad in unison with the washroom facility at Forest Glade Optimist Park. As mentioned above the pre-commitment of funds will allow administration to

take advantage of synergies in planning and construction for the park thereby shortening the duration the public will be inconvenienced by construction. The remaining funds in the project will complete landscaping and restoration works as noted

above.

As per RFP No. 22-20 and in accordance with the City of Windsor Purchasing By-Law the City received 4 separate responses to RFP No 22-20 from A.B.C Recreation (Proposal A), A.B.C Recreation (Proposal B), New World Park Solutions and YWI

Landscapes Inc. The proposal received by YWI Landscapes Inc. successfully meets all the requirements as outlined in RFP No. 22-20 including proposed cost in the amount of

$212,969.21 including a $10,000 contingency for the complete installation of a new Splash Pad at Forest Glade Optimist Park. ACCOUNTS CHARGED:

Forest Glade Capital Improvement Project ID # 7191039

Account - 007 5410 9998 10289 7191039

Consultations:

James Chacko – Senior Manager of Parks

Mark Friel – Financial Planning Administrator Jamie Scott – Manager Parks Operations

Alex Vucinic- Purchasing Manager

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the new park washroom and splash pad at Forest Glade Optimist Park will be a wonderful addition to this highly used community park. The March 2020 open

house received a number of comments requesting the splash pad and washroom


Page 5 of 5

facilities move forward. This the new addition will have a positive impact on the neighbourhood and surrounding community and satisfies planning and design initiatives

in both the City of Windsor Parks Master Plan Rediscover Our Parks and the Environmental Master Plan.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

James Chacko Senior Manager of Parks

Jan Wilson Corporate Leader of Parks, Recreation &

Culture and Facilities

Alex Vucinic Purchasing Manager

Melissa Osborne Senior Manager of Asset Planning

Shelby Askin Hager City Solicitor

Joe Mancina Chief Financial Officer


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices:


Page 1 of 3


Subject: Appointment of Drainage Engineer - Little River Steel Walls (Wards 6 and 7)

Reference:

Date to Council: July 13, 2020 Author: Andrew Dowie

Engineer III [email protected]

(519) 255-6100 ext. 6490Design and DevelopmentReport Date: June 18, 2020

Clerk’s File #: AS/2020


Recommendation:

THAT the firm of Landmark Engineers Inc. BE APPOINTED as the engineer of record

to prepare a report under Section 78 of the Drainage Act to inform City Council on the drainage works project, if any, that is required to address in order to analyze the

structural condition of the steel walls located at the shoreline of the Little River.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

At its meeting of February 28, 2011, City Council adopted CR77/2011, which commissioned the Little River Channel Dykes Study, as follows:

“That the Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA) BE RETAINED as the City’s agent for the Little River Channel Dykes Study.

That Council APPROVE the reallocation of capital funds in the amount of $90,000.00 in

order to pay for Little River Channel Dykes Study from project # 7082012 - Rossini Blvd - Wyandotte to Cul-de-sac.”

This study launched efforts that are now under way to correct the known dyke breaches along the Little River as well as provided a condition assessment of the steel-lined shoreline. Dillon Consulting Ltd. was the original consulting engineer for the work and

was engaged by ERCA. Immediate repairs were implemented in the subsequent years.

Item No. 8.3


Page 2 of 3

There have been further reports of structural concerns from adjacent residents. Some of these calls cannot be substantiated as high water levels persist.

With nearly ten years having passed since the 2011 inspection, and given the heightened risk of vulnerabilities with respect to our shoreline installations arising from the high water levels, Administration engaged Landmark Engineers, Inc., to undertake

an update of ERCA’s previous report to present day conditions. The fee payable to Landmark Engineers, Inc. will be $95,000.

Discussion:

City Council is being requested to approve the designation of Landmark Engineers Inc.

as engineer for this project in order for the firm to gain the rights and privileges vested to the engineer of record in order to carry out the requisitioned work.

Landmark Engineers, Inc. will begin their work in July 2020.

Risk Analysis:

Adoption of this recommendation will ensure that Landmark Engineers, Inc. is able to efficiently carry out their assigned duties. Absent adoption of the recommendation, the

right to enter private property can be overcome by having the Drainage Superintendent on site. The consequence of this outcome is that it fully encumbers the work day of the

Drainage Superintendent to this particular project rather than to other assigned duties.

Financial Matters:

There are no additional financial consequences arising from this recommendation. The existing requisition undertaken by Administration is funded under program ENG-001-13,

Little River Steel Retaining Walls, Project #7141019.

Consultations:

Landmark Engineers, Inc. (Dave Killen)

Conclusion:

In order for the work to be carried out efficiently, the designation of Landmark

Engineers, Inc. as engineer of record for the Little River Steel Retaining Walls project under the Drainage Act is recommended.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

Fahd Mikhael Manager of Design and Development


Page 3 of 3

Name Title

France Isabelle-Tunks Senior Manager of Engineering / Deputy

City Engineer

Mark Winterton City Engineer


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Landmark Engineers, Inc. 2280 Ambassador Drive, Windsor, ON N9C 4E4

[email protected]

Essex Region

Conservation Authority

360 Fairview Avenue

West, Suite 311, Essex, ON N8M 1Y6

[email protected]

Appendices: N/A


Page 1 of 3


Subject: Appointment of Drainage Engineer - Talsma and Janisse Drains (Ward 10)

Reference:

Date to Council: July 13, 2020 Author: Andrew Dowie

Engineer III [email protected]

(519) 255-6100 ext. 6490Design and DevelopmentReport Date: June 18, 2020

Clerk’s File #: AS/2020


Recommendation:

THAT the firm of BairdAE Inc. BE APPOINTED as the engineer of record to prepare a

report under Section 78 of the Drainage Act to inform Council on the drainage works project, if any, that is required to address the ongoing use of the Talsma Drain and

designation as a Municipal Drain.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

The Talsma Drain is a watercourse that provides storm water conveyance for a portion of the City west of Dougall Avenue and south of Tecumseh Road. The Talsma Drain

had an approximate construction date of 1892 and drained westerly towards the Basin Drain and originally followed the Northway Avenue right-of-way.

The Talsma Drain was named for C.S. Tolsma, the property owner of Lot 74 in

Sandwich West Township whose municipal boundaries once encompassed the area. A 1947 drawing noted in its title the drain name as Talsma while its details continued to

identify it as the Tolsma Drain. For the duration of its time within City of Windsor boundaries, the City of Windsor has named the drain as the Talsma Drain.

As development in the South Cameron planning area has increased, the drain has been

divided between two distinct sections. The section east of Dominion Boulevard begins on a property fronting Tecumseh Road West adjacent to the 2200 Block of Janette

Item No. 8.4


Page 2 of 3

Avenue. This section passes within the Canadian Pacific Railway and passes through Longfellow and Dominion Boulevards before its outlet into a storm sewer on MacKay

Avenue that in turn drains to the Janisse Drain. The Relief Drain, located west of the 2400 and 2500 blocks of Dougall Avenue, also outlets into the Talsma Drain.

The section west of Dominion Boulevard is located just south of Manitoba Street and

continues west to Northway Avenue where it flows southerly. A north-south relocation was constructed in 1986 without designation by By-law, where the drain was moved

easterly to Betts Avenue from Northway Street north of Kenora Street to accommodate land development. This section also outlets to the Janisse Drain.

The Janisse Drain is an adjoining east-west watercourse that drains the Talsma Drain

into the storm sewer system for a short distance near the Ojibway Street right-of-way. The Janisse Drain in turn outlets to St. Clair Avenue and, by way of a trunk storm

sewer, to the Grand Marais Drain.

Drawings for the Talsma Drain reside within municipal records but without corresponding By-law designating it as a municipal drain. The Janisse Drain is

designated through By-law 552 of Sandwich West Township, dated September 3, 1912. As a consequence, the majority of the drain is unregulated under the Drainage Act until

City Council adopts an updated By-law that gives approval for a companion Drainage Report. This report must be completed by an Engineer of Record.

Administration has engaged BairdAE Inc. to act as Engineer of Record by roster

appointment as authorized by Section 114 of the Purchasing By-law 93-2012. Approval is now being sought to designate the firm as Engineer of Record under the Drainage Act.

Discussion:

The designation of BairdAE Inc. as engineer of record for this project will provide the firm with all rights and privileges vested to the engineer of record in order to carry out

the requisitioned work.

BairdAE, Inc. will begin their work in July 2020 and will supply to City Council their report in a period of 12-18 months. The report will determine an updated design for the

drain as well as provide maintenance considerations on a go forward basis. Where applicable, it will also detail the special assessment charges to be levied for private

crossings such as culverts and bridges.

Risk Analysis:

Adoption of this recommendation will ensure that Baird AE, Inc. is able to efficiently carry out their assigned duties to complete a drainage report for the Talsma Drain.

Absent the designation of an Engineer of Record, a drainage report could not be created and would leave the Talsma Drain as an unregulated watercourse, susceptible

to alteration by property owners and with no legislated ability to correct unauthorized changes.


Page 3 of 3

Financial Matters:

There are no additional financial impacts arising from this recommendation. The existing requisition undertaken by Administration is funded under program ECP-004-08, Municipal Drains Capital Rehabilitation Program, Project #7086004. The contract value

awarded by corporate roster is in the amount of $87,000.00.

Consultations:

BairdAE Inc. (David Basilious)

Conclusion:

Designation of BairdAE Inc. as Engineer of Record for the Talsma and Janisse Drains report is recommended in order to protect and improve the functioning of these man-made watercourses.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

Fahd Mikhael Manager of Design and Development

France Isabelle-Tunks Senior Manager of Engineering / Deputy City Engineer



Notifications:

Name Address Email

BairdAE Inc. (Attn: David Basilious)

1000-267 Pelissier Street Windsor, ON N9A 4K4

[email protected]

Essex Region Conservation

Authority

360 Fairview Avenue West,

Suite 311, Essex, ON N8M 1Y6

[email protected]

Appendices: N/A


Committee Matters: SCM 186/2020

Subject: Updates to the Archaeological Management Plan

Moved by: Member Foot Seconded by: Member Baker

Decision Number: DHSC 169

THAT the report of the Heritage Planner dated May 5, 2020 entitled, "Updates to the Archaeological Management Plan" BE RECEIVED FOR INFORMATION.

Carried.

Report Number: S 71/2020 Clerk’s File: SPL2020

At the request of Chairperson Bortolin, a recorded vote is taken. Aye votes: Councillors Bortolin, Holt, Morrison, and Sleiman, and Members Baker, Bulmer, and Foot.

Nay votes: None. Absent: Members Fratangeli and Miller.

Abstain: None.

Clerk’s Note: The recommendation of the Standing Committee & Administration are

the same.

Item No. 8.5


Page 1 of 5


Subject: Updates to the Archaeological Management Plan

Reference:

Date to Council: June 8, 2020

Author: Kristina Tang Heritage Planner

[email protected] Planning & Building Services Report Date: May 5, 2020

Clerk’s File #: SPL2020


Recommendation:

That this report regarding the updating of the Windsor Archaeological Management Plan BE RECEIVED FOR INFORMATION.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

The City of Windsor is an area rich in cultural heritage resources. For thousands of years, the Detroit River served as a corridor for both Indigenous peoples and early Europeans, leaving behind a vast array of archaeological resources.

City Council recognized the rich archaeology resources in the City through adoption of the Windsor Archaeological Master Plan (AMP) as a policy document in August 2005.

AMP also includes a map of Archaeological Potential in Windsor and a companion report entitled: "Windsor Archaeological Master Plan Implementation Manual'', which have been used as tools to identify when and where archaeological assessments are

required prior to land disturbances. The AMP is referenced in the City of Windsor’s Official Plan Chapter 9 on Heritage Conservation, and the archaeological potential map

is also integrated as a schedule of the Official Plan.

Since the adoption of the AMP in 2005, there have been several legislative changes and updates to standards in archaeological processes, including expectations for

Indigenous Engagement.

In addition, a critical purpose of the AMP is its Archaeological Potential Model. The

original model adopted in 2005 was said to be mostly formulated between years 2000 to 2005, and has not been updated with data collected for the past 15-20 years. Updates


Page 2 of 5

to the model would form a major component of this Review and bring more clarity to requests for archaeological assessments.

The scope and nature of this update to the AMP requires the services of a licensed archaeologist. A Request for Proposal has been issued to engage a consultant to conduct the Review to the Archaeological Management Plan as per the Terms of

Reference (Appendix A), with a bid close date on June 5, 2020. A briefing will be provided to Heritage Committee to inform of the successful proponent subsequently.

Discussion:

Legislative & Policy Requirements

The Provincial Policy Statement, which is the policy document on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development, includes the following policies on

archaeology:

2.6.2 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on lands containing archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential unless significant

archaeological resources have been conserved.

2.6.4 Planning authorities should consider and promote archaeological management plans and cultural plans in conserving cultural heritage and archaeological resources.

2.6.5 Planning authorities shall engage with Indigenous communities and consider their interests when identifying, protecting and managing cultural heritage and archaeological

resources. Section 2.6.5 of the PPS has been updated in 2020 to indicate a heightened

engagement with Indigenous communities for archaeology. Given the recent Sandwich Roundabout Project which resulted in unanticipated archaeological processes with no

clear direction on Indigenous Engagement, it is the intent that the AMP Review will provide a protocol for Indigenous Engagement and Consultation, and bring clarity to any similar situations in the future.

Official Plan

The City of Windsor’s Official Plan also states the following archaeological policies:

9.3.2 Identification of Heritage Resources

9.3.2.1 Council will identify Windsor’s heritage resources by:

ARCHAEOLOGICAL

MASTER PLAN (a) Maintaining and updating the inventory of registered

archaeological sites or lands of archaeological potential, as

identified in the Windsor Archaeological Master Plan and Schedule ‘C-1’: Development Constraint Areas –

Archaeological Potential; (added by O PA 55 – 07/24/2006)


Page 3 of 5

9.3.4 Protection of Heritage Resources

9.3.4.1 Council will protect heritage resources by:

ARCHAEOLOGICAL

SITES (a) Requiring that development or infrastructure undertakings

on lands containing potential archaeological resources avoid the destruction or alteration of these resources; or

where this is not possible, requiring the proponent to conserve significant archaeological resources through

documentation and removal or mitigation in advance of land disturbances, in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act and the policies contained within the Windsor

Archaeological Master Plan, its implementation manual and Schedule ‘C-1’: Development Constraint Areas –

Archaeological Potential; (amended by O PA 55 – 07/24/2006)

9.3.7 Heritage Resources and Planning Initiatives

9.3.7.1 Council will integrate heritage conservation into the development and infrastructure approval process by:

ARCHAEOLOGICAL

ASSESSMENT (a) Requiring the preparation of an archaeological

assessment when development proposals or

infrastructure undertakings affect known archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential as designated on Schedule ‘C-1’:

Development Constraint Areas – Archaeological Potential and in accordance with the Windsor

Archaeological Master Plan and its implementation manual; (amended by OPA 55 – 07/24/2006)

Although not the approval authority, the practice of archaeology is regulated by the

Ministry of Heritage, Sports, Tourism and Culture Industries in Ontario (MSTCI). The Ministry updated the Standards and Guidelines for Consulting Archaeologist in 2011 and has also released new criteria for defining archaeological potential.

The select mentioned legislative and policy requirements/changes, and implications on modelling will be addressed through the AMP Review.

Stakeholder & Public Engagement, Implementation & Education

The project is expected to be guided by a Steering Committee which will be composed of representative stakeholders and appointment of a Heritage Committee Member if

desired. The Review will include engagement of stakeholders who may contribute information about archaeological resources in the area or may be impacted by the AMP

Review, including but not limited to City of Windsor staff who process permits or lead projects that may result in disturbances to archaeological resources, Indigneous Communities, the MHSTCI, archaeological and historical societies and organizations,


Page 4 of 5

developers and builders. The recreational group of metal detectors who obtained Council’s approval to be provided with a permit through City Parks Department to

conduct metal detecting activities in City Parks will also be taken into consideration. The consultant will not only design the engagement strategy, but also the educational and training components for both city staff and the public after adoption of the AMP Review

Plan.

Risk Analysis:

Risk to not conducting the review is the inability to comply with updated legislation and

to continue requiring/or not requiring archaeological assessments based on dated information from an outdated Archaeological Potential Model. The other risk is the

implications of inaccurate budgeting for city projects without understanding of Archaeological constraints, as well as the lack of clarity in Indigenous Engagement Protocols. Conversely, the AMP Review can be thought of as a tool to allow for the

conservation of archaeological resources while giving clarity to all parties that conduct land disturbance projects. It can also be a method to enhance Indigenous Relations.

Financial Matters:

The funding for this project has already been approved.

Consultations:

The terms of reference was created based on consultations with MHSTCI, and information from other municipalities who have recently conducted AMP.

Conclusion:

As the approval authority, the City of Windsor is undertaking an update to the current Archaeological Management Plan to satisfy the requirements of current legislation and better conserve archaeological resources in the community.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

Michael Cooke Manager of Planning Policy/ Deputy City Planner

Thom Hunt City Planner / Executive Director Planning & Building

Wira Vendrasco Deputy City Solicitor

Shelby Askin Hager City Solicitor / CLT


Page 5 of 5

Name Title


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices:

1 Appendix A- Terms of Reference for the Archaeological Management Plan Review


Appendix A- Terms of Reference for Archaeological Management Plan Review

Information has been extracted from RFP 9-20 Archaeological Management Plan Review

Consultant, Section 7 REQUIREMENTS AND DELIVERABLES OF THE CONTRACT

7.1 The successful Proponent will demonstrate ability, qualifications and knowledge in the following areas:

Proponent’s key liaison is an archaeologist who holds a valid Professional (P) licence issued by

the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries (MHSTCI).

7.1.1 Proponent with recent experience (ie. within the past 5 years) in creating or updating Archaeological Management Plan, stakeholder engagement such as experience working with Indigenous groups, and experience in municipal land use planning will be given preference.

7.1.2 Preference will be given to Proponents with in-house model 7.1.3 capabilities.

7.2 These competencies will support the provision of the following services under the Contract:

7.2.1 The Archaeological Management Plan Update for the City of Windsor should meet

the following objectives: 1. Update sites database of known/registered archaeological sites, site leads and archaeologically sensitive areas, including marine archaeological sites. 2. Review current archaeological potential model and update/improve it according to current standards, conditions, and new information. 3. Update the list of applicable legislation, modernize the relevant policies and recommend best practices for managing archaeological resources. Focus on land-based archaeology but include guidance for management of any known or discovered marine archaeological sites. 4. Revise implementation strategy for all affected stakeholders, including persons with interest to archeological resources (such as metal detectorists) municipal staff, and other private initiators of ground disturbances that may impact archaeological resources 5. Develop an engagement protocol for Indigenous Communities, with input from the communities. 6. Increase public awareness and stewardship of archaeological resources The deliverable will consist of two components; 1. A confidential technical report that contains all the data about registered and unregistered archaeological sites and archaeologically sensitive areas with particular emphasis on City-owned lands with known archaeological interest, and; 2. Updated public Archaeological Management Plan that speaks to the history of the area and background legislation, policy/guidelines on archaeology,


presence/potential of archaeological resources through the archaeological potential model, and the practical management of archaeological resources.

As part of the above, the consultant will be responsible for designing and carrying out a work program to achieve the study objectives. The consultant is expected to carry out the work program through a Stage 1 Project Information Form so that the AMP will officially be supported by MHSTCI. Upon completion the Proponent will present the public report to the Development & Heritage Standing Committee and to City Council. The public document must contain recommendations, an implementation plan and a schedule and should be written in plain, clear, and concise language, easily understood by users of the document who are not subject-matter specialists. It is desired that the AMP Plan Review be completed within a year of project initiation.

Without limiting the approach and originality of the consultant, this study shall include the

following:

7.2.2 BACKGROUND & POLICY a) Update the objectives for the Windsor Archaeological Management Plan, as

necessary. b) Prepare a brief review/update of the pre-history and the early history of Windsor

utilizing both primary (e.g. deeds, letters, etc.) and secondary sources, and engagement of Indigenous communities

c) Review and update legislative framework and existing federal, provincial and municipal guidelines for the protection and management of archaeological resources. Highlight municipal obligations for the protection and stewardship of archaeological resources.

d) Recommend policies addressing marine archaeology. e) Review and analyze the existing Official Plan policies dealing with archaeological

resources and provide recommended changes to these policies that may be appropriate as a result of this study. Note that any amendments to the Official Plan that result from this study will be prepared by municipal staff.

f) Review metal detecting and management of archaeological resources during metal detecting activities

g) Update the resource section and bibliography.

7.2.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL MAPPING & ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL MODEL

The City of Windsor has not consistently maintained its archaeological sites database and

Archaeological Potential Model since its adoption in 2005. Consolidation of this data would be

required as part of the work scope.

a) Review copies of all archaeological reports used to prepare the existing

Archaeological Management Plan to obtain accurate locations and status of archaeological resources. This includes reports used for registered sites, and information of site leads and suspected/non-registered sites that pre-date the registration system, as well as marine archaeological sites and shipwrecks. Traditional Indigenous areas, and active and closed cemeteries should be reviewed and included. The information from this exercise would be used to prepare the confidential technical report containing all data about registered and unregistered


archaeological sites, site leads and archaeologically sensitive areas referenced in the WAMP but only available internally to specific City staff.

b) Identify and map all lands that have been archaeologically assessed and reviewed for their archaeological potential (including areas which no longer have cultural heritage value or interest, and properties that require further archaeological assessment). The proponent will be required to obtain data from MHSTCI.

c) Re-evaluate the current archaeological potential model and its performance and recommend improvements.

d) Provide a rationale and explanation of the methodology and criteria of the archaeological potential model.

e) Update the model and mapping in accordance with their archaeological potential (high, and low) based on the criteria established in the study, not limited to the following:

Environmental factors

Previous/existing and new knowledge of pre-contact and post-contact Indigenous history

Previous/existing and new knowledge of non-Indigenous Historical Settlements, Sites, and Transportation Routes

Previous archaeological assessments

Known archaeological sites, archaeologically sensitive areas, and site leads

Archaeological integrity of properties based on previous ground disturbances from modern development activities

f) Recommend procedures for maintaining mapping and databases of archaeological potential and locations where something of significance has been discovered or when an area has been assessed to no longer contain cultural heritage value or interest.

g) Produce a GIS-based model with mapping that permits the identification of individual properties and is compatible with the City of Windsor GIS system. (The City of Windsor uses ArcGIS geographic information system software [ArcGIS Pro as well as the current ArcGIS software]). The City has adopted the UTM-NAD83, Zone 17, meters, as its standard in order to provide a common denominator for systems data. All geographic data shall be provided to the City of Windsor in ArcGIS shapefile format.)

7.2.4 IMPLEMENTATION a) Review the current Implementation Manual and determine its effectiveness. Update

and recommend appropriate policies and procedures for the management of archaeological resources in various contexts and scenarios, through current archaeological standards/practices and in consultation with stakeholders. Including but not limited to the following implementation to be proposed: For Municipal Implementation:

Municipal staff assessing the requirement for archaeological reviews in the land use planning process or for permit/development applications. Develop standard/template language that can be employed by municipal staff in the development review process. Procedures must be provided for all types of Planning Act, Ontario Heritage Act and Building Permit (both construction and demolition) applications, with consideration for applications located in areas of high archaeological potential with varying levels of past disturbances and proposed impact scenarios. These scenarios are not limited to: development


proposed in an area that spans across a mix of high and low archaeological potentials; development proposed in a high archaeological potential area/special interest areas, but where the subject property has been paved over; small-scale development in high archaeological potential areas/special interest areas; demolition or relocation proposed for a heritage property (recognized on the Windsor Municipal Heritage Register) on high archaeological potential areas, etc. Building Permit scenarios should include (but are not limited to) demolition with and without basements, and low profile residential construction etc.

Municipal staff reviewing Right-of-Way permits such as Utilities applications, in various integrity contexts and impact scenarios.

Municipal staff’s role and review of environmental assessments, or other less common application processes such as aggregate extraction, or renewable energy approval (if any).

Municipal staff leading site alteration activities, such as municipal construction or maintenance projects (eg. site grading, excavation, removal of topsoil/peat, placing and dumping of fill, drainage works, shoreline work impacting marine archaeological sites etc.). Recommend procedures for project managers and operations staff to be considered at the outset of the project/works.

Municipal staff management of municipal properties with archaeological interest/potential (eg. Real Estate Department).

Municipal staff management of metal detecting activities

For Non-municipal/Private Initiatives:

Land owners, consultants and contractors to utilize during the development process

Public Agencies (non-municipal) works such as but not limited to utility related construction or replacement/repair of underground utilities.

Consulting Archaeologist in assessment reporting and disposition of artifacts.

Recreational/Personal initiatives not limited to metal detecting activities b) Reference and summarize Stages 1- 4 of the Archaeological Assessment Process,

the marine archaeology assessment process, and reference the latest MHSTCI Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologist.

c) Develop a Contingency Plan for the Protection of Archaeological Resources in Urgent and Unanticipated Situations. Provide clear definition of these situations and provide common scenarios and approaches.

d) Recommend procedures for interdepartmental communication and consultation of Archaeological Management Plan requirements within the City of Windsor.

e) Provide a protocol for engaging and consulting Indigenous communities, including the identification of Indigenous communities to be engaged and how engagement should be undertaken.

f) Update the protocol and procedure relating to the discovery of human remains. g) Review and update the appropriate policies regarding the disposition of

archaeological artifacts. h) Update the procedures to integrate future archaeological assessments, registered

sites, and sites that no longer have cultural heritage value or interest into the regular maintenance of the archaeological information database to keep the archaeological potential model up-to-date.


i) Recommend a record-keeping process for archaeological sites/assessments, and a procedure for sharing confidential sensitive archaeological information with various stakeholders, which may include update of data sharing agreements with MHSTCI and/or other parties.

j) Recommend policies or measures to maintain the validity and robustness of the AMP (eg. To be compliant with and accommodate future changes in legislation or standards) and its data.

7.2.5 CONSULTATIONS, STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT & OUTREACH

Consultation, stakeholder and public engagement is crucial to the success and

effectiveness of the WAMP.

a) A Steering Committee which would include City of Windsor staff and other stakeholders will be formed and consulted throughout the course of the study.

b) Consultation with the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries, throughout the course of the study to ensure that Ministry requirements are met.

c) Consultation with local citizens and organizations, Indigenous communities and local museums who are knowledgeable of the City’s history and archaeology. The consultant will be expected to follow up on leads regarding local archaeological resources that emerge during the study. The consultant shall review with internal and external stakeholders about their perception and opinion on the effective implementation of the current Archaeological Management Plan, identify deficiencies, and suggest future improvements.

d) Stakeholders shall include but are not limited to:

City of Windsor (all affected Departments not limited to Planning, Building, Engineering, Operations, Parks, Facilities and Real Estate Departments)

Heritage Committee of the City of Windsor Development & Heritage Standing Committee

City of Windsor Department of Recreation & Culture

Museum Windsor

Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries

Indigenous Affairs Ontario

Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing (MMAH)

Indigenous Communities (to be verified with MHSTCI and MMAH) not limited to Walpole Island First Nation – Bkejwanong Territory, Caldwell First Nation, and Aboriginal Education Centre – Turtle Island at the University of Windsor

Ontario Archaeology Society – Windsor Chapter;

Essex County Historical Society;

University of Windsor – Anthropology & History;

Archaeological Approval Authorities in Neighbouring Communities (eg. Michigan State Historic Preservation Office)

Essex Region Conservation Authority

Planning Consultants in Windsor ;

Windsor Region Society of Architects

Windsor Construction Association;

Windsor Essex Home Builders’ Association;

Sun Parlour Treasure Seekers.


e) The consultant will be expected to design a public (and media) education program, which meets the following objectives:

provides information regarding the objectives of the study;

provides a brief overview on the archaeological history of Windsor; and

provides opportunity for public input into the study

The consultant will, subsequent to the approval of the study by City Council, educate land owners, consultants and contractors in the development community and provide training for municipal staff to inform relevant stakeholders internally and externally of their roles and obligations in the AMP. Recommendations must also be provided to City Staff on methods to maintain continual awareness of the AMP both externally and internally.



Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application for 4100 7th Con. Rd.; Applicant: MAA AshaPuri Enterprises Inc.; File No. Z-020/19, ZNG/5980; Ward 9

Moved by: Councillor Sleiman

Seconded by: Councillor Holt


I. THAT By-law 85-18 cited as the "Township of Sandwich South ComprehensiveZoning By-law" BE REPEALED for the land located at the southeast corner of

the intersection of Baseline Road and 7th Concession Road, described as Pt Lot

16, Concession 7, Sandwich East, and further described as PART 2, 12R16823.

II. THAT Zoning By-law 8600 BE AMENDED by changing the zoning of the land

located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Baseline Road and 7thConcession Road, described as Pt Lot 16, Concession 7, Sandwich East, and

further described as PART 2, 12R16823, from Hamlet Commercial zone underZoning By-law 85-18 to Commercial District 3.3 under Zoning By-law 8600 with a

holding prefix, so as to facilitate the construction of a Hotel.

III. THAT the holding symbol BE REMOVED when the applicant/owner submits an

application to remove the H symbol and the following conditions are satisfied:a) The Owner(s) enter into an agreement with the Corporation of the City of

Windsor for all requirements under the General Provisions of the Site PlanControl Agreement, including the following additional provisions, and any

other provision deemed relevant:Availability of municipal sanitary sewer – construct, or agree to construct, sanitary sewer extension from existing municipal sanitary sewer

trunk within the subject area to the subject land, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Local Improvement Works – sign petitions for and not to oppose the construction, under the provisions of Ontario Regulation 586/06 for local

improvements, of a sanitary sewer abutting the subject lands.

Sewer Connections – obtain a permit from the Engineering Department

to connect the private sanitary connection to the future service provided at the property line.

Item No. 8.6


Land Conveyance for road widening purposes – gratuitous conveyance of

3.0m wide parcel across the entire 7th Concession Road frontage, and

2.0m wide parcel across the entire Baseline Road frontage of the subject lands,

to the Corporation, in fee simple and without encumbrance, in accordance

with the requirements of the County Road 42 portion of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the

City Engineer.

Corner Cut-Off – gratuitous conveyance of a corner cut-off sufficient in

magnitude to facilitate improvements at the 7th Concession Road/County Road 42 Intersection, in accordance with the requirements of the County

Road 42 Portion of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Sidewalks – at the discretion of the City Engineer,

1. Construct at their expense and according to City of Windsor Standard

Specifications, a concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; or

2. Pay to the Corporation the sum of $25,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of a concrete sidewalk

along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands.

Curbs and Gutters – at the discretion of the City Engineer,

Construct at their own expense and according to City of Windsor Standard Specifications, a concrete curb and gutter along the entire 7th Concession

Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of the Corporation’s City Engineer; or

1. Pay to the Corporation, prior to the issuance of a construction permit, the sum of $14,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the

future construction of concrete curb and gutter on the frontage of the subject lands.

Storm Detention - construct storm detention scheme, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation &

Parks (MECP).

ERCA Requirements – follow all drainage and flood-proofing recommendations of the Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA)


may have with respect to the subject land, and obtain all necessary permits from ERCA with respect to the drainage works on the subject

lands.

Off-Site Improvement – an auxiliary westbound left-turn lane with a storage length of 15-meters at the intersection of Concession Road 7 and West Driveway to be provided at the owner’s cost.

Enbridge Gas requirement - a minimum separation of 0.3m from all Gas facilities.

Noise mitigation measures – implementation of the mitigation measures

recommended in the Noise Report dated January 22, 2020, prepared by Akoustik Engineering Limited.

b) Site Plan Control Agreement registered on title of the subject property; and

c) Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP) approval for

Storm Water Management for the subject site. Carried.

Report Number: S 42/2020 Clerk’s File: ZB/13675

Clerk’s Note: The recommendation of the Standing Committee and Administration are

the same.


Page 1 of 16


Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application for 4100 7th Con. Rd.; Applicant: MAA AshaPuri Enterprises Inc.; File No. Z-020/19, ZNG/5980; Ward 9.

Reference:

Date to Council: April 14, 2020 Author: Justina Nwaesei, MCIP, RPP

Senior Planner - Subdivisions 519-255-6543, ext. 6165 [email protected]

Planning & Building Services

Report Date: February 28, 2020 Clerk’s File #: ZB/13675


Recommendation:

I. That By-law 85-18 cited as the "Township of Sandwich South Comprehensive Zoning By-law" BE REPEALED for the land located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Baseline Road and 7th Concession Road, described as Pt Lot 16, Concession 7, Sandwich East, and further described as PART 2, 12R16823;

II. THAT Zoning By-law 8600 BE AMENDED by changing the zoning of the land located at

the southeast corner of the intersection of Baseline Road and 7th Concession Road, described as Pt Lot 16, Concession 7, Sandwich East, and further described as PART 2, 12R16823, from Hamlet Commercial zone under Zoning By-law 85-18 to Commercial District 3.3 under Zoning By-law 8600 with a holding prefix, so as to facilitate the construction of a Hotel;

III. THAT the holding symbol BE REMOVED when the applicant/owner submits an

application to remove the H symbol and the following conditions are satisfied:

a) The Owner(s) enter into an agreement with the Corporation of the City of Windsor for all requirements under the General Provisions of the Site Plan Control Agreement, including the following additional provisions, and any other provision deemed relevant:

Availability of municipal sanitary sewer – construct, or agree to construct, sanitary sewer extension from existing municipal sanitary sewer trunk within the subject area to the subject land, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Local Improvement Works – sign petitions for and not to oppose the construction, under the provisions of Ontario Regulation 586/06 for local improvements, of a sanitary sewer abutting the subject lands.


Page 2 of 16

Sewer Connections – obtain a permit from the Engineering Department to connect the private sanitary connection to the future service provided at the property line.




to the Corporation, in fee simple and without encumbrance, in accordance with the requirements of the County Road 42 portion of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;

Corner Cut-Off – gratuitous conveyance of a corner cut-off sufficient in magnitude to facilitate improvements at the 7th Concession Road/County Road 42 Intersection, in accordance with the requirements of the County Road 42 Portion of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;


1. Construct at their expense and according to City of Windsor Standard Specifications, a concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; or

2. Pay to the Corporation the sum of $25,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of a concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands;


1. Construct at their own expense and according to City of Windsor Standard Specifications, a concrete curb and gutter along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of the Corporation’s City Engineer; or

2. Pay to the Corporation, prior to the issuance of a construction permit, the sum of $14,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of concrete curb and gutter on the frontage of the subject lands;

Storm Detention - construct storm detention scheme, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP).

ERCA Requirements – follow all drainage and flood-proofing recommendations of the Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA) may have with respect to the subject land, and obtain all necessary permits from ERCA with respect to the drainage works on the subject lands

Off-Site Improvement – an auxiliary westbound left-turn lane with a storage length of 15-meters at the intersection of Concession Road 7 and West Driveway to be provided at the owner’s cost;



Page 3 of 16

Noise mitigation measures – implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in the Noise Report dated January 22, 2020, prepared by Akoustik Engineering Limited.


c) Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP) approval for Storm

Water Management for the subject site.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

1. KEY MAP


Page 4 of 16

2. APPLICATION INFORMATION

LOCATION: 4100 7th Concession Road; southeast corner of the intersection of Baseline Road and 7th Concession Road.

APPLICANT: MAA ASHAPURI ENTERPRISES INC. (C/O DAVE PATEL)

AGENT: BEZAIRE PARTNERS, (C/O PAUL BEZAIRE)

REGISTERED OWNER: SAME AS APPLICANT

PROPOSAL:

The applicant is requesting an amendment to By-law 85-18 (former Township of Sandwich South Comprehensive Zoning By-law) and By-law 8600 (City of Windsor Zoning By-law) for the lands located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Baseline Road and 7 th Concession Road, described as described as Pt Lot 16, Concession 7, Sandwich East, further described as PART 2, 12R16823, and municipally known as 4100 7th Concession Road, to permit a Hotel on the subject land. The subject land is designated Business Park on Schedule D: Land Use of the Official Plan, zoned Hamlet Commercial (CH) by Zoning By-law 85-18, and has access to 7th Concession Road and Baseline Road. The applicant is proposing to change the zoning of the subject land from Hamlet Commercial Zone under By-law 85-18 to Commercial District 3.3 under By-law 8600. The requested amendment will permit the construction of a four (4) storey hotel with 100 motor vehicle parking spaces on the subject land. The applicant also submitted a separate application for Site Plan Control Approval for the proposed development on the subject land. SUBMISSIONS BY APPLICANT:

o Application Form; o Property Deed; o Site Plan; o Planning Justification Report [by Bezaire Partners, Revised Dec. 2019); o Transportation Impact Study; o Functional Servicing Report; o Storm Water Management Report; o 2018 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment; o Market Study [Market Impact Assessment]; and o Noise Assessment Report.

3. SITE INFORMATION

OFFICIAL PLAN ZONING & ZDM CURRENT USE(S) PREVIOUS USE(S)

Land Use:

BUSINESS PARK

Development Constraint Areas:

AIRPORT OPERATING AREA

Hamlet Commercial Zone (CH), By-law 85-18;

ZDM T12 & T13

Vacant Land Vacant Land / Storage

FRONTAGE DEPTH AREA SHAPE 91.44m 134.7m 3.04 acres Rectangular

Note: All measurements are approximate


Page 5 of 16

4. REZONING MAP


Page 6 of 16

5. NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTERISTICS

NEIGHBOURHOOD MAP

The neighbourhood is characterized by the prominence of existing Windsor International Airport as well as the sub-urban and rural appeal stemming from the current cross-sections of the


Page 7 of 16

existing nearby roads (County Rd 42, Baseline Rd and 7th Concession Rd) plus roadside ditches and gravel shoulders, large expanse of farmlands and large size lots in the area.

SURROUNDING LAND USE

The surrounding area is zoned to accommodate a mix of uses as shown below: South of subject land: Low density residential uses and farmlands. Property records indicate existing single unit dwelling with commercial unit at 4120 7th Concession Road. Further south, there is another single unit dwelling at 4140 7th Concession. Next south is the Creek Stream, followed by farmlands. East of subject land: Low density residential uses. There are existing single unit dwellings along the south side of Baseline Road R.O.W. North of subject land: Baseline Road R.O.W abuts the north limit of the subject land. There is a Lube Centre at 2955 County Road 42, on the north limit of Baseline Road R.O.W. across from the subject land. On the north side of County Road 42 R.O.W. there is the Windsor International Airport. West of the subject land: 7th Concession Road R.O.W. abuts the west limit of the subject land. On the west side of the 7th Concession R.O.W. there are vacant industrial lots, followed by a commercial plaza (called Metro Plaza) at 2825 County Road 42 and further west, there is an existing nursery/garden centre at 2619 County Road 42. There is an industrial building at 4145 7th Concession, across from the single unit dwelling at 4140 7th Concession Road. Attached to this report as Appendix A are site photos showing some of the surrounding land

uses and the character of the neighbourhood.

MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE

The City’s records show that there is a municipal storm sewer [600mm diameter Reinforced

Concrete Pipe) along the north side of Baseline Road, available to service the subject land.

Drainage ditches existing along both frontages of the subject land.

There are municipal watermains and fire hydrants along the south limit of Baseline Road

R.O.W. / north limit of the subject land, and along the west limit of 7th Concession R.O.W.

There are LED streetlights along the west limit of 7th Concession R.O.W.

There are overhead hydro pole lines on both sides of Baseline Road R.O.W. and 7 th

Concession Road R.O.W.

Available Transit services are Walkerville 8, Walkerville & Airport and South Windsor 7 Transit Windsor buses. South Windsor 7 buses are available on Division Road and Walker Road, approximately, 700m from the subject land. Walkerville 8 Windsor Transit buses are available on along Walker Road, and Walkerville & Airport Windsor Transit buses are

available along County Rd 42 up to the Windsor Airport.

The nearest bus stop is located at the Windsor Airport, approximately 360 metres away

from the subject property.

Baseline Road right-of-way is classified as a Class 2 Arterial Road, and County Road 42 is

another Class 2 Arterial Road in close proximity to the subject land.

7th Concession Road right-of-way is classified as a Class 2 Collector Road.


Page 8 of 16

Discussion:

PLANNING ANALYSIS:

1. PLANNING ACT

In accordance with subsection 3(5) of the Planning Act, a decision of the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board, a minister of the Crown and a ministry, board, commission or agency of the government, including the Municipal Board (now the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal), in respect of the exercise of any authority that affects a planning matter, “shall be consistent with” Provincial Policy Statement 2014.

2. PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT (PPS) 2014

Provincial Policy Statement 2014 was issued under section 3 of the Planning Act and came into effect April 30, 2014. The PPS 2014 applies to all decisions in respect of the exercise of any authority that affects a planning matter made on or after April 30, 2014, including this application. The Provincial Policy Statement provides direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development and sets the policy foundation for regulating the development and use of land in Ontario. The PPS points to the important role of land use planning in achieving strong healthy communities, a healthy environment and economic growth.

Policy 1.1.1 states that “Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by:

a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term; b) accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential (including second units, affordable housing and housing for older persons),... and other uses to meet long-term needs; c) avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns; d) avoiding development and land use patterns that would prevent the efficient expansion of settlement areas in those areas which are adjacent or close to settlement areas; e) promoting cost-effective development patterns and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs; f) improving accessibility for persons with disabilities and older persons by identifying, preventing and removing land use barriers which restrict their full participation in society; g) ensuring that necessary infrastructure, electricity generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems, and public service facilities are or will be available to meet current and projected needs; and h) promoting development and land use patterns that conserve biodiversity and consider the impacts of a changing climate.”

The applicant’s planning consultant submitted a Planning Justification Report (PJR) dated October 2019 (Revised December 2019), which provides a planning analysis of the above policy statements and more. The following planning analysis is provided in addition to the analysis contained in the PJR:

The subject zoning by-law amendment will facilitate an infill commercial redevelopment in close proximity to the Windsor Airport and surrounded by a mix of uses. The amendment will facilitate an efficient development with no adverse impact on the financial well-being of the City of Windsor. Potential health and safety concerns resulting from the proximity of the development to nearby railway, roads and airport, are addressed in the noise report prepared by Akoustik


Page 9 of 16

Engineering Limited. Appropriate mitigation measures are recommended to enhance the health and safety of the traveling public who will be lodging in the proposed hotel. The Zoning by-law amendment recommends a zoning category that is complementary to the existing range of uses in the subject area and allow efficient expansion of the settlement area. Sidewalks improve accessibility for persons with disabilities and older persons . There are no existing sidewalks along the surrounding roads; however, sidewalks are planned for the subject area (through the completed Lauzon Parkway EA). On-site and off-site sidewalk construction should be required for the proposed development through the Site Plan Approval process. This report contains recommendation for construction of a concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands or contribution towards the construction of the required sidewalk. The land is in an area of the City that is serviced by necessary infrastructure, electricity generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems, and public service facilities. Consideration for climate change will be more appropriately addressed through the Site Plan Approval process by way of landscape requirements and other measures deemed appropriate.

Policy 1.1.3.1 states, “Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development, and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted.”

The subject parcel is located within the settlement area and the subject amendment creates opportunity for growth and development within the City of Windsor settlement area; thereby, promoting the vitality of the settlement area.

Policy 1.2.6.1 states, “Major facilities and sensitive land uses should be planned to ensure they are appropriately designed, buffered and/or separated from each other to prevent or mitigate adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants, minimize risk to public health and safety, and to ensure the long-term viability of major facilities.”

The proposed development is subject to a number of conditions that ensure consistency with the above policy. An example is the Noise mitigation measures recommended for the proposed development on the subject site. Implementation of the mitigation measures ensures compatibility with the two major facilities (railway and airport) in the subject area. The Site Plan Approval process provides additional planning tool for achieving the required compatibility through buffers and landscaping requirements. In terms of separations, the subject site is outside the separated from development because it is outside of the 30NEF (Noise Exposure Forecast) and the proposed 4 stories has been cleared through the airport zoning review; therefore, the development is compatible with the airport operation.

Policy 1.3.1 states, “Planning authorities shall promote economic development and competitiveness by: a) providing for an appropriate mix and range of employment and institutional uses to meet long-term needs; b) providing opportunities for a diversified economic base, including maintaining a range and choice of suitable sites for employment uses which support a wide range of economic activities and ancillary uses, and take into account the needs of existing and future businesses.”

This amendment is for a development that would meet the needs of existing and future businesses and support a range of economic activities in the immediate area and beyond. The amendment also enhances the mix and range of employment and institutional uses in the area. This amendment ultimately promotes economic development and competitiveness.


Page 10 of 16

Policy 1.6.3 states, “Before consideration is given to developing new infrastructure and public service facilities: a) the use of existing infrastructure and public service facilities should be optimized; and b) opportunities for adaptive re-use should be considered, wherever feasible”.

Policy 1.6.6.2 states, “Municipal sewage services and municipal water services are the preferred form of servicing for settlement areas. Intensification and redevelopment within settlement areas on existing municipal sewage services and municipal water services should be promoted, wherever feasible.”

The subject lands are within an area that is serviced by some municipal sewage services and municipal water services. This amendment promotes the optimization of the use of the existing infrastructure (storm sewer, watermains, electricity, transit system, etc) in the subject area. The proposed construction of a sanitary sewer connecting to an existing trunk sewer along the 8 th Concession Rd helps to optimize the use of the existing sewer. The requested zoning by-law amendment is consistent with Policies 1.6.3 and 1.6.6.2 of the PPS.

Policy 1.6.9.2 states, “Airports shall be protected from incompatible land uses and development by: a) prohibiting new residential development and other sensitive land uses in areas near airports above 30 NEF/NEP; b) considering redevelopment of existing residential uses and other sensitive land uses or infilling of residential and other sensitive land uses in areas above 30 NEF/NEP only if it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the long-term function of the airport; and c) discouraging land uses which may cause a potential aviation safety hazard.”

As noted already in this report, this amendment is for land below the 30NEF/NEP; therefore, compatibility is achieved and this amendment is consistent with policy 1.6.9.2.

In summary, the above planning analysis together with the consultant’s analysis found in the Planning Justification Report (revised Dec. 2019), demonstrate that the subject zoning by-law amendment is consistent with the relevant Policies of the PPS 2014.

3. OFFICIAL PLAN:

In order to strengthen Windsor’s economy, meet the land and infrastructure needs of employment activities and address concerns over compatibility, employment land uses are provided under two designations on Schedule D (of the OP) as either Industrial or Business Park. The subject site is designated “Business Park” in the Land Use Schedule D of City of Windsor Official Plan. Business Park Land Use designation provides for business and industrial uses of a similar quality and character to locate together in highly visible areas according to a comprehensive development plan. The framework for development decisions in the Business Park areas within the City of Windsor can be found under in sections 6.4.1, 6.4.2, and 6.4.4 of the OP.

The following objectives are relevant in this discussion:

Compatible Development

6.4.1.3 To ensure that employment uses are developed in a manner which are compatible with other land uses.

Support Services

6.4.1.5 To enhance the quality of employment areas by providing for complementary services and amenities.


Page 11 of 16

Accessible

6.4.1.6 To locate employment activities in areas which have sufficient and convenient access to all modes of transportation.

Infrastructure

6.4.1.8 To ensure that adequate infrastructure services are provided to employment areas.

Visible Locations

6.4.1.10 To provide highly visible and attractive locations for business park development.

The above noted objectives of the OP are satisfied, or will be satisfied, by the proposed development on the subject land. Section 6.4.4 of the OP provides a list of uses permitted within the Business Park land use designation. A hotel is permitted as an ancillary use in the Business Park land use designation provided the hotel meets all of the following criteria:

(i) they are located adjacent to a Controlled Access Highway, Class I or Class II Arterial Road or Class I Collector Road;

(ii) they are located at, or near, the periphery of a Business Park;

(iii) the proponent demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Municipality that any market impacts on other commercial areas is acceptable (see Procedures chapter); and

(iv) the evaluation criteria established in policy 6.5.3.7. Appendix B attached to this report provides excerpts from the OP. The locational criteria, s.6.4.4.3 of OP Vol. 1 and the evaluation criteria, s.6.4.4.4 and 6.5.3.7 of OP Vol. 1 can be found in Appendix B. This amendment satisfies all relevant criteria as detailed on pages 15, 16, 17 & 18 of the PJR (see attached Appendix E, excerpts from the PJR as revised Dec, 2019). Section 7.2.8.8 states that “all proponents of a new development within 300 metres of a rail corridor, may be required to complete a noise study to support the proposal, and if the need for mitigation measures is determined by such study, shall identify and recommend appropriate mitigation measures, in accordance with the Procedures chapter of this Plan”. Section 7.2.10.3 states that “Council shall ensure that new development in the vicinity of the Windsor Airport includes appropriate noise and vibration abatement measures in accordance with established off-airport land use planning practices.” This amendment satisfies the aforementioned policies of the OP. Recommendation III (a) requires the implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in the Noise Report dated January 22, 2020, prepared by Akoustik Engineering Limited. Section 7.3.2.3 of the OP stipulates that “Council shall require all new developments to have full municipal infrastructure available, or agreements in place to provide such infrastructure, as a condition of approving a development”. There is no sanitary sewer available for the new development; therefore, approval of the subject rezoning shall be conditional upon availability of municipal sanitary sewer or an agreement (such as Site Plan Control Agreement) to provide such infrastructure. Recommendation III (a) of this report satisfies the OP policy 7.3.2.3.

SECTION 11.6.3 OF OP VOL. 1 – ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT POLICIES

AMENDMENTS

MUST CONFORM 11.6.3.1 All amendments to the Zoning By-law(s) shall conform with this Plan.

The Municipality will, on each occasion of approval of a change to the zoning by-law(s), specify that conformity with the Official Plan is maintained or that the change will be in conformity upon the coming into


Page 12 of 16

effect of an amendment to the Official Plan.

EVALUATION

CRITERIA 11.6.3.3 When considering applications for Zoning By-law amendments, Council

shall consider the policies of this Plan and will, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, consider such matters as the following:

(a) The relevant evaluation criteria contained in the Land Use Chapter of this Plan, Volume II: Secondary Plans & Special Policy Areas and other relevant standards and guidelines;

(b) Relevant support studies;

(c) The comments and recommendations from municipal staff and circularized agencies;

(d) Relevant provincial legislation, policies and appropriate guidelines; and

(e) The ramifications of the decision on the use of adjacent or similar lands.

The relevant evaluation criteria have been considered as noted in this report. Relevant support studies were submitted and were considered in the review of the subject amendment. See “Summary of Required Support Studies” attached as Appendix E-1 to this report. The requirements, comments and recommendations from municipal departments and circularized agencies have been considered as noted in the CONSULTATION section of this report. Relevant provincial legislation and policies have been considered. The subject zoning by-law amendment is consistent with the relevant policies of the PPS noted in this report and conforms with the relevant policies of OP Vol. 1 as discussed above, in this report. This amendment provides the opportunity for a desirable commercial use (a hotel) to be located in very close to the airport. The development will provide a convenient lodging for travellers using the Windsor International Airport and patrons of nearby businesses. This amendment is expected to boost the economy in the subject area and beyond. Based on the above analysis in this report, the recommended Zoning By-law Amendment maintains conformity with the Official Plan and meets the criteria set out above under section 11.6.3.3 of the OP Vol. 1.

4. ZONING

The subject land is zoned Hamlet Commercial (CH) by By-law 85-18 as shown in the ‘Requested Zoning Amendment’ map in this report, under Background Information. The Hamlet Commercial zoning permits a hotel use in accordance with section 10.2.3 of By-law 85-18. However, section 10.2.3 restricts hotel use to a location fronting on the Provincial Highway Number 3 and County Road No. 42. See Appendix C-1 (Excerpts from Zoning By-law 85-18) attached to this report. The applicant’s request for zoning amendment includes changing the by-law that governs the subject land from B/L 85-18 to B/L 8600. Hence, this amendment is for zoning change from Hamlet Commercial zone under By-law 85-18 to Commercial District 3.3 (CD3.3) under By-law 8600. Based on the applicant’s request, Zoning By-law 85-18 will have to be repealed on the subject land and Zoning By-law 8600 will be further amended to allow the proposed hotel use on the subject land. The change of lands from being under By-law 85-18 to being under By-law 8600 is generally recommended because it harmonizes the zoning process with the rest of the City.


Page 13 of 16

Permitted Uses in the CD3.3 zoning category (B/L 8600) can be found in Appendix C (Excerpts from Zoning By-law 8600) attached to this report. A hotel is permitted in the CD3.3 zoning category. The Planning Justification Report confirms that the design of the proposed hotel complies with the CD3.3 provisions as well as parking and loading requirements of By-law 8600. Note that 100 motor vehicle parking spaces are proposed for the hotel. However, By-law 8600 requires 1 parking space for each guest room AND 1 parking space for each 22.5m 2 gross floor area (GFA) used for a restaurant, convention hall, meeting room and other places of assembly. The following conditions are recommended by municipal departments and external agencies for the approval of the requested amendment. See details in Appendix D attached to this report. i. Availability of municipal sanitary sewer – sanitary sewer extension to the subject lands.

ii. Local Improvement Works – for a sanitary sewer abutting the subject lands.

iii. Sewer Connections permit required - to connect the private sanitary connection to the future service provided at the property line by the Local Improvement.

iv. Land Conveyance for road widening purposes –3.0m wide parcel across the 7th Concession Rd frontage, and 2.0m wide parcel across the Baseline Rd frontage of the subject lands;

v. Corner Cut-Off – per Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment Report;

vi. Sidewalks – construct concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th Concession Road and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands, or contribute the sum of $25,000.00 towards the future construction of the required sidewalk;

vii. Curbs and Gutters – construct a concrete curb and gutter along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands, or contribute the sum of $14,000.00 towards the future construction of concrete curb and gutter on the frontages of the subject land;

viii. Storm Detention - construct storm detention scheme, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP).

ix. ERCA Requirements – follow all drainage and flood-proofing recommendations of the Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA) and obtain permits from ERCA;

x. Off-Site Improvement –an auxiliary westbound left-turn lane with a storage length of 15m at the intersection of Con. Rd 7 and West Driveway to be provided at the owner’s cost;

xi. Enbridge Gas requirement - a minimum separation of 0.3m from all Gas facilities.

xii. Noise mitigation measures – per Noise Report prepared by Akoustik Eng. Limited.

xiii. Site Plan Control Agreement registered on title of the subject property

xiv. MECP Approval for Storm Water Management for the subject site

To address the above recommended conditions, a holding provision is recommended for the approval of the Zoning By-law amendment. The holding symbol shall be removed when the applicant/owner submits an application to remove the ‘H’ symbol and the stipulated conditions are satisfied. This zoning by-law amendment, as recommended in this report, maintains conformity with the Official Plan. A draft by-law is attached as Appendix G.


Page 14 of 16

5. SITE PLAN The applicant’s proposal meets the definition of a “development” as found in section 41(1) of the Planning Act and in the City of Windsor Site Plan Control By-law 1-2004. The applicant submitted an application to the Planning department for Site Plan Control Approval concurrently with this rezoning application. Site Plan Control is a more appropriate tool for addressing most of the conditions imposed by municipal departments and external agencies. A Site Plan Control Agreement is also recommended as a condition of H-removal for this amendment.

6. ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED None.

7. ALTERNATIVES FOR CONSIDERATION n/a

Risk Analysis:

The requested zoning amendment poses no known risk to The Corporation of the City of Windsor.

Financial Matters:

N/A

Consultations:

1. DEPARTMENT AND AGENCIES Attached as Appendix D, to this report, are comments from the municipal departments and

external agencies. There are no objections to the proposed amendment. However, there are conditions for approval of the rezoning as noted in the municipal comment received from Engineering & Geomatics, Transportation Planning, and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation & Parks. See attached Appendix D for details. Note that the required conditions are already included in this report under ZONING discussion and RECOMMENDATION section. Enbridge Gas requires a minimum separation of 0.3m from all of our plant. Enbridge asks that this minimum separation requirement be maintained, and that the contractor obtains locates prior to performing any work and utilizes safe excavation practices while performing any work in the vicinity. This requirement is best addressed through the Site Plan Control Approval process. Transportation Planning - Based on the findings of Transportation Impact Study prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited and dated November 2019, Transportation Planning recommends that the development be approved with an auxiliary westbound left-turn lane with a storage length of 15-meters at the intersection of Concession Road 7 and West Driveway. Although we did not receive any comment directly from the Airport, but the applicant’s Planning Consultant, was in communication with the Airport officials in October, 2019 and has an email, dated October 31, 2019 from the Airport official (Steve Tuffin) stating the following: “I will confirm that the property in question is outside the Obstacle Limitation Scope OLS. Therefore, the height restriction is 150’. The building at 40 to 50 feet high would not be an issue for the airport.” See a copy of the correspondence attached as Appendix D-1 to this report.


Page 15 of 16

2. PUBLIC NOTICE

The City will advertise the official notice in the Windsor Star Newspaper as mandated by the Planning Act. The City will mail courtesy notice to all properties within 120m (400 feet) of the subject parcel, prior to the Development & Heritage Standing Committee (DHSC) meeting.

Conclusion and Planner’s Opinion:

This amendment is consistent with the PPS 2014 and maintains conformity with the Official Plan. The amendment promotes good planning. The recommendation is for approval of the applicant’s request with a holding prefix, which shall be removed when the conditions in Recommendation III of this report are satisfied and an application is submitted to remove the holding symbol.


I concur with the above comments and opinion of the Registered Professional Planner. Michael Cooke, MCIP, RPP

Manager Planning Policy / Deputy City Planner Thom Hunt, MCIP, RPP

City Planner

I am not a registered Planner and have reviewed as a Corporate Team Leader

SAH, City Solicitor

OC, Chief Administrative Officer

Approvals:

Name Title

Michael Cooke, MCIP, RPP Manager Planning Policy/ Deputy City Planner

Thom Hunt, MCIP, RPP City Planner




Notifications:

Name Address Email

Abutting property owners,

tenants/ occupants within 120m (400 ft) radius of the subject land


Page 16 of 16

Name Address Email

Applicant/Owner: MAA ASHAPURI ENTERPRISES

INC.

2498 Dougall Avenue,

Windsor, ON N8X 1T2

Agent:

Bezaire Partners, c/o Paul Bezaire

302 - 180 Eugenie St.

W., Windsor, ON N8X 2X6

[email protected]

Councillor Kieran McKenzie

350 City Hall Square West - Suite 220,

Windsor, ON, N9A 6S1

[email protected]

Appendices:

1 Appendix A - Site Photos 2 Appendix B - Excerpts from OP 3 Appendix C - Excerpts from Zoning By-law 8600

4 Appendix C-1- Excerpts from Zoning By-law 85-18 5 Appendix D - Consultations

6 Appendix D-1- Email from Airport 7 Appendix E - Excerpts from PJR as Revised Dec., 2019 8 Appendix E-1- Summary of Required Support Studies

9 Appendix F - Conceptual Site Plan 10 Appendix G - Z-020-19, Draft By-law


APPENDIX A – SITE PHOTOS -July 2019 Google Photo Files Z-020/19

VIEW OF SUBJECT LAND and ADJOURNING PROPERTIES1



STREET VIEW LOOKING WEST TOWARDS THE INTERSECTION OF COUNTY RD 42 & BASELINE RD

2Council Agenda July 13, 2020

Page 60 of 413


STREET VIEW LOOKING SOUTH OF BASELINE RD ALONG 7th CONCESSION RD

3Council Agenda July 13, 2020

Page 61 of 413


4

STREET VIEW LOOKING NORTH OF BASELINE RD ALONG 7th CONCESSION RD TOWARDS COUNTY RD 42AND THE WINDSOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT



5

STREET VIEW LOOKING EAST OF BASELINE RD TOWARDS 8th CONCESSION RDCouncil Agenda July 13, 2020

Page 63 of 413

Page 1 of 6

APPENDIX B – EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL PLAN

OP Volume 1 – Primary Plan

6. Land Use

6.4.4 Business Park Policies

The Business Park land use designation provides for business and industrial

uses of a similar quality and character to locate together in highly visible areas

according to a comprehensive development plan.

PERMITTED

USES 6.4.4.1 Uses permitted in the Business Park land use designation include:

(a) establishments devoted to research, development and

information processing, business (deleted by OPA 58, 24 07 2006)

offices, business (deleted by OPA 58, 24 07 2006) services, industrial

research and/or training facilities, communication,

production uses, printing and publishing; and

(b) selected industrial uses which:

(i) do not create nuisances such as noise, dust,

vibration or odour;

(ii) confine industrial operations within a building

and/or structure; and

(iii) do not require outside storage.

ANCILLARY

USES 6.4.4.2 In addition to the uses permitted above, Council may permit the

following ancillary uses in areas designated Business Park on

Schedule D: Land Use without requiring an amendment to this

Plan:

(a) Open Space uses;

(b)

convenience stores, gas bars, service stations, personal

services, restaurants, warehouse, (added by OPA 58, 24 07 2006)

wholesale store (added by OPA 58, 24 07 2006) and financial

institutions which, by their size are designed to serve the

employees in the Business Park and which have access to

an Arterial or Collector road;


Page 2 of 6

(c)

hotels or motels, provided that they meet all of the

following criteria: (amended by OPA #22 – 07/16/02)

(i) they are located adjacent to a Controlled Access

Highway, Class I or Class II Arterial Road or Class I

Collector Road;

(ii) they are located at, or near, the periphery of a

Business Park;

(iii) the proponent demonstrates to the satisfaction of the

Municipality that any market impacts on other

commercial areas is acceptable (see Procedures

chapter); and

(iv) the evaluation criteria established in policy 6.5.3.7.

(d) retail sale of goods produced on-site by a permitted use

provided that such retail space does not exceed 20% of the

gross floor area of the main use. This limitation may be

reduced or eliminated by Council having given

consideration to the following:

(i)

the evaluation criteria established in policy 6.5.3.7;

and

(ii)

the proponent demonstrates to the satisfaction of the

Municipality that any market impacts on other

commercial areas is acceptable (see Procedures

chapter).

(e) adult entertainment parlours provided that:

(i) such uses are a minimum of 150 metres from lands

used or zoned for residential, institutional or open

space purposes; and

(ii) the evaluation criteria established in policy 6.5.3.7

are satisfied, with the exception of the requirement

that the proponent demonstrate that market impacts

on other commercial areas is acceptable.

(f) Clubs, health studios. (amended by OPA #22 – 07/16/02)

LOCATIONAL

CRITERIA 6.4.4.3 Business Park development shall be located where:


Page 3 of 6

(a) the business park use can be sufficiently separated and/or

buffered from sensitive land uses;

(b) the site will be accessible and highly visible from

Controlled Access Highway or a Class I or Class II Arterial

Road;

(c)

full municipal physical services can be provided;

(d)

business park related traffic can be directed away from

residential areas;

(e) public transportation service can be provided; and

(f) there is access to designated truck routes.

EVALUATION

CRITERIA 6.4.4.4 At the time of submission, the proponent shall demonstrate to the

satisfaction of the Municipality that a proposed business park

development is:

(a) feasible having regard to the other provisions of this Plan,

provincial legislation, policies and appropriate guidelines

and support studies for uses:

(i) within or adjacent to any area identified on Schedule

C: Development Constraint Areas and described in

the Environment chapter of this Plan;

(ii) adjacent to sources of nuisance, such as noise,

odour, vibration and dust;

(iii) within a site of potential or known contamination;

(iv) where traffic generation and distribution is a

provincial or municipal concern; and

(v) adjacent to sensitive land uses and/or heritage

resources.

(b) in keeping with the goals, objectives and policies of any

secondary plan or guideline plan affecting the surrounding

area;

(c) capable of being provided with full municipal physical

services and emergency services;


Page 4 of 6

(d) provided with adequate off-street parking; and

(e) compatible with the surrounding area in terms of scale,

massing, height, siting, orientation, setbacks, parking and

landscaped areas.

DESIGN

GUIDELINES 6.4.4.5 The following guidelines shall be considered when evaluating

the proposed design of a Business Park development:

(a) the ability to achieve the associated policies as outlined in

the Urban Design chapter of this Plan;

(b) the massing and scale of buildings, and the extent to which

their orientation, form and siting help to enhance the well

landscaped setting of the business park;

(c) the provision of functional and attractive signage;

(d) the provision of appropriate landscaping or other buffers to

enhance:

(i) all parking lots, and outdoor loading and service

areas; and

(ii) the separation between the use and adjacent

sensitive uses, where appropriate;

(e) motorized vehicle access is oriented in such a manner that

business park related traffic will be discouraged from using

Local Roads where other options are available;

(f) loading bays and service areas are located to avoid conflict

between pedestrian circulation, service vehicles and

movement along the public right-of-way;

(g) pedestrian and cycling access is accommodated in a

manner which is distinguishable from the access provided

to motorized vehicles and is safe and convenient; and

(h) the design of the development encourages and/or

accommodates public transportation services.


Page 5 of 6

(i) The design of the development encourages the retention

and integration of existing woodlots, vegetation and

drainage corridors where feasible to provide amenity areas

for employees and to enhance the visual appearance of

business parks in Windsor. (added by OPA #60–05/07/07-B/L85-2007–

OMB Decision/Order No.2667, 10/05/2007)

6.5.3 Commercial Corridor Policies

EVALUATION

CRITERIA 6.5.3.7 At the time of submission, the proponent shall demonstrate to the

satisfaction of the Municipality that a proposed commercial

development is:


provincial legislation, policies and appropriate guidelines

and support studies for uses:

(i) within or adjacent to any area identified on Schedule

C: Development Constraint Areas and described in

the Environment chapter of this Plan;

(ii) within a site of potential or known contamination;

(iii) where traffic generation and distribution is a

provincial or municipal concern; and

(iv) adjacent to sensitive land uses and/or heritage

resources.


secondary plan or guideline plan affecting the surrounding

area;

(c) capable of being provided with full municipal physical

services and emergency services;

(d) provided with adequate off-street parking;

(e) compatible with the surrounding area in terms of scale,

massing, height, siting, orientation, setbacks, parking and

landscaped areas; and

(f) acceptable in terms of the proposal’s market impacts on

other commercial areas (see Procedures chapter).


Page 6 of 6

11.6.3 Zoning By-law Amendment Policies

AMENDMENTS

MUST

CONFORM

11.6.3.1 All amendments to the Zoning By-law(s) shall conform with this Plan.

The Municipality will, on each occasion of approval of a change to the

zoning by-law(s), specify that conformity with the Official Plan is

maintained or that the change will be in conformity upon the coming into

effect of an amendment to the Official Plan.

REVIEW

PROCEDURE

11.6.3.2 All applications for Zoning By-law amendments shall be processed in

accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, and regulations

pursuant thereto, and the procedural requirements of this Plan. In

general, after an applicant’s pre-application consultation meeting with

municipal staff and submission of an application that is determined to be

complete, all applications shall: Added by OPA 65 – 10/22/2007– By-law 192-2007

(a) Be circulated to appropriate agencies and those agencies be

provided with sufficient time to respond; Added by OPA 65 – 10/22/2007–

By-law 192-2007

(b) Be advertised and be presented to the public and the views of the

public ascertained at a public meeting to be held in accordance

with the Planning Act; and Added by OPA 65 – 10/22/2007– By-law 192-2007

(c) Be given due and thorough consideration by Council. Added by OPA

65 – 10/22/2007– By-law 192-2007

EVALUATION

CRITERIA

11.6.3.3 When considering applications for Zoning By-law amendments, Council

shall consider the policies of this Plan and will, without limiting the

generality of the foregoing, consider such matters as the following:

(a) The relevant evaluation criteria contained in the Land Use

Chapter of this Plan, Volume II: Secondary Plans & Special

Policy Areas and other relevant standards and guidelines;


(c) The comments and recommendations from municipal staff and

circularized agencies;

(d) Relevant provincial legislation, policies and appropriate

guidelines; and

(e) The ramifications of the decision on the use of adjacent or similar

lands.


APPENDIX C – EXCERPTS FROM ZONING BY-LAW 8600

SECTION 16 - COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS 3. (CD3.)

16.3 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 3.3 (CD3.3)

16.3.1 PERMITTED USES

Ambulance Service

Automobile Repair Garage

Bakery

Business Office

Child Care Centre

Commercial School

Confectionery

Food Outlet - Drive-Through

Food Outlet - Take-Out

Funeral Home

Garden Centre

Gas Bar

Hotel

Medical Appliance Facility

Medical Office

Micro-Brewery

Parking Garage

Personal Service Shop

Place of Entertainment and Recreation

Place Of Worship

Print Shop

Professional Studio

Public Hall

Public Parking Area

Repair Shop - Light

Restaurant

Restaurant with Drive-Through

Retail Store

Service Station

Temporary Outdoor Vendor’s Site

Veterinary Office

Warehouse

Wholesale Store

Workshop


Page 2 of 2

Existing Automobile Collision Shop

Existing Industrial Use

Existing Motor Vehicle Dealership

Any use accessory to any of the above uses. An Outdoor Storage Yard is prohibited,

save and except with the following main uses: Ambulance Service, Garden Centre,

Temporary Outdoor Vendor’s Site, Existing Automobile Collision Shop, Existing

Industrial Use, Existing Motor Vehicle Dealership.

16.3.5 PROVISIONS

.4 Building Height – maximum 20.0 m

.10 Gross Floor Area – maximum

a) Bakery or Confectionary 500.0 m2

b) Workshop – Percent of the gross floor area of

the Retail Store or Wholesale Store 200.0%

.26 A Temporary Outdoor Vendor’s Site is prohibited in a Business Improvement

Area.


1

APPENDIX C-1: Excerpts from Zoning By-law 85-18

SECTION 10 - HAMLET COMMERCIAL ZONE (CH) REGULATIONS

10.1 GENERAL USE REGULATIONS

10.1.1 Permitted Uses

No land, building, or structures shall be used or erected in the Hamlet Commercial Zone

(CH) except for the following purposes:

i) automobile repair garage;

ii) automobile sales and service establishments in accordance with subsection 10.2.3;

iii) automobile service station;

iv) banks, credit unions, trust companies and other financial institutions;

v) boat and recreation vehicle sales, service and storage in accordance with

subsection 10.2.3;

vi) church;

vii) commercial recreation and entertainment establishment sin accordance with

subsection 10.2.3;

viii) community center or public hall

ix) craft industries and small, specialty workshops;

x) furniture store in accordance with subsection 10.2.3;

xi) gas bar;

xii) hotel or motor hotel, in accordance with subsection 10.2.3;

xiii) library;

xiv) motel in accordance with subsection 10.2.3;

xv) nurseries and garden centers in accordance with subsection 10.2.3;

xvi) offices, general or professional


2

xvii) personal service hop;

xviii) restaurant in accordance with subsection 10.2.3;

xix) school;

xx) service shop;

xxi) tavern in accordance with subsection 10.2.3;

xxii) wholesale business, excluding a lumber yard or steel yard;

xxiii) retail store;

xxiv) accessory buildings or uses, including a dwelling unit.

10.1.2 Permitted Buildings and Other Structures

No building or structures shall be used or erected in the Hamlet Commercial Zone (CH)

except for the following purposes:

a) buildings and structures for the permitted uses, and where available serviced by a

public water supply;

b) accessory buildings and structures for the permitted uses, including only one (1)

dwelling or dwelling unit associated with a commercial use.

10.1.3 Minimum Lot Area 1400 sq. metres (15,,070’sq.)

10.1.4 Minimum Lot Frontage

a) on a County Road 61 metres (200.13’)

b) on all other roads 23 metres (74.46’)

10.1.5 Maximum Lot Coverage 40 percent

10.1.6 Minimum Landscaped Open Space 20 percent

10.1.7 Maximum Building Height 10.5 metres (34.45’)

10.1.8 Minimum Retail Floor Area

a) commercial Use – retail floor area 55.5 sq. meters (597’sq.)

b) Dwelling 92.5 sq. metres (996’ sq.)


3

c) Dwelling Unit 70.0 square metres (753.5 sq.)

10.1.9 Minimum Front Yard Depth 10.5 metres (34.5’)

10.1.10 Minimum Side Yard Width

a) Where the yard abuts a 6.0 metres (19.68’)

residential or an

agricultural zone

b) Where the yard abuts a 4.5 metres (14.76’)

c) All other cases 7.5 metres (24.60’)

10.1.11 Minimum Rear Yard Depth 7.5 metres (24.60’)

10.1.12 Buffer Strip

A buffer strip with a minimum width of three (3.0) metres (9.84’) shall be provided

abutting the side and rear lot lines, where the Hamlet Commercial Zone abuts a

residential institutional or parks and open space zone, in compliance with subsection

5.25.

10.1.13 Loading Space Regulations

In addition to the requirements specified in subsection 5.31 and 5.32 of this By-law, the

following provisions shall apply:

a) No loading space shall be located in nor open onto a front yard or any yard

directly abutting a residential, institutional or parks and open space zone. If all

yards abut such zones, then the loading space shall be allowed to open onto a side

or rear yard.

10.1.14 Outside Storage

a) No outside storage shall be permitted in a front yard, however, display of goods

may be permitted behind the required minimum front yard setback.

b) Outside storage shall be permitted in any side or rear yard provided it is to the rear

of the front wall of any building, or where there is no building behind the

minimum front yard setback.

c) No outside storage shall be permitted in any required minimum yard setback

directly abutting a residential, institutional or parks and open space zone.


4

d) Any areas used for permitted outside storage shall be in addition to and separate

from such areas as may be required by this By-law for the provisions of off-street

parking and loading spaces.

e) The maximum height for permitted outside storage (except for machinery,

equipment and trucks that are stored as single units at grade) shall not exceed 5

metes (16.40’).

10.1.15 Outside Lighting Facilities

Illuminated signs and exterior lighting installed on a lot to illuminate parking areas,

driveways, loading areas, buildings or outside storage areas shall be so arranged as to

direct light away from abutting lots and adjacent residential uses.

10.2 SPECIFIC USE REGULATIONS

In addition to the general regulations outlined in subsection 10.1, the following additional

regulations shall apply to certain specific uses permitted in subsection 10.1.1.

10.2.1 Automobile Repair Garages, Automobile Service Stations, and Gas Bars and Automobile

Sales and Service Establishments

Notwithstanding any previous provisions of this By-law, where a lot is used for an

automobile repair garage, automobile service station or gas bar, the following special

regulations shall apply:

a) Interior Lot Corner Lot

Minimum lot frontage 48.5 metres 48.5 metres

(159.12’) (159.12’)

Minimum lot depth 30.5 metres 48.5 metres

(100.06’) (159.12’)

b) No portion of any pump island shall be located closer than six (6.0) metres

(19.68’) from the street line of any street.

c) The minimum distance from the intersection of two street lines to the nearest

ingress or egress ramp shall be not less than fifteen (15.0) metres (49.21’).

d) The minimum distance from any portion of any ingress or egress ramp to any side

lot line which abuts any other lot shall not be less than three (3.0) metres (9.84’).


5

e) The width of any ingress or egress ramp along any street line shall be not more

than nine (9.0) metres (29.52’) or less than seven and one-half (7.5) metres

(24.60’).

f) The minimum distance between ramps shall be not less than twelve (12.0) metres

(39.37’).

g) The minimum interior angle of any ramp to the street line shall be greater than

sixty (60) degrees and less than ninety (90) degrees.

h) All parts of the ingress and egress ramps shall be maintained with a cement or

asphalt binder or any other type of permanent surfacing to prevent the raising of

dust or loose particles.

i) Land which is not used for buildings, ramps or paving shall be landscaped.

j) Any permitted open storage area, or vehicular access thereto, involving the

storage, parking or display of motor vehicles for the purpose of sale, lease rental,

washing, service or repair, or any primary means of vehicular access to any

permitted open storage area shall be constructed and maintained with a stable

surface which shall have a cement or asphaltic binder and shall include provision

for adequate drainage facilities.

10.2.2 Accessory Residential Dwelling Unit

a) Access

Pedestrian access to an accessory dwelling unit shall be provided from an

adjacent street or lane and shall be for the sole use of the occupants of the said

dwelling unit and shall be separate from the access to the commercial portion of

the building.

b) Minimum Landscaped Open Space

Fifty percent of the floor area used for residential purposes.

c) Parking for Dwelling Unit

In addition to the minimum number of parking spaces required for the principal

use of the lot, a minimum of one and one-half parking spaces per dwelling unit

shall be provided on the same lot.

d) Exception

No commercial building wherein gasoline or any other highly flammable, toxic,

or explosive products are handled in quantity shall have a contiguous dwelling

unit. Where such dwelling unit exists and the use of the commercial


6

establishment changes to a use involving the aforementioned products, the said

dwelling unit shall immediately cease to be occupied as a dwelling unit and

shall not be used as a dwelling unit as long as the aforesaid mentioned products

are handled in quantity in the commercial area of the building.

10.2.3 Highway Commercial Uses

a) Any lot used for the following purposes shall be restricted to a location fronting

on the Provincial Highway Number 3 and County Road No. 42:

i) automobile uses, including a gas bar;

ii) boat and recreation vehicle sales, service and storage;

iii) commercial recreation and entertainment establishment;

iv) furniture store;

v) a garden supply center;

vi) hotel or motor hotel;

vii) motel;

viii) restaurants, including drive-in and fast food restaurants;

ix) taverns.

b) The following additional regulations shall apply to the uses defined in

subsection 10.2.3 a) ii) through ix):

i) Maximum Lot Coverage 50 percent

ii) Minimum Front Yard Depth 10.5 metres (34.45’)

iii) Minimum Side Yard Width

Where the yard abuts a residential 7.5 metres (24.60’)

Institutional or parks and open

Space zone or use

Where the yard abuts a street; 4.5 metres (14.76’)

10.3 EXCEPTIONS


7

The specific regulations contained in this subsection 10.3 shall apply to the area or areas

defined below:

10.3.1 Defined Area CH-1 as shown on Schedule “A”, Map 10 to this By-law.

a) Permitted Uses and Other Requirements

The property shall be developed in accordance with the requirement of, and

attached site plan marked Schedule “B” attached to, By-law No. 78-28, as

amended by By-law 80-3.

10.3.2 Defined Area CH-2 as shown on Schedule “A”, Map 10 to this By-law.

a) Other Permitted Uses

An electrical contracting business in addition to all other uses permitted in the

Hamlet Commercial Zone (CH).

b) Other Permitted Buildings and Structures

i) Buildings and structures for the uses permitted in subsection 10.3.2 a);

ii) accessory buildings and structures for the uses permitted in subsection

10.3.2 a).

10.3.3 Defined Area CH-3 as shown on Schedule “A” Map 10 to this By-law.

a) Other Permitted Uses

i) A landscaping contracting business in addition to all other uses permitted

in the hamlet Commercial Zone (CH);

ii) existing single family dwellings including accessory uses, buildings and

structures thereto.

b) Other Permitted Buildings and Structures

i) Buildings and structures for the uses permitted in subsection 10.3.3 a) i);

ii) accessory buildings and structures for the uses permitted in subsection

10.3.3 a) i).

c) Residential Requirements

The provisions of subsection 7.1.3 to 7.1.11 shall apply to the uses defined in

subsection 10.3.3 a) ii).


8

10.3.4 Defined Area CH-4 as shown on Schedule “A”, Map T12 to this By-law. (AMENDED by B/L 215-2011, Jan. 5, 2012)

a) Permitted Uses

Notwithstanding subsection 10.2.3 a) i) an automobile sales and service

establishment shall be permitted in addition to the other uses permitted in

subsection 10.1.1 of this by-law.

b) Permitted Buildings and Structures

Buildings and structures permitted in subsection 10.1.2 of this By-law.

c) Zone Provisions

All lot and building requirements shall be in accordance with subsections 10.1.3

to 10.1.15, inclusive, and 10.2 of this By-law. An automobile sales and service

establishment shall also be in accordance with subsection 10.2.3 b) of this By-

law.


Page 1 of 9

APPENDIX D: CONSULTATIONS TABLE Comments from Municipal Departments & External Agencies CANADA POST - Bruno DeSando, Dec. 17, 2019

Canada Post has no comments for the attached application.

ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT, PROJECTS & ROW – Rob Perissinotti & Pat Winters, Jan 17, 2019 The subject lands are located at 4100 7th Concession Rd. The applicant is proposing a 4,027m² hotel building footprint, including 100 new parking, 2 loading & 7 bicycle spaces. We have reviewed the servicing requirements relative to the current application and offer the following comments: This site is within the limits of the County Road 42 portion of the Lauzon Parkway Improvements Environmental Assessment (EA). The applicant is required to provide conveyances consistent with the requirements of the EA as a condition of this application. Based on timing, the servicing requirements specified below are based on interim or existing conditions until the specified upgrades are implemented at a future date by the City. Additionally, the Official Plan classifies 7th Concession Road as a Class 2 Collector, requiring a right-of-way width of 26.0m. The current right-of-way width is 20.10m; therefore, a land conveyance in the amount of 3.0m is required. Baseline Road is classified as a Class 2 Arterial, requiring a right-of-way width of 24.0m. The current right-of-way width is 20.0m; therefore, land conveyance in the amount of 2.0m is required. There is no sanitary sewer currently available to service this site. Based on discussions within the Engineering Department, a Local Improvement to construct a municipal sanitary sewer along Baseline Rd. must be undertaken. The applicant will be required to connect to this municipal sanitary sewer following its installation. This site is serviced by the Baseline Road Drain, which is located along the north boulevard of Baseline Rd and is enclosed by an existing 600mm reinforced concrete pipe. Any new connection to the enclosed road drain shall be completed in accordance with City of Windsor Engineering Best Practice BP.1.3.2. Storm water management completed in accordance with the Windsor/Essex Region Stormwater Standards Manual and a site grading plan will be required. An oil and grit separator will need to be installed on any storm outlet from the site. Connection to the drain also requires approval from ERCA. Any driveway approaches shall be constructed of concrete as per AS-204, complete with straight flares and no raised curbs within the right-of-way. In summary, we have no objections to the proposed site plan control application, subject to the following requirements: (Note, these conditions are to supersede those requested during the site plan control process) Site Plan Control Agreement – The applicant enter into an agreement with the City of Windsor for all requirements under the General Provisions of the Site Plan Control Agreement for the Engineering Department.


Page 2 of 9 Local Improvement Works – The owner(s) shall agree to sign petitions for and not to oppose the construction, under the provisions of Ontario Regulation 586/06 for local improvements, of a sanitary sewer abutting the subject lands. Sewer Connections – The owner(s) will be required to obtain a permit from the Engineering Department to connect the private sanitary connection to the future service provided at the property line by the Local Improvement. Land Conveyance – The owner further agrees, prior to the issuance of a construction permit, to gratuitously convey to the Corporation, in fee simple and without encumbrance, a 3.0m wide parcel across the entire 7th Concession Road frontage and a 2.0m wide parcel across the entire Baseline Road frontage of the subject lands for road widening purposes, in accordance with the requirements of the County Road 42 Portion of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer Corner Cut-Off – The Owner agrees, prior to the issuance of a construction permit, to gratuitously convey a corner cut-off sufficient in magnitude to facilitate improvements at the 7th Concession Road/County Road 42 Intersection, in accordance with the requirements of the County Road 42 Portion of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer Sidewalks –The owner(s) agrees, to:

1. Construct at their expense and according to City of Windsor Standard Specifications, a

concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the

subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;

or

2. Pay to the Corporation, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the sum of $25,000.00

being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of a concrete sidewalk

along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands.

It will be up to the discretion of the City Engineer whether or not a cash contribution will be

allowed in lieu of sidewalk construction by the

Curbs and Gutters – The Owner further agrees, at the discretion of the City Engineer, to:

1. Construct at their own expense and according to City of Windsor Standard Specifications, a concrete curb and gutter along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of the Corporation’s City Engineer;

or 2. Pay to the Corporation, prior to the issuance of a construction permit, the sum of

$14,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of concrete curb and gutter on the frontage of the subject lands.

It will be up to the discretion of the City Engineer whether a cash contribution will be allowed in lieu of curb and gutter construction by the Owner. Storm Detention - Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant(s) shall agree to retain a consulting engineer for the design and preparation of drawings, satisfactory to the City Engineer, for an internal stormwater detention scheme to service the subject lands. The purpose of this scheme will be to ensure that the storm drainage being directed to the Corporation’s storm sewer or ditch, from the lands in their improved state, be restricted to no greater than the present


Page 3 of 9 flow from the subject lands. If these drawings are approved, the applicant(s) shall agree to construct this storm detention scheme, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. ERCA Requirements – The owner further agrees to follow all drainage and flood proofing recommendations of the Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA) may have with respect to the subject land, based on final approval will obtain all necessary permits from ERCA with respect to the drainage works on the subject lands. Should you have any questions, please contact Rob Perissinotti, of this office at 519-255-6257,

ext. 6615.

ENBRIDGE GAS (Operating as UNION GAS) – Sandro Aversa, Dec 17, 2019

After reviewing the provided drawing for 4100 7th Concession Rd, and consulting our mapping

system, please note that Enbridge Gas has active infrastructure in the area. A PDF drawing of the

proposed areas of work has been attached for reference.

Please Note:

1. The shown piping locations are approximate and for information purposes only

2. The drawings are not to scale

3. This drawing does not replace field locates. Please contact Ontario One Call for onsite locates

prior to excavating, digging, etc.

Enbridge Gas requires a minimum separation of 0.3m from all of our plant. Please ensure that this

minimum separation requirement is maintained, and that the contractor obtains locates prior to

performing any work and utilizes safe excavation practices while performing any work in the

vicinity.


Page 4 of 9 Also, please note the following should you find any abandoned infrastructure in the area:

Any pipe that is excavated, please assume that it is live

If during the course of any job, any pipe is found that is not on the locate sheet and is in

conflict with your work, please call our emergency number (1-877-969-0999), and one of our

Union Gas representatives will respond to determine if that plant is in fact live or dead

Please note that our Enbridge Gas representative will respond to the live or dead call within 1-

4 hours, so please plan your work accordingly.

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES – Anne Marie Albidone, Dec. 30, 2019

No concerns from Environmental Services.

ENVIRONMENTAL & SUSTAINABILITY COORDINATOR – Yared Meraal, Dec. 19, 2019

As they have already provided an Environmental Assessment, we have no further

requests/comments.

ENWIN UTILITIES (Hydro Engineering) – Cecile Dalgleish, Jan. 9, 2020

No Objection. This particular development area is not serviced by ENWIN Utilities (HYDRO) as

shown in the attached sketch. We suggest contacting Hydro One for comment. Attached is also a

sketch showing the ENWIN service boundary for the southeast corner of the City of Windsor.

ENWIN UTILITIES (Water Engineering) – Cecile Dalgleish, Jan. 9, 2020

Water Engineering has no objections to the rezoning.

ESSEX REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY (ERCA) – Corinne Chiasson, Jan 15, 2020:

See comment on pages 7 & 8 of this Appendix D.

HERITAGE PLANNER– Kristina Tang, Jan. 23, 2020

The subject property is located on an area of low archaeological potential.


Page 5 of 9 Nevertheless, the Applicant should be notified of the following archaeological precaution.

1. Should archaeological resources be found during grading, construction or soil removal

activities, all work in the area must stop immediately and the City’s Planning & Building

Department, the City’s Manager of Cultural Affairs, and the Ontario Ministry of Tourism,

Culture and Sport must be notified and confirm satisfaction of any archaeological

requirements before work can recommence.

2. In the event that human remains are encountered during grading, construction or soil

removal activities, all work in that area must be stopped immediately and the site secured.

The local police or coroner must be contacted to determine whether or not the skeletal

remains are human, and whether the remains constitute a part of a crime scene. The Local

police or coroner will then notify the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport and the

Registrar at the Ministry of Consumer Services if needed, and notification and satisfactory

confirmation be given by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.

Contacts:

Windsor Planning & Building Department:

519-255-6543 x6179, [email protected]

Windsor Manager of Cultural Affairs:

Cathy Masterson, 519-253-2300x2724, [email protected]

Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport

Archaeology Programs Unit, 1-416-212-8886, [email protected]

Windsor Police: 911

Ontario Ministry of Government & Consumer Services

Registrar of Burial Sites, War Graves, Abandoned Cemeteries and Cemetery Closures, 1-416-212-7499,

[email protected]

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT – Stefan Fediuk, Jan. 22, 2020

The site is currently a trucking storage area with no landscape features. The property and

proposed development has been reviewed through the Site Plan Review process where all

landscape requirements have been addressed. Therefore there are no further requirements to be

made for landscaping through this Zoning application.

MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS & HOUSING (MMAH) AND MINISTRY OF

ENVIRONMENT CONSERVATION & PARKS (MECP) Marion-Frances Cabral, Jan. 10, 2020

MECP has reviewed the subject application and has the following comments:

1. We have no concerns with the proposed development, assuming the proposed use is not

expected to cause any land use compatibility issues;

2. In the Ministry’s viewpoint, the proposed use complements the site;

3. No concerns provided the subject land will be fully serviced;

4. MECP approval will be required for storm water Management for the site;

5. MECP encourages the City to promote a low impact development option for the site.

TRANSIT WINDSOR – Jason Scott, Dec. 17, 2019

Transit Windsor has no objections to this development. The closest bus stop would be at the

Windsor Airport with the existing Walkerville 8 route. This bus stop is approximately 360 metres

away from this property falling within our average walking distance of 400 metres to a bus stop.


[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



Page 6 of 9 Our proposed service delivery review that is going to City Council for final approval in January

2020 maintains this service.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ENGINEER – Juan Paramo, Jan. 22, 2020

Overall, Transportation Planning supports the subject Zoning By-law amendment. The following requirements are expected to be satisfied through Site Plan Control.

Schedule X of the Official Plan classifies Baseline Road as a Class II Arterial road with a required right-of-way width of 24 metres. The current right-of-way width is 20 metres, therefore a land conveyance of 2 metres is required as per Section 7.2.6.21 of the Official Plan.

The Official Plan classifies 7th Concession Road as a Class 2 Collector Road with a required right-of-way width of 26 metres. The current right-of-way width is 20 metres, therefore a land conveyance of 3 metres is required.

The approved Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment identifies property requirements at the corner of 7th Concession Road and Baseline Road for future implementation of a roundabout. A land conveyance as identified under Plate 2 of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental Assessment is required.

All new exterior paths of travel must meet the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).

All new accesses shall conform to the TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads and the City of Windsor Standard Engineering Drawings AS-204.

A Transportation Impact Study has been received in conjunction with this application. Additional comments on the TIS will be provided separately.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING SENIOR ENGINEER – Jeff Hagan, Dec 13, 2019

1. No issues were identified with the study. 2. The study recommends an off-site improvement. We recommend that this improvement be

provided at the developer’s cost:

“Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended that the development be approved with an

auxiliary westbound left-turn lane with a storage length of 15-meters at the intersection of

Concession Road 7 and West Driveway.”

WINDSOR FIRE & RESCUE SERVICES – John Lee, Dec. 17, 2019

No concerns.

WINDSOR POLICE SERVICE - Barry Horrobin, Dec. 17, 2019

My comments for this application are as follows:

The Windsor Police Service has no concerns or objections with this Zoning By-Law amendment application to permit a hotel on the subject property. The proposed development is not anticipated to cause any problems that will impact public safety for the immediate area. While such a land use (hotel) does carry some unique conditions that affect public safety, these have already been addressed through a comprehensive review of the applicant’s site plan by this office. It is felt the requirements of the applicant, as it relates to their site plan, will ensure safety and security for the hotel once it is constructed and becomes operational.


Page 7 of 9


Page 8 of 9


Page 9 of 9 No Comment was received from the following:

BELL CANADA (WSP)

CANADA MORTGAGE & HOUSING CORPORATION (CMHC)

CN BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT

COGECO CONNEXION

GREATER ESSEX COUNTY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (GECDSB)

HYDRO ONE

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION

PROPERTY ASSESSMENT OFFICER

SITE PLAN APPROVAL OFFICER

WINDSOR-ESSEX CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (WECDSB)

WALPOLE ISLAND FIRST NATIONS

WINDSOR ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

WINDSOR ESSEX COUNTY HEALTH UNIT

WINDSOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT




APPENDIX E: EXCERPTS FROM PJR as Revised Dec 2019



___________________________________________________________________________________





APPENDIX E-1- SUMMARY OF REQUIRED SUPPORT STUDIES

Support studies, information and materials may be required as a part of the development and infrastructure approval process or as a part of a more detailed planning study (s.10.2.1.1, OP Vol. 1). All support studies shall be prepared by qualified professionals to the satisfaction of the Municipality (s.10.2.1.3). All relevant mitigation recommendations included in a support study shall be considered as condition of approval to be implemented by the proponent of development (s.10.2.1.5). As noted already in this report, the applicant submitted the following support studies, information and materials:

Planning Justification Report [by Bezaire Partners, Revised Dec. 2019); Transportation Impact Study; Functional Servicing Report; Storm Water Management Report; 2018 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment; Market Study [Market Impact Assessment]; and Noise Assessment Report.

Below are highlights of each report/study submitted: o Planning Justification Report (PJR), dated October 2019 and Revised, was

prepared by Bezaire Partners. The report reviewed the following relevant documents:

The Provincial Policy statement 2014 (PPS)

The City of Windsor Official Plan (OP)

The Sandwich South Zoning By-law 85-18 (85-18)

The City of Windsor Zoning By-0law 8600 (8600)

City of Windsor Lauzon Parkway Improvements Class Environmental Assessment Study (Plate 2)

Reports and Studies submitted for the subject rezoning applicaiton

Following a review of relevant policies of the PPS, relevant policies and objectives of the OP, and the requirements of zoning by-laws 85-18 and 8600, Bezaire Partners provides the following planning opinion:

“The proposed development is consistent with the policies of the PPS. In accordance with the PPS, lands have been designated under the City of Windsor Official Plan in order to meet the needs of the community. With respect to the development of the subject lands, the hotel is intended to meet the current and future needs of patrons of Windsor Airport, as well as businesses located in the Business Park who will have the opportunity for out-of-town employees and prospective customers to stay nearby.”

“The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is consistent with policies of the PPS, OP, and regulations of the Zoning By-law”


“The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is appropriate and desirable within this policy framework as it will facilitate development of site while also implementing the proposals included in this Planning Justification Report October 2019.”

”The proposed amendments to the Zoning By-law represents “good planning””.

o Transportation Impact Study, dated November 2019, was prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited. The study analyses existing traffic conditions, proposed development, 5-year traffic forecast (2019-2024), and further analyses the forecast traffic with the proposed intersection improvements and recommends improvements to mitigate future traffic conditions. The report assessed the need for dedicated left turning lanes at the intersections within the study area, using MTO procedures, and concludes that a 15-metre southbound left-turn lane is warranted under 2024 total traffic conditions during the Saturday peak hour.

o Functional Servicing Report, dated November 6, 2019, was prepared by Aleo Associates Inc. The report was prepared to demonstrate how the proposed development will be serviced for water distribution, wastewater, and storm drainage without negatively impacting the existing municipal infrastructure. The report concludes that

Water servicing for the development can be provided by the existing 200mm diameter municipal watermain along 7th Concession Road;

A new sanitary sewer is proposed to be constructed along Baseline Road from 7th Concession Road to 8th Concession Road and will be used to service the property for wastewater discharge;

Stormwater runoff from the site will drain to an existing 24” diameter municipal storm sewer along Baseline Road; and

Stormwater management design shall follow the latest Windsor/Essex Stormwater Management Standards manual. Quality control measures must be implemented on site to effectively treat stromwater runoff from the site before it is released into the municipal storm sewer. All stormwater management measures shall provide a “Normal” level of protection in accordance with MOE standards.

o Storm Water Management Report, dated November 6, 2019, was prepared by Aleo Associates Inc. The report provided storm water management calculations for 1:2 year frequency storm.

o A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report, dated April 2018, was prepared by Coulson & Associates Ltd, Environmental Inspection & Consulting Services; the report concludes that, “Based on the information gathered and observations made during this investigation, the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment has revealed no significant evidence of potential or actual environmental contamination on the subject property”. No further investigation or remedial actions were required.

o Market Study [Market Impact Assessment], dated August 16, 2019, was prepared by HVS Consulting & Valuation, DBA: MM&R Valuation Services, Inc. The study


identified various properties that are expected to be competitive to some degree with the proposed hotel on the subject site. Eight existing hotels are expected to compete with the proposed hotel on a secondary level and none on a primary basis.

o Noise Assessment Report, dated January 22, 2020, was prepared by Akoustik Engineering Limited. The report is a noise assessment for the proposed hotel located at 4100 7th Concession. The report assesses the environmental noise impact from nearby road and rail traffic as well as aircraft noise and concludes that the noise impact on the proposed development exceeds the limits set by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. The report provides the following mitigation measures: “the use of appropriate building material design (STC), the installation of heating components to accommodate air conditioning and warning clauses” as in Table 6 below. The report recommends approval of the development on the condition, with the understanding that the required noise mitigation measures are implemented.

Warning clause Type C:



APPENDIX G – Draft By-law

B Y - L A W N U M B E R -2020

A BY-LAW TO FURTHER AMEND BY-LAW NUMBER

8600 CITED AS THE "CITY OF WINDSOR ZONING BY-LAW"

Passed the day of , 2020.

WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to further amend By-law Number 8600 of the Council of The

Corporation of the City of Windsor, cited as the "City of Windsor Zoning By-law" passed the 31st day of March, 1986, as heretofore amended:

THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Windsor enacts as follows:

1. That By-lay Number 85-18 cited as the “Township of Sandwich Comprehensive Zoning By-law”

is REPEALED for the land located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Baseline Road and 7th Concession Road, described as Pt Lot 16, Concession 7, Sandwich East, and further described as PART 2,

12R16823;

2. By-law Number 8600 is further amended by changing the Zoning District Maps or parts thereof

referred to in Section 1, of the by-law and made part thereof, so that the zoning district symbol of the lands described in Column 3 shall be changed from that shown in Column 5 to that shown in Column 6:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Item

Number

Zoning

District

Map Part

Lands Affected Official Plan

Amendment

Number

Zoning

Symbol

New Zoning

Symbol

1 T12&T13

Part of Lot 16, Concession 7,

Sandwich East, described as

PART 2, 12R16823; (located at the southeast corner of the

intersection of Baseline Road

and 7th Concession Road)

n/a HCD3.3

3. That the holding (‘H’) symbol BE REMOVED when the applicant/owner submits an application

to remove the ‘H’ symbol and the following conditions are satisfied::

a) The Owner(s) enter into an agreement with the Corporation of the City of Windsor for all

requirements under the General Provisions of the Site Plan Control Agreement, including the

following additional provisions, and any other provision deemed relevant:

Availability of municipal sanitary sewer – construct, or agree to construct, sanitary sewer

extension from existing municipal sanitary sewer trunk within the subject area to the

subject land, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Local Improvement Works – sign petitions for and not to oppose the construction, under

the provisions of Ontario Regulation 586/06 for local improvements, of a sanitary sewer

abutting the subject lands.

Sewer Connections – obtain a permit from the Engineering Department to connect the

private sanitary connection to the future service provided at the property line.




to the Corporation, in fee simple and without encumbrance, in accordance with the requirements of the County Road 42 portion of the Lauzon Parkway Environmental

Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;

Corner Cut-Off – gratuitous conveyance of a corner cut-off sufficient in magnitude to facilitate improvements at the 7th Concession Road/County Road 42 Intersection, in


accordance with the requirements of the County Road 42 Portion of the Lauzon Parkway

Environmental Assessment Report, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;


1. Construct at their expense and according to City of Windsor Standard Specifications,

a concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages

of the subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; or

2. Pay to the Corporation the sum of $25,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution

towards the future construction of a concrete sidewalk along the entire 7th

Concession Rd and Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands;


1. Construct at their own expense and according to City of Windsor Standard

Specifications, a concrete curb and gutter along the entire 7th Concession Rd and

Baseline Road frontages of the subject lands. All work to be to the satisfaction of

the Corporation’s City Engineer; or

2. Pay to the Corporation, prior to the issuance of a construction permit, the sum of

$14,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of

concrete curb and gutter on the frontage of the subject lands;

Storm Detention - construct storm detention scheme, to the satisfaction of the City

Engineer and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP).

ERCA Requirements – follow all drainage and flood-proofing recommendations of the

Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA) may have with respect to the subject land,

and obtain all necessary permits from ERCA with respect to the drainage works on the

subject lands

Off-Site Improvement – an auxiliary westbound left-turn lane with a storage length of 15-

meters at the intersection of Concession Road 7 and West Driveway to be provided at the

owner’s cost;


Noise mitigation measures – implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in

the Noise Report dated January 22, 2020, prepared by Akoustik Engineering Limited.


c) Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP) approval for Storm Water

Management for the subject site.

DREW DILKENS, MAYOR

CLERK

First Reading - , 2020

Second Reading - , 2020

Third Reading - , 2020


SCHEDULE 2

1. By-law has the following purpose and effect:

To amend the zoning of the land located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Baseline Road

and 7th Concession Road, described as Pt Lot 16, Concession 7, Sandwich East, and further described as PART 2, 12R16823, by changing the zoning from Hamlet Commercial (B/L 85-18) to Commercial

(B/L 8600).

To allow a 4-storey hotel development with 87 guest rooms proposed on the subject land.

2. Key map showing the location of the lands to which By-law applies.


From: Angie LaMarre Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 12:07 PM To: clerks <[email protected]> Subject: Development & Heritage Standing Committee April 14, 2020 - File Number ZNG/5980 Z-020/19

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless

you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,

I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600

- Residential privacy - A four story hotel impedes on the homeowners privacy into their yards.

- Increased Traffic on the class B tar road with ditches, no street lights and no sidewalks for residents andfamilies to safely walk along.

- Why a commercial development would require the residents in the area to bear the cost of new sewercosts and hookups?

We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as tax payers.

Thanks, Angie LaMarre

Item 7.1--Development &Heritage StandingCommittee April 14, 2020Written submission



From: barinder bhangu <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 3:16 PM To: clerks <[email protected]> Subject: Development & Heritage Standing Committee April 14, 2020 - File Number ZNG/5980 Z-020/19

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments

unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,

I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 - Residential privacy - A four story hotel impedes on the homeowners privacy into their yards. - Increased Traffic on the class B tar road with ditches, no street lights and no sidewalks for residents and families to safely walk along. - Why a commercial development would require the residents in the area to bear the cost of new sewer costs and hookups? We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as tax payers. Thanks, Barinder Bhangu Email: [email protected]





From: Bridgette Riberdy Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 7:25 AM To: Nwaesei, Justina <[email protected]> Cc: Keith R. Subject: Public Meeting TODAY April 14th re Baseline/Sewers



Good morning. I left you a telephone message Sunday morning requesting that you contact my husband, Keith Riberdy at his cell to confirm that the public meeting to be held today, April 14th at 4:30 at City Hall to consider an amendment to Zoning Bylaw 8600, is cancelled or is somehow otherwise being held. My husband and I (Bridget Riberdy) oppose the sewer system cost as this hotel building and sewer installation does directly affect us as we live at 3530 Baseline Road and the sewers are apparently to come from 8th Concession up to the 7th, which is directly in our path and the cost of the sewers that we were given is totally unacceptable and beyond possible, especially in this economic pandemic climate. We feel the increased crime that another hotel at this area would further bring to our neighbourhood is not worth it. As well, the traffic at the corner at 42 and the 7th is already unacceptable traffic volume, excessive and dangerous. We need better infrastructure first before this hotel should begin. There is NO need for a hotel in this area. Another issue the storm water from this proposed hotel will have to go through the same ditch that is already extremely overburdened and we are all flooding during heavy rains.

Please call my husband, Keith Riberdy at his cell to confirm. We look forward to hearing from you today.

Thank you. Bridget & Keith Riberdy




From: hardeep singh Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2020 3:40 PM To: Nwaesei, Justina <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Deployment in my street



Dear Sir/Madam

I am reaching out to you to inform you guys my concern about the zoning change for 4100 7thconcession. They will be building a 4 storey hotel less than 100 feet from my home. I am taking the action to be apart of this decision making as I am against the zoning change. This draws great attention as I am concerned for the safety of my 2 young Kids and the rest of my family as well as the safety of the community. I have discussed this issue with other people living in the community and they are all against this project. I do not think a 4 storey structure would be a good plus point as it is an invasion to my privacy as well as the privacy of the people living in the neighborhood. I would also like to know about the meeting that will be taking place for action. Thanks

Hardeep Jhattu

Item 7.1--Development & HeritageStanding Committee April 14, 2020Written submission



Josh & Anita Trudeau3716 Baseline Road519-819-4288

We are against the rezoning at 4100 7th con.rd. (southeast corner of baseline rd and 7th con. Rd. Intersection), to permit a hotel on that land. We are against this due to the close proximity of numerous motels located on county road 42, these motels are known around the community as being transitional housing. In summer of 2019, we were subject to crime due to someone staying in one of these motels, a number of our neighbour's have been targeted too. We fear that changing this zoning to permit hotels will increase the crime that is already taking place in our neighborhood.

I would like to point out that because of the current situation (covid-19) and the closure of the city to the public, this meeting should be rescheduled so the public can attend. We also feel that due to the local improvements taking place on baseline road (from the 7th to the 8th), the reason for this development to take place, that all residents should have been notified of this meeting. Not just the standard radius of the subject land.



From: Linda Unis Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:22 AM To: Toldo, Beth <[email protected]> Subject: Public Meeting about zoning by-law 8600



Beth. Ray Unis here. After per our conversation, here are my concerns that will affect all the home owners on Baseline Rd if this amendment goes through.

1. There are 58 homes involved with this issue that would have to pay for SEWERS that are notneeded.2. The sewer system that we have now works just fine.3. The cost for the new sewers will cost each home owner will be anywhere from 15,000 to20,000 depending on the homeowner,s frontage that would be a burden on their finances at atime when the world as we see it is upside down.4. The homeowners would now have to pay for water in and water out that would be anadditional cost to their monthly bill that as i said is not needed as the sewer systems that wethe homeowners have work just fine.5. This issue about building a Hotel at the end of Baseline Rd would also bring another addedcost to the city, let alone will mean added costs for maybe another street light at theintersection of Baseline Rd.6. If this amendment goes through, why not hook the sewer system to the existing sewersystem near Walker Road.7. This would alleviate a huge cost to all the homeowners on Baseline Rd.

I trust that my concerns will be brought to the attention of the city at the meeting today the 14th of April 2020. Sent from Outlook

Item 7.1 -Development &Heritage StandingCommittee April 14, 2020Written submission


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__aka.ms_weboutlook&d=DwMFAw&c=B5L1HN7L_zh5RkkcpMBsXdKVyx_gC9QrvRwDUrli_sY&r=TKRtoMLWQVhJQ6Wkn-XT7itaiQefBzaOzG06donV6mk&m=PPiwJAnxn0ATD1seTN2SwWjM7P6BGS_R6fDp1toiZJE&s=tpZRXqT9AzOSghof-MWc7zY9TTuEj5MtS0DCeBru-vQ&e=

From: Robert Rizzo <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 2:40 PM To: Nwaesei, Justina <[email protected]> Subject: re zoning change for 4100 7th con.rd zng/5980



TO JUSTINA NWAESEI AND COUNCIL my name is robert rizzo, owner of 4120 7th concession. my property is located directly to the south of proposed zoning change. a four story hotel across from the airport is a perfect location. county road 42 is going to be widened for the mega hospital if traffic is a concern.the hotel would also benefit patients or families requiring services from the mega hospital, if patients and family are from outside the area. hotels are always located a stones throw away from an airport. i realize there are homes on baseline rd but there are businesses on county rd. 42 now. its a very small residential area next to commercial zoning on 42. or i should say backs up to. i would hope dave patel of ashapuri enterprises will be able to move forward with his proposed project. you may reach me for comment at 734 612 1100 i hope planning and council will see this project as a benefit to the community. thank you, robert rizzo




From: Rob Roy Sent: Monday, April 06, 2020 9:33 PM To: Nwaesei, Justina <[email protected]> Subject: Re: File Number ZNG/5980



Hello,

I am reaching out in hopes in having my voice heard. I would like this email to find the

appropriate people. My name is Robert Roy and I live at 3185 Baseline Rd. My concern is in

regards to the zoning application change for the property at 4100 7th concession for the purpose

of building a 4 storey hotel. This proposed change will see an approximate 120 unit hotel built

less than 100 meters from my home. While I understand the need for growth and development,

this location is inappropriate and it presents problems for the residents in our small community .

I fully oppose this zoning change application for these reasons.

First, building a hotel will infringe on our residents' ability to have a neighborhood free of a

commercialized environment. The natural comfort of our neighborhood, filled with long time

residents, will be severely disrupted with the added traffic and a large hotel generates. It is

difficult to imagine adding more chaos to an area already being affected by a major artery in

County Rd 42. Not to mention that once the new hospital is approved, there will be an

even greater impact of commercialization on our neighborhood families. Also, non resident hotel

patrons do not necessarily care about the neighboring homes. Often, specifically weekends,

holidays or special events, hotel guests be disruptive, loud or cause disturbances. This would be

close to my home.

Second, the location of the proposed hotel at the intersection of the 7th Concession Rd. and

Baseline Rd. is unfit for this application. It has a 4 way stop with one being a one way street. It

is, more often than not, a very busy junction with many vehicles rolling through stop signs to

hurry though this complicated intersection. Many use 7th Concession Rd. as a shortcut to

Walker Rd from County Rd. 42. Adding a hotel would create an even more hazardous situation

as vehicles already do not observe traffic laws at this intersection. It is very difficult to make a

left turn from the 7th Concession Rd. onto County Rd. 42. I know this because I drive this route

daily. The entire area would not be able to receive additional, continuous traffic in and out of a

hotel this close to this intersection. Without a total redesign considered, this intersection is not

suitable for this proposal. I cannot see how this added volume of traffic would be efficiently

handled.

Last, and most important, heading east, Baseline Rd. terminates at Manning Rd. which connects

to Highway 401. This is a direct and unobstructed route to a major highway. I feel that non

resident hotel guests, relying on their vehicle's GPS, will use this route and add unnecessary

through traffic to our residential road. Allowing a proposed hotel to be built, will be a major

safety issue for my young children as vehicles already tend to speed down Baseline Rd. as an

Item 7.1--Development & Heritage Standing Committee April 14, 2020Written submission



alternative to County Rd. 42. My twin boys regularly play outside and and so do other neighbor's

young children. By adding a hotel, which typically provides a service to non-residents, I can see

even MORE speeding and reckless driving in our neighborhood. Hotel guests are typically in a

hurry to check-in, catch their flight, or get home to where they came from. I do not want this

frantic pace and unsafe condition near my home. I worry about my young ones being on

their bicycles, scooters or skateboards and having to be so close to this type of additional traffic.

This has me fear for my family's safety in a very real way.

Without a complete study to redesign and reconstruct the intersection at 7th Concession and

Baseline Rd., this proposed zoning change should not proceed. It would be negligent to allow an

unsafe situation like this, to exist. This hotel is not welcome in our neighbourhood. If need be, a

petition can be produced to show that our Windsor residents oppose this proposed project.

Please, I hope to hear from someone who can understand my concerns and absolute opposition to

this proposal.

As a longtime Windsor resident, I would like to think the needs and opinions of our community

can be addressed with OUR best interests in mind.

Thank you

Regards,

Robert Roy


-----Original Message----- From: Bridgette Riberdy Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 1:23 PM To: clerks <[email protected]> Cc: Keith R. Subject: Tonight's Council Meeting, April 14/20

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good afternoon. There is a Public Meeting to consider an amendment to zoning by-law 8600 tonight, April 14th, File Number ZNG/5980 Z-020/19 with the Development & Heritage Standing Committee. We live at 3530 Baseline Road andthis is a discussion of a hotel to be built, and sewer system. This directly affects our home, and ALLproperties between the 8th and 7th Concessions of Baseline Road. We are writing to request apostponement of this meeting so that we may attend in person, and so all residents have anopportunity to attend and discuss.

Please confirm receipt of this email and that this meeting may be rescheduled.

Thank you.

Keith & Bridget Riberdy




-----Original Message----- From: Michelle <michellecharbs Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2020 10:06 PM To: Nwaesei, Justina <[email protected]> Subject: Public meeting for hotel

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Regarding the proposed 4 story hotel at 4100concession rd. How can there be a “public” meeting during this covid 19 time? I am a frontline healthcare worker and we encourage everyone to stay home, maintain social isolation. I don’t believe this to be considered essential at all. This should be postponed until such time as a proper public meeting can be held. Looking forward to your response.

Sincerely, Michelle,

Sent from my iPhone




ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MEMO

Page 1 of 1

TO: Mayor and Members of City Council

FROM: Planning & Building Services

DATE: May 20, 2020

SUBJECT: Supplementary Information to Report No. S 42/2020, File No. Z-020/19, ZNG/5980; 4100 7th Con. Rd.

On May 1, 2020, Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (PPS 2020) came into effect and replaced Provincial Policy 2014

(PPS 2014). All decisions of Council on Planning Act matters shall be consistent with PPS 2020.

Report No. S 42/2020 was prepared well ahead of the May 1st, 2020 and the Planning Analysis in the report, as well

as the applicant`s Planning Justification Report were based on PPS 2014, which is no longer in effect. Consequently,

the applicant`s planning consultant (Bezaire Partners) has provided supplementary information dated May 12,

2020, addressing the impact of PPS 2020 on the proposed development at 4100 7th Concession. In the consultant`s

opinion, the proposal is consistent with policies of PPS 2020. Please see attached material prepared by Bezaire

Partners.

I have reviewed the changes to PPS 2014, the relevant policies of PPS 2020, and the attached supplementary

information prepared by Bezaire Partners. I note that the language in policy 1.2.2 has changed from supportive in

PPS 2014 to directive in PPS 2020. In light of that, I have made effort to engage the Walpole Island and Caldwell

First Nation Communities in discussions pertaining to the subject planning Act matter. I am awaiting their response.

Based on the above, it is my opinion that the recommended Zoning By-law amended in Report Number S 42/2020,

is consistent with PPS 2020.

Item 7.1--Additional Information Memo June 8, 2020--Development & Heritage Standing Committee Meeting


BP

Bezaire Partners Urban Planners, Landscape Architects, Planning & Construction Mediation, Public Consultation, Project Management,

Environmental Impact Studies, Park and Recreation Planning

3514 Walker Rd. Unit 1A Windsor ON N8W 3S4

C 519 816 6844 | V 519 966 6844 | F: 519 966 4088 | E: [email protected]

2020 05 12

City of Windsor

Department of Planning and Building Services

350 City Hall Square West

Windsor ON

N9A 6S1

Att: Justina Nwaesei

Dear Justina:

RE: 4100 7th Concession – Supplement to PJR dated October 2019

The Province of Ontario enacted Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) 2020 replacing PPS

2014 on May 1, 2020. The planning justification report (PJR)for this project was prepared

in October of 2019. The application was deferred at the April meeting of the

Development & Heritage Standing Committee with the earliest possible date for

rescheduling being in June 2020. The application is consequently subject to PPS 2020.

The purpose of this supplementary report is to identify any implications of that change on

the application.

I have reviewed PPS 2020 and noted the following:

1. The following sections cited in the October 2019 PJR remain unchanged or have

simple changes of wording that don’t impact the overall meaning of the policy:

1.1.1 (a) (b) (c), 1.1.3.1, 1.1.5.3, 1.1.6.4, 1.6.3, 1.6.6.1, 1.6.7.3, 1.6.7.4, 1.6.9.2

2. The following sections incorporate a relatively significant change

PPS Policy

No.

Intent of Policy Impact of

Change

a. 1.1.1 (e) Requires the integration of land use planning,

growth management, transit-supportive

development, intensification, and infrastructure

planning to minimize land consumption and

servicing costs

None – makes

use of existing

land use

designation

b. 1.2.6.1 Requires locating major facilities to avoid or

minimize the adverse effects from odour, noise,

other contaminants and minimize risk to public

health and safety

None – no

increased risk

Item 7.1--Attachment from P. Bezaire to Additional Info. MemoJune 8, 2020--Development & Heritage Standing Committee Meeting


Impact of PPS 2020 on PJR 4100 7th Concession

May 12, 2020

Page 2

c. 1.3.1(c)

Requires identifying and monitoring strategic sites

for investment and addressing barriers to

investment.

None – not

relevant

d. 1.3.2.2

Assess employment areas at time of OP review and

provide for separation from sensitive land use.

None – not

relevant

e. 1.3.2.3

For employment areas, prohibit residential or other

sensitive land uses.

None – not

relevant

f. 1.3.2.5

Allows for the interim designation of non-

employment uses in employment areas under

certain conditions

None – not

relevant

g 1.6.6.2

Requires municipality to promote municipal sewage

and water services as preferred option

None – site will

have benefit

of full

municipal

services

h. 1.6.6.7(c)

Integrate the planning of services and minimize

impacts of changing climate through effective

management

None –

planning for

zero runoff

3. The document includes changes to sections that were not cited in the original

PJR. I reviewed these and found nothing that would impact the application.

It is my professional planning opinion that the proposal for the construction of a hotel on

the subject property is consistent with the policies of PPS 2020.

Sincerely,

Paul Bezaire OALA, RPP MCIP

Partner


Public

Consultation

Report Zoning By-law Amendment

4100 7th Concession Rd.

Concession 7 PT Lot 16;

RP 12R16826 Part 2 City of Windsor

Date:

May, 2020 Revised May 15, 2020

Prepared For:

MAA Ashapuri Enterprises Inc.

Prepared by:

Bezaire Partners 302-180 Eugenie St. West

Windsor ON N8X 2X6

V: 519 966 6844

M: 519 816 6844

E: [email protected]

Item 7.1-- P. Bezaire's report on Public ConsultationJune 8, 2020--Development & Heritage Standing Committee Meeting


Public Consultation Report 4100 7th Concession

MAA Ashapuri Enterprises Inc. May 2020

Revised May 15, 2020

Bezaire Partners Page 2

0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Bezaire Partners (Bezaire) has been retained by MAA Ashapuri Enterprises Inc. (the

applicant) to hear the concerns and provide additional information to the concerned

residents in the area of its proposed development of a hotel at 4100 7th Concession.

Specifically, nine residents had contacted the City of Windsor prior to the Planning

Heritage Standing Committee Meeting on April 14, 2020. Eight were opposed to the

development and one was in favour.

Under normal circumstances, those 9 residents would have appeared as delegations at

the standing committee; the applicant would have had the opportunity to respond;

and the committee would have made a decision based on the merits of what they

heard. The issue normally would have been decided at that meeting. But these are

unusual times and this public meeting was being conducted on-line. We acknowledge

that it would have been difficult to adequately hear the delegations in that format.

Consequently, the committee chose to defer the application to allow the public

consultation to occur.

The chair indicated that since construction was in a shutdown mode in Ontario, there

would be no negative impact on the applicant. I was available to the committee by

phone, having advised the clerk that I was available for questions, and would have liked

to comment on that statement because it is false. Since we are in design mode and

perhaps six months away from actual construction, a delay at this point prevents the

design from proceeding and results in an actual delay for the project. It will have the

impact we believe of delaying start of work until the spring of 2021.

At this point, the applicant is entirely focused on having this matter brought back to the

standing committee as soon as possible and have undertaken to meet with any resident

willing to do so to make sure that they have all the information necessary to make an

informed decision.

This report documents the concerns of each of the residents and provides a response.

While it is not possible to satisfy all of their concerns, I believe that our response in each

case is reasonable and will be supported by administration and helpful to the committee

in terms of reaching a decision on the subject rezoning.






1.1 BACKGROUND

Bezaire Partners (Bezaire) has been retained by MAA Ashapuri Enterprises Inc. (MAE) to

hear the concerns residents in the area of the proposed development at 4100 7th

Concession and provide additional information as needed. Specifically, nine residents

had contacted the City of Windsor prior to the Planning Heritage Standing Committee

Meeting on April 14, 2020. Eight were opposed to the development for a variety of

reasons and one was in favour. This report documents the concerns received both in

writing and in our discussions with them.

Under normal circumstances, those nine residents would have appeared as delegations

at the standing committee; the applicant or their planner would have had the

opportunity to respond; and the committee would have made a decision based on the

merits of what they heard. The issue normally would have been decided at that meeting.

But these are unusual times and this public meeting was being conducted on-line. We

acknowledge that it would have been difficult to adequately hear the delegations in

that format. Consequently, the committee chose to defer the application to allow the

public consultation to occur.

The chair indicated that since construction is in a shutdown mode in Ontario, there would

be no negative impact on the applicant. Having advised the clerk that I was available

for questions, I was available to the committee by phone and would have liked to

comment on that statement because it is incorrect. Since we are in design mode and

perhaps six months away from actual construction a delay at this point prevents us from

entering into a site plan agreement, which in turn stops the design from proceeding and

results in an actual delay for the project. This project is extremely time-sensitive because

of conditions imposed by the hotel brand. Even a short delay puts the project at risk. At

the very least, it will have the impact of delaying the start of work until the spring of 2021.

It is imperative that this matter is brought back to the Standing Committee as soon as

possible.

1.2 LIST OF INITIAL COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF WINDSOR

Having received the correspondence sent by the nine residents, we summarized them as

follows:

KEY NAME ADDRESS MAIN CONCERNS

1 Hardeep Jhattu

(Hardeep Singh)

• Safety for children

• Loss of Privacy

2 Linda and Ray

Unis

4020 Baseline Rd. • Doesn’t want to pay for sewers

• Doesn’t want to pay sewer surcharge

• Traffic light required at 7th and

Baseline.

• Route sanitary to Walker Rd.

3 Michelle Charbs • Lack of opportunity for public input

because of COVID-19

• Requested deferral






4 Keith & Bridgette

Riberdy

3530 Baseline Rd. • Cost of sanitary sewer

• Increased crime

• Unacceptable traffic volume

• Insufficient infrastructure

• No demand for a hotel

• Impact of storm water on

overburdened ditch

• Requested deferral

5 Angie LaMarre

3850 Baseline Rd.

• Loss of privacy

• Increased traffic on Class B Road

• Lack of streetlights and sidewalks

creates safety issue

• Cost of Sanitary Sewer

6 Josh and Anita

Trudeau

3716 Baseline Rd.

• No need for a hotel

• Increased crime

• Lack of opportunity for public input

because of COVID-19

• Residents beyond normal radius

should be notified

7 Barinder Bhangu • Loss of privacy

• Increased traffic

• Lack of streetlights and sidewalks

creates safety issue.

• Cost of Sanitary Sewer

8 Robert Rizzo

4120 7th

Concession Rd.

(next south of

proposed site)

• Future widening of CR 42 should take

care of traffic concerns

• Location near airport is a perfect

location

• Will benefit families of people in

hospital

• Residential area is very small

compared to commercial nature of

the area.

• Project will benefit community

9 Robert Roy

3185 Baseline Rd. • Location is inappropriate

• Commercial use intrudes into

residential neighbourhood

• Additional traffic will cause problems

• Hotel guests will be disruptive, loud

and cause disturbances.

• Intersection of 7th Concession and

Baseline is inadequate.






• Baseline will become a route

between hotel and Hwy 401 via

Manning Rd.

• Safety issue for children

1.3 LOG OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH RESIDENTS AND BEZAIRE

A date log of all communications between Bezaire and the residents can be found at

Appendix 1.

1.4 LOCATION OF RESIDENTS FILING COMMENTS REGARDING THEIR CONCERNS.

* Residents not shown did not respond to our offer to provide additional information or

provide their address in their written communication. Numbers refer to key in chart at

Section 1.2

1.5 Consultation with Each Concerned Resident

In order to assist the municipality with the public consultation, the applicant directed

Bezaire to provide whatever assistance they could to the Ward Councillor. In addition,

we were directed by the applicant to contact each of the concerned residents and

enter a dialogue about their concerns. Since the Clerk could not provide contact

information for the residents, they invited them to contact us. Five residents responded

leading to discussions with four. Ultimately, all nine received the additional information

included at Section 1.6 of this report.

1.6 SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND RESPONSES

a) Cost of local improvement for Sanitary Sewer

Concern:

There is concern that the residents must pay for a sewer that is only required for a

private commercial development.

Response:

The applicants initially proposed the extension of a small diameter force main to

County Road 42 and then westerly to an existing connection near the Tim






Horton’s. Unfortunately, the city turned that down since the overall drainage

scheme required the sanitary flow be directed to the east.

We then proposed either a small diameter pipe or a larger gravity sewer running

easterly on County Rd. 42 to just before 8th concession where there is a

connection. The city was quite collaborative in these negotiations, but after

considering it, they made it clear that they wanted the sewer to run down

Baseline Rd. The construction of a sanitary sewer along Baseline Rd. was already

a municipal objective before the hotel was proposed. If anything, the hotel

provided the means for public works to achieve its objective of improving the

environment by connecting the homes on Baseline to municipal services and

abandoning the existing septic systems. The hotel will pay its full share of the

construction. The residents have the alternative of putting the cost on their taxes

and paying it over a period of time.

While the applicant supports the environmental objective of getting these homes

off septic tanks, we would be happy with any of the alternative routes.

b) Cost of sewer surcharge

Concern:

Once connected to the sanitary sewer, the residents will be charged the sewer

surcharge rate. They prefer to not pay that charge.

Response:

The sewer surcharge is paid by all residents of the City of Windsor (except those

on septic tanks) in order to cover the cost of the sewer system in the City of

Windsor. We understand why the residents would want to avoid that cost but

also know that it constitutes their fair share the infrastructure costs in the city.

c) Not a good location for a Hotel

Concern:

Some residents suggest that this is an inappropriate location for a commercial

enterprise such as a hotel.

Response:

The site is currently designated as a Business Park which allows for business and

industrial uses. The current zoning is Commercial Hamlet which permits

commercial uses such as a service station, a bank, a public hall, tavern, lumber

yard or a motel, a steel yard or if it was a bit closer to CR 42, a hotel. This site has

never been intended to be an extension of the residential area.

d) Lack of demand for a hotel

Concern:

The residents note the existence of hotels west of Walker Rd on Cabana. They

suggest that those hotels provide adequate capacity for travelers in the area.






Response:

Determining whether there is sufficient demand for a hotel in this area is the

obligation of not only the applicant, but of the hotel brand itself. They wouldn’t

be investing or putting their name on a location that was to fail. In addition, as

part of our application, the applicant commissioned a marketing study which

was prepared by HVS which concluded the following:

“The proposed subject hotel is not expected to compete with

any hotels on a primary basis because of the distance

between the subject site and the existing hotel supply.

However, we have identified 8 area lodging facilities that are

expected to compete with the proposed subject hotel on a

secondary basis.”

It is also important to recognize that this proposal is for a Fairfield Inn & Suites by

Marriott which is an excellent brand with a good reputation.

e) Capacity of the roadside ditch for storm water

Concern:

A resident noted that the roadside ditches along Baseline Rd would be

overwhelmed why the additional storm runoff from the hotel site.

Response:

the storm water management plan for the hotel site has been designed to

achieve near zero runoff. This means that the impact on the sewer system is

mitigated. Additionally, the storm water from the site will not be directed to the

roadside ditch but to an existing storm sewer which is already available to service

the site.

f) Loss of privacy because of multi-story building

Concern:

The proposal is for a multi-story building. There is concern that windows located

at that height will create a loss of privacy for neighboring sites.

Response:

There are very few residences that would be directly impacted by views from the

hotel. The resident next South of the hotel is in support of the project. Trees have

been strategically placed as part of the landscaping to mitigate views from the

hotel that might affect properties to the south and east. The applicant is willing to

increase that planting if needed.






g) Lack of streetlights and sidewalks on baseline creates safety concerns

Concern:

Baseline Rd lacks municipal services such as streetlights and sidewalks and, the

residents claim, results in an unsafe environment for children and families who

want to walk along the road. They suggest that this will get worse because of the

increased traffic.

Response:

Baseline Rd was constructed when the area was part of the county.

Consequently, it was developed using quasi rural standards. Now that it is part of

the City of Windsor, eventual upgrades to an urban standard are needed. Those

additional amenities are available, as they are to any residential area in the city

by local improvement.

h) Increased traffic

Concern:

The hotel will result in an unacceptable increase in traffic.

Response:

A traffic impact study was completed as part of the planning application. The

report by Paradigm Traffic Solutions indicates this for future traffic operations with

the proposed infrastructure.

“Background Traffic Operations: All intersections within the study area are

forecast to operate within acceptable levels of service, with no problem

movements.

Total Traffic Operations: All Intersections within the study area are forecast to

operate within acceptable levels of service similarly to the background

conditions with no problem movements.

A southbound left turn Lane at concession road 7 and West driveway is

warranted under 2024 total traffic conditions during the Saturday peak hour.”

Installation of the proposed left turn Lane is a requirement of the municipality and

will be installed at the cost of the applicant.

i) Increased crime

Concern:

The residents are concerned about crime that might occur because of the

transient nature of the hotel patrons.

Response:

The development proposal was circulated to many agencies both inside and

outside of city hall. One such agency is the Windsor Police Department. They

expressed no concern about the proposal. They commented as follows:






“The Windsor Police Service has no concerns or objections with this Zoning

By-Law amendment application to permit a hotel on the subject property.

The proposed development is not anticipated to cause any problems that

will impact public safety for the immediate area. While such a land use

(hotel) does carry some unique conditions that affect public safety, these

have already been addressed through a comprehensive review of the

applicant’s site plan by this office. It is felt the requirements of the

applicant, as it relates to their site plan, will ensure safety and security for

the hotel once it is constructed and becomes operational.”

As noted earlier, this will be a Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott which is a well-

respected brand with high standards and well-developed policies. We suggest

that the problems associated with other motels are unlikely to happen here.”

j) Lack of opportunity for public input

Concern:

The restrictions connected with the COVID-19 pandemic has restricted public

assembly and reduced the public’s ability to participate in the public

consultation.

Response:

COVID-19 has certainly changed the way we do many things. The City of

Windsor has the obligation and authority under the planning act to ensure an

adequate level of public input. As is normally the case, residents within a

specified radius area have been notified of the application, invited to provide

comments by email or phone, invited to connect to the meeting as it

proceeded, and provide comments or responses at the meeting by phone. In

addition, when it became apparent that there were residents with concerns, the

meeting was deferred so that each resident could be contacted. Since then the

applicants have reached out to each resident with an offer to speak with them

about their concerns.

The City of Windsor is responsible for the process and has determined that the

process provides sufficient opportunity for public consultation as evidenced by

the 9 emails expressing concern, the deferral, and the dialogue flowing from our

contact with them.

k) Need for traffic light at 7th Concession and Baseline

Concern:

A traffic light may be required at the intersection of 7th Concession and Baseline

Rd.

Response:

As part of its application, a traffic impact study (TIS) was completed for the

project. The TIS looked at each of the intersections surrounding the site and

determine what improvements might be necessary. There is no warrant for a

traffic light at that intersection. See item g) for the conclusions of the Traffic study.






In addition to the above, the City of Windsor has existing plans to install a

roundabout that will incorporate traffic from Baseline, 7th Concession, and

County Road 42. That work is already planned regardless of this the application

by the hotel. In fact, the hotel has agreed to convey a large part of its property to

the city of Windsor for the purpose of the roundabout. The roundabout and

extent of conveyances is shown below:

Excerpt from Lauzon Parkway Improvements Class Environmental Assessment Study –

Roundabout at intersection of 7th Concession, Baseline, and CR 42.

1.7 CONCLUSIONS

a) The additional information provided in the responses should support a better

understanding of the issues raised by the neighbours.

b) By far the most significant item of concern is the cost to be incurred by each

resident to install sanitary sewers and connections to their property.

Unfortunately, it is a clear objective of the municipality to put these residences

onto municipal services for environmental reasons. This is beyond the control

of the applicant. While we support the environmental objectives being met,

we would be happy with any of the previously proposed routes. The residents

have the option of having the cost put on their taxes and paying it over

several years.

c) The traffic impact study does not support the neighbour’s concerns with

respect to traffic or safety. The City will, when the need is justified, install a

roundabout at the intersection of 7th Concession and Baseline Rd

accommodating traffic from County Rd. 42.






d) The market study does not support the neighbour’s concerns relative to the

need for the proposed hotel.

e) The Windsor Police do not share the neighbour’s concerns about increased

crime.

f) While the format of the public meeting is not ideal; the municipality has

elected to proceed in this way and there is a reasonable opportunity for the

public to have input as evidenced by the comments received. In addition,

only a portion of the residents accepted our offer to speak with them and

hear their concerns.

g) The applicant has utilized strategically placed trees to reduce the impact of

views from the hotel to the adjacent properties. Additional plantings could be

provided if it would help.

h) The proposed hotel will be a Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott which is a solid

brand with a good reputation and good management practices. It is unlikely

to compete in the same market as the other nearby motels. Also, the patrons

are unlikely to cause concerns for the neighbourhood.

1.8 RECOMMENDATION

Based on the above consultation, we continue to support the recommendation of the

planning department that the application BE APPROVED.

APPENDIX 1 – LOG OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH NEIGHBOURS

DATE DESCRIPTION DISCUSSION

2020 04 Email from City Clerk to

the nine residents

Provided my contact information and invited them to

contact Bezaire Partners

2020 04 15 Email to Ward Councillor Offered support if needed to respond to residents

2020 04 16 Email from Angie LaMarre Provided her email address.

2020 04 16 Email to Angie LaMarre Will be in touch tomorrow or the weekend

2020 04 17 Telecon with Rob Rizzo Located right beside the site and supports the project

2020 04 17 Email from Rob Roy Provided his contact info

2020 04 17 Email to Rob Roy Available on Friday or the weekend.

2020 04 17 Telecon with Ray Unis Provided information on sanitary sewer, intersection,

hotel brand. Wants to know what side of the road the

sewer will be on.

2020 04 17 Email to Angie LaMarre Asked when are you available to chat?

2020 04 17 Letter to Ray Unis Additional information responding to everyone’s

concerns






2020 04 17 Letter to Rob Rizzo Additional information responding to everyone’s

concerns and thanking him for his support for the

project.

2020 04 17 Email from Rob Rizzo Thank you for information.

2020 04 17 Email to Ray Unis Let him know that the sewer is planned to go down the

centre of south lane of the road.

2020 04 18 Email from Ray Unis Thank you for information about sewer location

2020 04 18 Email to Ward Councillor Provided summary of issues and responses

2020 04 18 Email from Roby Roy He is available to talk on Sunday

2020 04 19 Telecon with Rob Roy Sanitary sewer is not his main concern. He purchased

his home within the last couple years intending to live

in a quasi-rural area and finds this commercial

development to be in intrusion into his neighborhood.

Would like to install a cul-de-sac on baseline to limit

access from the hotel

2020 04 19 Letter to Rob Roy Additional information responding to everyone’s

concerns for the project.

2020 04 19 Email to Angie LaMarre Wondering whether she would like to meet this

evening.

2020 04 20 Telecon with Anita

Trudeau

Concerned with lack of notice, potential for increased

crime in the area. They have young children and they

are concerned about safety.

2020 04 20 Email to Anita Trudeau Additional information responding to everyone’s

concerns for the project.

2020 04 20 Second email from City

Clerk to four remaining

residents asking them to

contact me

Provided my contact information

2020 04 22 Letter with additional

information sent through

Clerks Department to

remaining residents that

had filed a concern.

Provided summary of resident’s concerns with

additional information for each and repeated our

willingness to meet with any concerned resident.

2020 04 24 Telecon with Keith Riberdy Concerned about cost of local improvement cost

Storm sewer on north side of Baseline is in poor

condition and lacks capacity

Wants to know why we didn’t go south from the site

along 7th concession to the municipal drain.

Concern about intersection of CR42 and 7th

Concession traffic

2020 04 24 Email from Angie LaMarre Spoke to a neighbour that I had spoken to previously.

Talking with others and received a copy of the letter I

had sent. Will contact me if she has questions.



Subject: OPA & Rezoning – Responsive Group – 3175-3215 Banwell - OPA 131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 -Ward 7

Moved by: Member Gyemi

Seconded by: Member Moore

Decision Number: DHSC 166 THAT Volume 1: The Primary Plan of the City of Windsor Official Plan BE AMENDED

by changing the land use designation of Part of Lots 143 and 144, Concession 1,

designated as Parts 1 to 4, 11 to 15, and 26 to 30, Plan 12R-27789 (PIN 01566-0995; Roll No. 070-890-02411), situated on the west side of Banwell Road between

Tecumseh Road East and Palmetto Street, on Schedule D: Land Use from “Commercial Corridor” to “Residential”.

THAT Zoning By-law 8600 BE AMENDED by changing the zoning of Part of Lots 143

and 144, Concession 1, designated as Parts 1 to 4, 11 to 15, and 26 to 30, Plan 12R-27789 (PIN 01566-0995; Roll No. 070-890-02411), situated on the west side of Banwell

Road between Tecumseh Road East and Palmetto Street, from HCD2.1 and S.20(1)181 to Residential District 3.20 (RD3.20) on the following basis:

12.20 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.20 (RD3.20)


Lodging House Residential Care Facility

Any use accessory to the above uses

12.20.5 PROVISIONS

.1 Lot Frontage – minimum As existing

.2 Lot Area – minimum As existing

.3 Lot Coverage – maximum 35.0%

.4 Main Building Height – maximum 14.0 m

.5 Front Yard Depth – minimum 3.50 m

.6 Rear Yard Depth – minimum 6.0 m

.7 Side Yard Width – minimum 6.0 m

.8 Landscaped Open Space Yard – minimum 25.0% of the lot area [ZDM 15; ZNG/6046]

Carried.

Item No. 8.7


Report Number: S 74/2020 Clerk’s File: Z0/13758 & ZB/13757


the same.


Page 1 of 14


Subject: OPA & Rezoning – Responsive Group – 3175-3215 Banwell - OPA 131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 -Ward 7

Reference:

Date to Council: June 8, 2020 Author: Adam Szymczak, MCIP, RPP

Senior Planner 519-255-6543 x6250

[email protected] Planning & Building Services Report Date: May 19, 2020

Clerk’s File #: Z0/13758 ZB/13757


Recommendation:

THAT Volume 1: The Primary Plan of the City of Windsor Official Plan BE AMENDED

by changing the land use designation of Part of Lots 143 and 144, Concession 1, designated as Parts 1 to 4, 11 to 15, and 26 to 30, Plan 12R-27789 (PIN 01566-0995;

Roll No. 070-890-02411), situated on the west side of Banwell Road between Tecumseh Road East and Palmetto Street, on Schedule D: Land Use from “Commercial

Corridor” to “Residential”.

THAT Zoning By-law 8600 BE AMENDED by changing the zoning of Part of Lots 143

and 144, Concession 1, designated as Parts 1 to 4, 11 to 15, and 26 to 30, Plan 12R-

27789 (PIN 01566-0995; Roll No. 070-890-02411), situated on the west side of Banwell Road between Tecumseh Road East and Palmetto Street, from HCD2.1 and

S.20(1)181 to Residential District 3.20 (RD3.20) on the following basis:

12.20 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.20 (RD3.20)


Lodging House

Residential Care Facility

Any use accessory to the above uses

12.20.5 PROVISIONS

.1 Lot Frontage – minimum As existing

.2 Lot Area – minimum As existing

.3 Lot Coverage – maximum 35.0%

.4 Main Building Height – maximum 14.0 m


Page 2 of 14

.5 Front Yard Depth – minimum 3.50 m

.6 Rear Yard Depth – minimum 6.0 m

.7 Side Yard Width – minimum 6.0 m

.8 Landscaped Open Space Yard – minimum 25.0% of the lot area

[ZDM 15; ZNG/6046]

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

Application Information:

Location: 3175, 3195 and 3215 Banwell Road

West side of Banwell Road between Tecumseh Road East and Palmetto

Street; PIN 01566-0995; Roll No. 070-890-02411

Ward: 7 Planning District: 10 – Forest Glade Zoning District Map:15

Applicant: Responsive Group Inc. (Greg Bowman)

Agent: Zelinka Priamo Ltd. (Matt Campbell)

Proposal:

The applicant is requesting Amendments to the Official Plan (OPA) and Zoning By-law 8600 (ZBA) to allow a three-storey long-term care facility consisting of 192 beds,142 parking spaces including 4 accessible spaces, 6 bicycle parking spaces, and 2 loading

spaces in two parking areas. Access is via two driveways from Banwell Road: a south access to a future signalized intersection at Banwell Road and Palmetto Street located

on lands to the south owned by others; and a north access to Banwell Road.

The agent submitted the following documents with the application: Planning Justification Report (PJR) prepared by Zelinka Priamo Ltd. (January 31, 2020), Functional Servicing

Report (FSR) prepared by Aleo Associates Inc. (January 31, 2020), Transportation Impact Study (TIS) prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited (February

2020), and a Conceptual Site Plan (February 23, 2020).

The agent submitted a revised conceptual site plan dated April 22, 2020 (Appendix A). This report is based on the revised conceptual site plan.

While this application was being processed, a new Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (PPS 2020) came into effect on May 1, 2020. The Planning Division requested an

update to the PJR to reflect the new PPS 2020 and the revised conceptual site plan. The original PJR is attached as Appendix B. An addendum to the PJR is in Appendix B2. The TIS is being updated based on feedback from Transportation Planning and the

Planning Division and the revised conceptual site plan.


Page 3 of 14

Site Information:

OFFICIAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE PREVIOUS USE

Commercial

Corridor

Commercial District 2.1 (HCD2.1)

S.20(1)181

Vacant Land Vacant Land

LOT FRONTAGE LOT DEPTH AREA SHAPE

154.1 m 82.8 m 1.4 ha Rectangular

505.6 ft 271.7 ft 3.5 ac

All measurements are provided by applicant and are for information purposes only.

Neighbourhood Description:

The subject parcel is located on the eastern edge of the Forest Glade neighbourhood, a predominantly low-density and stable residential neighbourhood. To the west, adjacent to the subject parcel, is a recently built residential subdivision.

To the immediate north, on the west side of Banwell Road, is a vacant commercial parcel, a gas bar with an automatic carwash, and a building supply centre.

Tecumseh Road East is a major commercial corridor consisting of a broad range of commercial uses such as stores, restaurants, business offices and medical offices.

North of Tecumseh Road East is a railway corridor used by VIA rail. North of the railway

corridor is the East Riverside neighbourhood, a residential area that has developed over the past 15 years.

To the northeast, on the east side of Banwell Road, is a funeral home, a business office and a grocery store.

To the east is the Banwell Gardens Long-Term Care Facility (which the proposed

development is replacing). To the east and south east, is the Palmetto Subdivision, a newer residential subdivision that also contains a small park (Palmetto Park).

East of this subdivision are residential uses located in the Town of Tecumseh, consisting of low-density housing such as townhomes and semi-detached dwellings.

To the immediate south are vacant commercial lands, an office building containing

medical offices, business offices and studios, a child care centre (at Wildwood Drive and Troup Crescent), and a small plaza on the south side of Wildwood. Wildwood Park

is located about 700 m south. Further south is the E.C. Row Expressway, which currently has an at-grade intersection with Banwell Road.


Page 4 of 14

Per Schedule F: Roads and Bikeways, Banwell Road and Tecumseh Road East are Class II Arterial Roads, EC Row Expressway is an Expressway, Wildwood Drive is a

Class II Collector Road and Palmetto Street is a Local Road. Signalized intersections exist at Banwell and Tecumseh, Banwell and Wildwood/Mulberry and Banwell and EC Row Expressway.

Public transit is available via the Lauzon 10 bus which connects with several bus routes at the East End Terminal located at Tecumseh Mall to the west at Tecumseh Road East

and Lauzon Parkway. A bus stop is located on the east side of Banwell Road, across from the subject parcel.

Future improvements to Banwell Road including sidewalks and traffic lights at Palmetto

will improve access to the bus stop. The 2019 Transit Master Plan recommends maintaining bus service on Banwell Road.

No sidewalks or multi-use trail exist on Banwell Road, however, they are planned as part of the Banwell Road Environmental Assessment (EA).

Banwell Road between Tecumseh Road East and the CPR Railway corridor to the

south was subject to a Class EA, approved in 2016. Adjacent to the subject parcel, the preferred design proposes a road with a four-lane cross section with basic elements

between Tecumseh and Wildwood/Mulberry, a 4.0 m wide multi-use trail, with a signalized intersection at Palmetto Street. No additional land is required for road widening purposes.

The existing signalized intersection at Banwell and Wildwood/Mulberry is to be replaced with a roundabout.

It is anticipated that the tender for Phase 1 of the Banwell Road EA (Tecumseh Road to

Palmetto) will be complete by the end of June 2020 with construction beginning by the end of August 2020.

Sanitary and storm sewers are available to service the subject lands. The parcel is located within the regulatory area for the Parent Outlet Drain.


Page 5 of 14

Figure 1: Key Map


Page 6 of 14

Figure 2: Subject Parcel - Rezoning


Page 7 of 14

Figure 3: Neighborhood Map


Page 8 of 14

Discussion:

For the sake of clarity and ease of reading, the undefined and generic term “long-term care facility” will be used in this report. From the perspective of land use and zoning, a “long-term care facility” may consist of both a Lodging House and a Residential Care

Facility.

This report, including the recommendations, are based the revised conceptual plan

dated April 22, 2020. Please note that the proposed development is conceptual in nature and is subject to change.

Provincial Policy Statement 2020

The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development and sets the policy foundation for

regulating the development and use of land in Ontario. On May 1, 2020, the new Provincial Policy Statement 2020 came into force.

The review of the PPS 2020 applies to both the Official Plan Amendment and the

Zoning By-law amendment.

Policy 1.1.1 of the PPS states:

“Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by:

a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term;

b) accommodating an appropriate affordable and market-based range and mix of residential types (including single-detached, additional residential units, multi-unit

housing, affordable housing and housing for older persons), employment (including industrial and commercial), institutional (including places of worship, cemeteries and long-term care homes), recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet

long-term needs;

e) promoting the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit-

supportive development, intensification and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs;

g) ensuring that necessary infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to meet current and projected needs;”

The requested amendments will allow an existing use to remain in the same neighbourhood, which allow the proposed development to make use of existing services and infrastructure.

The construction of a long-term care facility represents an efficient development and land use pattern that will have no adverse impact on the financial well-being of the City

of Windsor, promotes intensification, achieves a cost-effective development pattern and minimizes land consumption and servicing costs.

Banwell Road has an approved Environmental Assessment and design work for the

segment adjacent to the subject lands is underway. No servicing issues have been identified. Necessary infrastructure will be available to meet the needs of the proposed

development.


Page 9 of 14

The amendments are consistent with Policy 1.1.1 of the PPS.

Policies 1.1.3.1, 1.1.3.2 and 1.1.3.3 of the PPS state:

1.1.3.1 Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development.

1.1.3.2 Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses which:

a) efficiently use land and resources;

b) are appropriate for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public

service facilities which are planned or available, and avoid the need for their unjustified and/or uneconomical expansion;

e) support active transportation;

f) are transit-supportive, where transit is planned, exists or may be developed;

1.1.3.3 Planning authorities shall identify appropriate locations and promote opportunities for transit-supportive development, accommodating a significant supply and range of housing options through intensification and

redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing building stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability of

suitable existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected needs.

The subject parcel is located within the settlement area. The requested amendments

promote a land use that makes efficient use of land and existing infrastructure. Active transportation options and transit services are located or planned adjacent to, or near, the subject lands. The subject location represents an appropriate location for

intensification.

The amendments are consistent with PPS Policies 1.1.3.1, 1.1.3.2, and 1.1.3.3.

Policy 1.4 of the PPS states:

1.4.1 To provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densi ties required to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the

regional market area, planning authorities shall:

a) maintain at all times the ability to accommodate residential growth for a

minimum of 15 years through residential intensification and redevelopment and, if necessary, lands which are designated and available for residential development;

1.4.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities to meet projected market-based and affordable housing

needs of current and future residents of the regional market area by:

b) permitting and facilitating:

1. all housing options required to meet the social, health, economic

and well-being requirements of current and future residents, including special needs requirements and needs arising from

demographic changes and employment opportunities;


Page 10 of 14

c) directing the development of new housing towards locations where appropriate levels of infrastructure and public service facilities are or wi ll

be available to support current and projected needs;

d) promoting densities for new housing which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities, and support the

use of active transportation and transit in areas where it exists or is to be developed;

The proposed long-term care facility represents a form of intensification that will expand the range and mix of housing options in the surrounding area. It will facilitate the municipality’s ability to accommodate residential growth through intensification, will

provide a form of housing that is appropriate in terms of range and mix, and will meet the social, health and well being of current and future residents. Appropriate levels of

infrastructure, active transportation, and transit are available or will be available.

The amendments are consistent with PPS Policy 1.4.

The amendments to allow a long-term care facility are consistent with the overall policy

direction of the PPS.

Official Plan:

Relevant excerpts from the Official Plan are attached as Appendix C.

The subject property is located within the Forest Glade Planning District and is designated Commercial Corridor on Schedule D: Land Use of the City of Windsor

Official Plan. The applicant is requesting an amendment in the Land Use designation from Commercial Corridor to Residential.

Objective 6.3.1.1 supports a complementary range of housing forms and tenures in all

neighbourhoods. Objective 6.3.1.2 seeks to promote compact neighbourhoods and balanced transportation systems. Objective 6.3.1.3 seeks to promote selective

residential redevelopment, infill and intensification initiatives.

The proposed long-term care facility represents a complementary and compact form of housing and intensification that is near sources of transportation. It is a replacement for

a smaller facility located directly across the street. The proposed development satisfies the objectives set out in Section 6.3.1 of the Official Plan.

The locational criteria of Section 6.3.2.4 require residential development to have access to an arterial road, be provided with full municipal services, be provided with public transit, and adequate community services and open spaces are available or planned.

The parcel is located on a Class II Arterial Road (Banwell Road) that provides access to an Expressway to the south (EC Row Expressway) and to an east-west Class II Arterial

Road to the north, Tecumseh Road East. Public transit is available on Banwell Road.


Page 11 of 14

Full municipal services are available. The applicant has submitted a Functional Servicing Report (FSR) which is supported by Public Works. The FSR proposes to use

the existing 1050 mm storm sewer on Banwell Road as the outlet for this site at a release rate of 38 L/s. Public Works confirms that this release rate is adequate. The servicing study, together with site servicing drawings will need to be finalized to the

satisfaction of Public Works, and the Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA) prior to the issuance of construction permits. The satisfaction of this criteria will be

administered during site plan control. Open spaces are available in the area and there will be outdoor spaces on the subject parcel for facility residents to use.

The proposed development satisfies the location criteria of the Residential land use

designation.

The proposed long-term care facility is classified as a large-scale Low Profile housing

development under Section 6.3.2.3 (a), a permitted use in the Residential land use designation (Section 6.3.2.1). The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses (Section 6.3.2.5 (c)) and no deficiencies in municipal physical

services and emergency services have been identified (Section 6.3.2.5 (e)). The proposed development conforms to the policies in Sections 6.3.2.1 and 6.3.2.5 of the

Official Plan.

The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Study (TIS). Transportation Planning identified some issues with the TIS and the applicant is revising the TIS. They also note that

overall, TIS establishes that the traffic impact of the propose development can be accommodated by the road network.

The TIS notes that the “two parking areas are proposed to be kept separate without an

internal road connection, to isolate the movements of the facility patrons and visitors in the south area, from the service vehicle movements in the north area.” The revised

conceptual plan reinforces the separation of the two parking areas. It also provides a direct connection from the facility to the proposed multi-use trail on the west side of Banwell Road without requiring a pedestrian or cyclist to cross a driveway and deal with

motor vehicle movements, including tractor-trailers and other large delivery vehicles.

Recent discussion between the Planning Division, Transportation Planning, the agent

and the applicant sought clarification on the issues. The agent noted the possibility of introducing full movement to the north parking area. The Banwell Road EA indicates a left turn lane on the segment of Banwell Road between Palmetto and Tecumseh Road

with part of the left turn lane being protected with a median towards Palmetto. The final design of the median and left lane is being finalized, so there may be an opportunity to

accommodate full movements to avoid U-turns at the Banwell/Palmetto intersection.

Both the original and revised conceptual plans eliminate the pedestrian/motor vehicle conflict, which is a worthy safety objective, given the nature of the proposed facility. It

also provides a continuous landscaped area adjacent to Banwell Road, which, from an urban design perspective is encouraged. The Planning Division does not oppose a

separate driveway access to the north parking area.


Page 12 of 14

No major concerns regarding traffic generation have been identified. Any improvements or restrictions identified in a revised TIS will be considered during site plan review. The

revised conceptual site plan indicates an adequate amount of off-street parking. The proposed location of the building provides excellent pedestrian access.

Section 6.3.2.5 lists guidelines when evaluating a proposed design. Site Plan Control is

the appropriate tool to consider the guidelines.

When Official Plan Amendment 131 is approved, the requested zoning amendment will

conform to the Zoning Amendment Policies, Section 11.6.3.1 and 11.6.3.3, of the Official Plan and conform to the general direction of the Official Plan.

Zoning By-Law:

Relevant excerpts from Zoning By-law 8600 are attached as Appendix D.

The applicant requested an amendment from Holding Commercial District 2.1 (HCD2.1)

and S.20(1)181 to Residential 3.14 (RD3.14) and site specific exceptions for certain yard depths and widths. Any land zoned RD3.7 or higher usually applies to a specific parcel in the City. Staff recommend the creation of a new RD3 zoning district – RD3.20

– that provides some flexibility for the developer, while placing appropriate restrictions on the proposed development.

Permitted uses will be a Lodging House and a Residential Care Facility. This will allow the operator to provide a flexible range of services or level of care from independent living to assisted living.

Lot frontage and lot area are as existing. Lot coverage and landscaped open space yard are typical for this type of development. Main building height is the same as in the current CD2.1 zoning and will allow for the construction of 3-storey building. Section

5.35 exempts mechanical penthouses from the maximum building height provision. The front yard depth, rear yard depth and side yard widths are based on conceptual site

plan. For reference purposes, parking areas are required to be a minimum of 3.0 m from a street. The rear yard depth and side yard width are within the typical range for this type of development. The current CD2.1 and S.20(1)H181 zoning, which permits

residential above the first storey, has no yard setbacks.

The applicant indicates that 48 parking spaces, 6 bicycle parking spaces and two

loading spaces are required. A total of 142 parking spaces (for staff and visitors) and two loading spaces are shown on the revised conceptual plan. All other provisions in Zoning By-law 8600 including the General Provisions in Section 5, the Parking, Loading

and Stacking Provisions in Section 24 and the Parking Area Provisions in Section 25 will also apply.

The various requirements of municipal departments and external agencies are best implemented and/or incorporated during the site plan review process.

Risk Analysis:

N/A


Page 13 of 14

Financial Matters:

N/A

Consultations:

Comments received from municipal departments and external agencies are attached as Appendix E.

The applicant held a public open house on January 21, 2020 from 7 to 9 pm at Banwell Gardens Care Centre, 3000 Banwell Road, across the street from the subject parcel.

Comments dated April 7, 2020 and May 5, 2020 from Transportation Planning regarding the TIS were forwarded to the Agent for their consideration. A teleconference call was held on May 8, 2020 with Adam Szymczak (Senior Planner, Planning Division, City of

Windsor), Jeff Hagan (Transportation Planning Senior Engineer, Transportation Planning, City of Windsor), Greg Bowman (Applicant, Responsive Group Inc.), and

Mathew Campbell (Agent, Zelinka Priamo Ltd.) to discuss the various comments and potential options, including full access to the north area. A revised TIS is pending.

The various requirements of municipal departments and external agencies will be

considered and/or incorporated during the Site Plan review process.

Public Notice: Statutory notice was advertised in the Windsor Star, a local daily

newspaper. A courtesy notice was mailed to property owners and residents within 120m of the subject lands.

Planner’s Opinion:

The Planning Act requires that a decision of Council in respect of the exercise of any

authority that affects a planning matter, “shall be consistent with” Provincial Policy Statement 2020. The requested official plan and zoning amendments have been evaluated for consistency with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and conformity with

the policies of the City of Windsor Official Plan.

Based on the information presented in this report, it is my opinion that the requested

amendment to the City of Windsor Official Plan, to change the land use designation on Schedule D: Land Use from Commercial Corridor to Residential, is consistent with the PPS 2020 and is in general conformity with the City of Windsor Official Plan.

The requested amendment to Zoning By-law is consistent with the PPS 2020 and will be in conformity with the City of Windsor Official Plan when OPA 131 is approved.

The proposed RD3.20 zoning district permits uses that are compatible with existing and permitted uses in the surrounding neighbourhood. Site plan control is also the appropriate tool to incorporate the requirements of municipal departments and external

agencies.

The recommendations to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law 8600 constitute

good planning.


Page 14 of 14

Conclusion:

It is recommended that Official Plan Amendment 131 changing the land use designation from Commercial Corridor to Residential in the City of Windsor Official Plan and that an amendment to Zoning By-law 8600 changing the zoning of the subject parcel from

HCD2.1 and S.20(1)181 to RD3.20, to allow the construction of a long-term care facility (Lodging House and Residential Care Facility) be approved.


Adam Szymczak, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner - Zoning

I concur with the above comments and opinion of the Registered Professional Planner.

Neil Robertson, MCIP, RPP Thom Hunt, MCIP, RPP Manager of Urban Design City Planner


SAH OC

Approvals:

Name Title

Neil Robertson Manager, Urban Design

Thom Hunt City Planner




Notifications:

Name Address Email Mathew Campbell Zelinka Priamo Ltd.

318 Wellington Road London ON N6C 4P4

[email protected]

Greg Bowman Responsive Group Inc

3760 14th Avenue, Suite 402 Markham ON L3R 3T7

[email protected]

Property owners and residents within 120 m of the subject lands

Appendices:

1 Appendix A - Conceptual Site Plan Revised 2020 April 22 2 Appendix B - Planning Justification Report January 2020 3 Appendix B2 - Planning Justification Report Addendum May 25 2020

4 Appendix C - Extracts from Official Plan 5 Appendix D - Extracts from Zoning By-law 8600

6 Appendix E - Consultations


LEGAL DESCRIPTION:PART OF LOTS 143 AND 144 CONCESSION 1GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF SANDWICHCITY OF WINDSORCOUNTY OF ESSEX, ONTARIO

ALL PROPERTY BOUNDARY INFORMATION AS PER SURVEY PREPARED BY VERHAEGEN LAND SURVEYORS, DATED DECEMBER 23, 2019.

SITE STATISTICS:

TOTAL LOT AREA:

PROPOSED SITE USE:

TOTAL PAVED AREA:

BUILDING COVERAGE:

PROPOSED GFA:

PRIVATE BEDS:

BASIC BEDS:

TOTAL NUMBER RHA'S:

TOTAL NUMBER OF BEDS:

PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT (STOREYS):

PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT (EXCLUDING MPH):

LOADING SPACE DIMENSIONS:

REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:

AMBULATORY PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS:

TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES:

PROPOSED PARKING SPACES:

BARRIER-FREE PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS:

TOTAL BUILDING AREA:

REQUIRED LANDSCAPED AREA:

LONG-TERM CARE HOME

3,520.28 m2 (37,892 ft2) = 24.2%

78 BASIC

114 PRIVATE

192 TOTAL BEDS

6

10,231.60 m2 (110,132 ft2)

14,520.00 m2 (156,292 ft2)

2,904.00 m2 (31,258 ft2) = 20.0%

6,738.81 m2 (72,536 ft2) = 46.5%

11.6m

3 STOREYS

3.0m (W) x 7.5m (L) x 3.5m (H)

1 SPACE / 4 BEDS = 48 SPACES

(138 AMBULATORY + 4 B/F SPACES)

142 SPACES

TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA: 4,260.91 m2 (45,864 ft2) = 29.3%

REQUIRED LOADING SPACES: 2 SPACES

REQUIRED BIKE SPACES:

PROPOSED BIKE SPACES:

6 SPACES

0.6m X 2.5m

TYPICAL: 2.5m x 5.5m (min.)

WHEN FLANKED BY WALL OR FENCE: 3.5m x 5.5m (min.)

TYPE A: 3.5m x 5.5m (min.)

TYPE B: 2.5m x 5.5m (min.)

*1.5m ACCESS AISLE REQUIRED FOR EACH SPACE

12,136.30 m2 (130,634 ft2)

BASEMENT: 1,904.70 m2 (20,502 ft2)

LEVEL 1: 3,494.64 m2 (37,616 ft2)

LEVEL 2: 3,281.52 m2 (35,322 ft2)

LEVEL 3: 3,281.52 m2 (35,322 ft2)

MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE: 173.92 m2 (1,872 ft2)

SETBACKS REQUIRED:

FRONT: 7.5 m

REAR: 7.5 m

SIDE (INTERIOR): 3.0 m

SIDE (EXTERIOR): 7.5 m

STAFF PARKING

(75 SPACES)

COVERED DROP-OFF

4 B.F. + 2 AMBULATORY

PARKING SPACES

SECURE OUTDOOR

SPACE

2ND FLOOR TERRACE

PROPOSED 3-STOREY LONG-TERM CARE HOME

BANWELL ROAD

EXISTING LONG TERM CARE FACILITY

PALM

ETTO

STR

EET

STAFF & SERVICE ENTRANCENEW CURB CUT c/w RIGHT-IN RIGHT-OUT ACCESS

EXISTINGSINGLE FAMILY

DWELLINGS

FENCE FOR SERVICE ENCLOSURE c/w LOCKED ACCESS GATE GEN.

DESIGNATED SMOKING AREA / GAZEBO

POSSIBLE FUTURE ROAD

EXTENSION

STAFF/VISITOR PARKING

(28 SPACES)

MAIN ENTRY

MAIN ENTRANCENEW CURB CUT AT PALMETTO STREET

POSSIBLE FUTURE ROAD

EXTENSION

TRFMR.

LOADING SPACE 3.0m x 7.5m x 3.5m

SECURE GATE ACCESS

STAFF/VISITOR PARKING

(33 SPACES)

SECURE OUTDOOR

SPACE

SECURE GATE ACCESS

LOADING SPACE 3.0m x 7.5m x 3.5m

LOWER LOADING / SERVICE AREA

TERRACE

TERRACE

SNOW STORAGE

6. 87 m

36.44 m

8.07 m

7. 24 m

39.73 m

3.58 m 3.87 m

36.27 m

41.37

m

43.37

m

All drawing and specifications are the property of the Architect. The

Contractor shall verify all dimensions and information on site and report

any discrepancy to Architect before proceeding.

310 Spadina Avenue, Suite 303 | Toronto, ON M5T 2E8 www.garchitects.ca | (416) 937-7733 | [email protected]

scale:

drawn by:

reviewed by:

job number:

plot date:

drawing number:

architects

NOT FORCONSTRUCTI

MG, DO

MG

As indicated

SITE PLAN - PROPOSED

19073

NEW BANWELL LONG-TERM CARE HOME

2016 11 25

A 1.12

3175 - 3215 BANWELL ROAD, WINDSOR, ONTARIO

# date: revision: by:


Planning Justification Report February 3, 2020 3175-3215 Banwell Road Zelinka Priamo Ltd.

1

Planning Justification Report

The Responsive Group 3175-3215 Banwell Road

Windsor, ON

January 31, 2020

Dec




1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 2

SUBJECT LANDS ..................................................................................................................... 2

SURROUNDING LAND USES .................................................................................................. 4

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................... 6

PLANNING POLICY ANALYSIS ............................................................................................... 9

2014 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT ............................................................................ 9

CITY OF WINDSOR OFFICIAL PLAN ..................................................................................12

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................................17

CONCLUSION ..........................................................................................................................18



2

INTRODUCTION

The Responsive Group has made an application to the City of Windsor to amend its Official Plan

and Zoning By-Law for the lands at 3175, 3195, and 3215 Banwell Road (the “subject lands”) in

the City of Windsor. The purpose of the proposed amendments is to permit the development of a

three-storey long-term care facility.

The purpose of the following Planning Justification Report is to evaluate the proposed Official

Plan Amendment and the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment within the context of existing land

use policies and regulations, including the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, the City of Windsor

Official Plan, and the City of Windsor Zoning By-Law 8600.

SUBJECT LANDS

The subject lands consist of three parcels located on the west side of Banwell Road,

approximately 180m (590.6ft) south of Tecumseh Road East (Figure 1). The rectangular shaped

subject lands have an approximate frontage of 154.1m (505.6ft) along Banwell Road, an

approximate depth of 82.8m (271.7ft), and an area of approximately 1.4ha (3.5ac) (Figure 2).

Figure 1 – Subject Lands and Surrounding Context

There is currently no formal vehicular access to the subject lands. Pedestrian sidewalks are

located to the north of the subject lands along the east and west sides of Banwell Road. The lands

are flat in topography and there is no significant vegetation (Figures 3 and 4).



3

Figure 2 – Subject Lands

Figure 3 – Google Streetview of Subject Lands, Looking Northeast (October 2018)

Figure 4 – Google Streetview of Subject Lands, Looking Southeast (October 2018)



4

SURROUNDING LAND USES

Surrounding land uses consist of a range of commercial, light industrial, open space/public park,

and residential uses (Figure 5). Commercial and light industrial uses are located to the north along

Tecumseh Road East, including a grocery store, a bank, and a hardware store (Figure 6). A public

park is located to the west between Troup Crescent and Urban Lane. Low density residential uses

in the form of 1- and 2-storey single detached dwellings are located to the west, southwest, and

southeast (Figure 7). Medium density residential uses in the form of 2-storey townhouse dwellings

are located to the southeast, outside of the City of Windsor municipal boundary, within the

Township of Sandwich South. A single-storey, long-term care facility (Banwell Gardens) is located

directly across Banwell Road from the subject lands, which is also owned and operated by The

Responsive Group.

Figure 5 – Surrounding Land Uses (Subject Lands in Yellow; Municipal Boundary in Dashed Red Line)

This portion of Banwell Road is identified as a “Class II Arterial Road”. The long-term plan for

Banwell Road includes reconstruction to accommodate four (4) lanes of traffic, which will require

road widening to achieve a 30m right-of-way. This widening is accounted for in the proposed Site

Plan, as discussed later in this report.



5

Figure 6 – Oblique Aerial View of Surrounding Land Uses (Looking Southeast)

Figure 6 – Oblique Aerial View of Abutting Single Detached Dwellings (3032-3068 Troup Crescent)

Figure 7 – Street View of Abutting 1- to 2-Storey Single Detached Dwellings (3032-3056 Troup Crescent)



6

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The subject lands are proposed to be developed for a three-storey, 192 bed, long-term care facility

with 97 parking spaces (Figures 8 and 9). The conceptual site plan provides for a building footprint

of 11,505 m2 (37,745 ft2) and a gross floor area (excluding the mechanical penthouse) of 37,419

m2 (122,765 ft2). The majority of the massing of the building is located to rear of the property, with

two wings extending towards Banwell Road. Ultimately, the design of the building reflects two,

mirrored ‘L-shaped’ buildings on the north and south ends of the subject lands, which are

connected at the rear of the property. Each ‘L’-shaped wing forms a “community” within the portion

of the building linking them, containing shared dining facilities. The 192 beds are comprised of

114 private rooms and 78 basic (shared) rooms. Shared rooms are provided to help provide more

affordable living arrangements, as requested by the Province.

The conceptual site plan provides a landscaped open space area of 35.5% and a lot coverage of

24.1%. The three-storey building has a maximum height of 11.6m (excluding the mechanical

penthouse).

There are two vehicular access points proposed for the subject lands: (1) a primary full-turns

access at the new, future signalized intersection at Banwell Road and Palmetto Street, and (2) a

secondary right-in/right-out (RIRO) access for loading, service, and staff parking. A pick-up/drop-

off area, including barrier-free parking spaces, is proposed in the centre of the property in front of

the principle entrance. Access to the pick-up/drop-off, as well as parking for residents and visitors,

is provided from the new, future signalized intersection (Figure 10).

The servicing and loading area is located below grade, allowing for loading directly into the

basement. This area is located between the north wing of the building and the single detached

dwellings to the west, shielding the dwellings from noise and activity. Further, the building will

provide a noise buffer to the dwellings from traffic on Banwell Road.

Figure 8 – Conceptual Rendering



7

Figure 9 – Conceptual Site Plan

Figure 10 – Conceptual Site Circulation



8

A network of pedestrian pathways are illustrated on the conceptual site plan, providing

connections between amenity areas, parking areas, and multiple building entrances. Landscaping

will be provided across the site, with an emphasis on providing a quality landscape buffer along

the rear property line between the subject lands and the single detached dwellings along Troup

Crescent. A detailed landscape plan will be provided at the Site Plan Approval stage.

The proposed new long-term care facility is required to replace the Banwell Gardens long-term

care home across the street. Due to provincial legislation reflecting new building standards, all

older long-term care facilities will be removed from service by 2025 and replaced with new,

modern facilities.

PROPOSED PLANNING APPLICATIONS

An Official Plan Amendment is required to re-designate the subject lands from the existing

“Commercial Corridor” land use designation to the “Residential” land use designation to permit

the proposed long-term care facility.

A Zoning By-Law Amendment is required to re-zone the subject lands from the existing “Holding,

Commercial District 2 (HCD2.1)” zone to a site specific “Residential District 3 (High Density

Housing) (RD3.14(_))” zone to permit the proposed long term care facility. The following site

specific special regulations are proposed:

A minimum rear yard depth of 6.0m; and,

A minimum south side yard depth of 5.4m.



9

PLANNING POLICY ANALYSIS

2014 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT

The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), issued under the authority of Section 3 of the Planning

Act “provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning” in

order to ensure efficient development and the protection of resources. All planning applications,

including Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By-law Amendment applications are required to

be consistent with these policies.

Section 1.1.1

Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by:

a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term;

b) accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential, employment (including industrial, commercial and institutional uses), recreational and open space uses to meet long-term needs;

e) promoting cost-effective development patterns and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs;

f) improving accessibility for persons with disabilities and older persons by identifying, preventing and removing land use barriers which restrict their full participation in society.

The proposed long-term care facility is an efficient and appropriate form of development for the

subject lands. It adds to the range and mix of housing types in the surrounding area, contributing

to the long-term housing needs in the community, including specialized housing. The proposed

land use supports employment opportunities in various forms throughout the development (i.e.

care support and food services etc.). The proposed built form and density reflects a cost-effective

development pattern that minimizes land consumption and servicing costs. The provision of long-

term care resources encourages full participation in society by the future residents.

Section 1.1.3.1

Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development, and their vitality and regeneration

shall be promoted.

The subject lands are within a settlement area, being within the City of Windsor municipal

boundary. The proposed development promotes vitality and regeneration of the vacant subject

lands.



10

Section 1.1.3.2

Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on:

a) densities and a mix of land uses which:

1. efficiently use land and resources;

2. are appropriate for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public service facilities

which are planned or available, and avoid the need for their unjustified and/or

uneconomical expansion;

b) a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment in accordance with

the criteria in policy 1.1.3.3, where this can be accommodated.

Section 1.1.3.3

Planning authorities shall identify appropriate locations and promote opportunities for

intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing

building stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability of suitable existing or

planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected needs.

The proposed development broadens the range and mix of land uses and built forms in the area.

It makes efficient use of vacant land, as well as existing and planned resources, infrastructure,

and transportation networks. The subject lands are an appropriate location for the proposed

development, as they are located adjacent to a mix of commercial and residential land uses; they

are located on a ‘Class II Arterial Road’ with access to public transit (Lauzon 10) at Banwell Road

and Palmetto Street; and they are sufficiently sized to accommodate the proposed long-term care

facility, while also providing appropriate building setbacks. The proposed development will make

use of available existing municipal services.

Section 1.1.3.4

Appropriate development standards should be promoted which facilitate intensification,

redevelopment, and compact form, while avoiding risks to public health and safety.

The proposed long-term care facility is an efficient and compact form of development that is

appropriately located along a higher-order road. The proposed development conforms to the

standard implementing zone for long-term care facilities, save and except two minor site specific

provisions for building setbacks. As discussed later in this report, the proposed zoning regulations

represent appropriate development standards for the development of the subject lands. The

proposed setbacks provide adequate separation between the proposed development and

property lines. There are no risks to public health and safety.



11

Section 1.1.3.6

New development taking place in designated growth areas should occur adjacent to the existing

built-up area and shall have a compact form, mix of uses, and densities that allow for efficient use

of land, infrastructure, and public service facilities.

The proposed development is within an existing built-up, mixed-use area with a variety of built

forms along Banwell Road and Tecumseh Road East. The proposed density is reflective of a

compact, efficient form of housing which adds to the mix of uses and densities that are compatible

with the surrounding context.

Section 1.3.1

Planning authorities shall promote economic development and competitiveness by:

a) providing for an appropriate mix and range of employment and institutional uses to meet

long-term needs;

c) encouraging compact, mixed-use development that incorporates compatible employment

uses to support liveable and resilient communities.

The proposed long-term care facility will provide employment opportunities (such as, support/care

nurses and staff, administrative staff, and ancillary employment), contributing to the economic

activities of the City of Windsor.

Section 1.4.3

Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing types and densities

to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area by:

b. permitting and facilitating:

2. all forms of housing required to meet the social, health, and well-being

requirements of current and future residents, including special needs

requirements; and,

The proposed development is a form of housing that contributes to meeting the social, health,

and well-being of those with special needs who require long-term care, specifically seniors. It is

noted that the proposed development is required to replace the existing Banwell Gardens facility

across the street, which is required by the Province of Ontario to cease operations by 2025.



12

Section 1.6.6.2

Municipal sewage services and municipal water services are the preferred form of servicing for

settlement areas. Intensification and redevelopment within the settlement areas on existing

municipal sewage services and municipal water services should be promoted, wherever feasible.

The proposed development will make use of existing, full municipal services.

Section 1.6.8.3

Planning authorities shall not permit development in planned corridors that could preclude or

negatively affect the use of the corridor for the purpose(s) for which it was identified.

New development proposed on adjacent lands to existing or planned corridors and transportation

facilities should be compatible with, and supportive of, the long-term purposes of this corridor and

should be designed to avoid, mitigate or minimize negative impacts on and from the corridor and

transportation facilities.

A Transportation Impact Study (TIS) has been prepared to evaluate the proposed right-in/right-

out access point from the subject lands on Banwell Road. The findings of the TIS are consistent

with the above PPS policy as the proposed access will maintain the planned function and

vehicular flow of Banwell Road. Details on the TIS are provided later in this report.

Based on the above analysis, the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law

Amendment are consistent with the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement.

CITY OF WINDSOR OFFICIAL PLAN

The subject lands are designated “Commercial Corridor” in the City of Windsor Official Plan

(Figure 11). The subject lands were included in Official Plan Amendment (OPA) #44, which re-

designated the subject lands from “Residential” to “Commercial Corridor”. However, the

commercial development proposed at the time never materialized and the subject lands have

remained vacant. It is understood that a commercial development is proceeding on the remaining

vacant lands to the south, however no specific details are available at this time.

As the proposed long-term care facility is not permitted within the existing “Commercial Corridor”

land use designation, an Official Plan Amendment is required to re-designate the subject lands

back to the “Residential” land use designation to permit the proposed development.

The spatial and land use context of the site is supportive of a long-term care facility. The subject

lands have frontage along an arterial road, providing good access. The subject lands are large

enough to accommodate the requisite components of an appropriate and compatible long-term

care facility, including landscaped space and parking. The low-rise profile of the long-term care

facility is compatible with the low density residential uses to the east, and the facility will exhibit

low activity and noise emissions.



13

Figure 11 – City of Windsor Official Plan, Schedule ‘D’ – Land Use (Excerpt)

There are no other applicable secondary plans or guideline documents for the subject lands

(Section 6.3.2.5(b)).

In evaluating the proposed Official Plan Amendment, regard must be had for the objectives and

policies of the “Residential” land use designation.

Official Plan Section 6.3.1 – Residential Objectives

The objectives of the “Residential” designation are to provide a complementary range of housing

forms and tenures (i.e. rental vs. ownership) in all neighbourhoods (Section 6.3.1.1) in a compact

manner, encouraging a balanced transportation system (Section 6.3.1.2). The proposed use is a

compact, efficient form of development, adding to the range of built forms and tenures that exist

in the surrounding area. Long-term care facilities are a complementary use of land within existing

residential areas and are generally regarded as compatible abutting single detached dwellings.

Furthermore, the proposed long-term care facility will allow seniors in the community to “age-in-

place” and may not be required to leave the area to live in a long-term care home. Given the

above, the proposed development meets the applicable objectives of the “Residential” land use

designation.

Official Plan Section 6.3.2 – Residential Policies

Low, medium, and high profile dwelling units are permitted within the “Residential” land use

designation. Low profile developments consist of buildings or structures generally no greater than

three (3) storeys in height (Section 6.2.1.2). The proposed 3-storey long-term care facility is a low

profile development and is permitted within the “Residential” land use designation. Generally, 3-

storey buildings are compatible with all other building heights, including single-storey dwellings.



14

The development of residential uses is encouraged at locations which enhance the character and

amenity of a residential area, and where there is safe and convenient access to public transit,

shopping, public open space, recreation facilities and other urban amenities. The proposed

development is appropriate and compatible with the surrounding context; has access to public

transit along Banwell Road; and is proximate to multiple public parks, shopping, and other

amenities.

There are no concerns with compatibility of the proposed development and surrounding land

uses, including the lumber yard located to the northwest. Given that single detached dwellings

abut the lumber yard to the north, which is a much more intensive land use than a long-term care

facility, the proposed development is compatible with single detached dwellings and the abutting

lumber yard.

The Official Plan provides that residential development shall be located where there is access to

a collector or arterial road; full municipal services can be provided; adequate community services

and open spaces are available or planned; and public transportation service can be provided

(Section 6.3.2.4). The subject lands abut Banwell Road (a Class II Arterial Road), with future

vehicular access from a new signalized intersection at Palmetto Street and a secondary RIRO

access onto Banwell Road. The proposed development will make use of full municipal services.

Public park space is available to the east across Banwell Road along Palmetto Street (Palmetto

Park) and to the south along Wildwood Drive (Wildwood Park). Public transportation (Lauzon 10)

is available along Banwell Road. Given the above, the proposed development conforms to the

locational criteria of the “Residential” land use designation.

The existing development pattern surrounding the subject lands is a mixture of existing

neighbourhood and vacant lands which provide a mix of uses, lot shapes/sizes, and built forms.

Further to the Evaluation Criteria for Neighbourhood Development Pattern, the proposed

development conforms to Official Plan Section 6.3.2.5(a):

There are no identified development constraints on the subject lands (i.e. Schedule ‘C’ –

Development Constrain Area);

There are no adjacent uses that emit obnoxious nuisance, noise, odor, vibration, or dust

that create unlivable conditions;

There are no known contaminants on the site;

There are no adjacent heritage resources; and,

Traffic generation is not a significant concern.

An adequate off-street parking supply should be provided in the “Residential” land use

designation, as per Official Plan Section 6.3.2.5(d)). The off-street parking supply for the long-

term care facility exceeds the required parking amount (1 per 4 beds) within the City of Windsor

Zoning By-Law, and is adequate for the proposed use.

The proposed development will make use of available, existing municipal services surrounding

the subject lands (Section 6.3.2.5(e)). Details relating to engineering and servicing are described

later in this report, and supporting studies are attached to this application.



15

The proposed low profile, long term care facility is an appropriate transition between less intense,

low profile single detached dwellings to the west of the subject lands, and Banwell Road to the

east, and is only a minor increase in height from the adjacent buildings and the dwellings to the

west (Section 6.3.2.5(f)). Furthermore, the proposed building will act as a noise buffer and visual

screen between vehicular noise and activity along a “Class II Arterial Road” (Banwell Road).

Official Plan Section 6.3.2.14 provides that the provision of housing to meet the needs of special

segments of the City of Windsor’s population, such as seniors, is encouraged. The proposed

development provides long term care opportunities for seniors (Section 6.3.2.15).

As outlined above, the subject lands are an appropriate location to re-apply the “Residential” land

use designation of the City of Windsor Official Plan. The proposed 3-storey long term care facility

maintains the planned function of the land use designation, is consistent with the intent and

policies of the City of Windsor Official Plan, and is an appropriate, compatible, and desirable use

for the subject lands.

THE CITY OF WINDSOR ZONING BY-LAW

The subject lands are currently zoned “Holding, Commercial District (HCD2.1)” with site specific

zoning provision “S.20(1)181” in the City of Windsor Zoning By-Law 8600 (Figure 12). The

HCD2.1 and S.20(1)181 zones permit a range of commercial uses reflective of the previous

development proposal for the subject lands, but does not permit a long-term care facility. A Zoning

By-Law Amendment is required to permit the proposed long-term care facility. As such, it is

proposed that the subject lands be re-zoned from the existing HCD2.1 and S.20(1)181 zones to

a site specific “Residential District (RD3.14(_))” zone to permit the proposed development. The

following site specific special provisions are requested to permit the proposed development:

A minimum rear yard depth of 6.0m; and,

A minimum south side yard depth of 5.4m.

Figure 12 – City of Windsor Zone Map (Excerpt)



16

The RD3.14 zone is the standard implementing zone to permit long-term care facilities in the City

of Windsor (see Table 1). The standard zone regulations are regarded as established standards

that are compatible with a range of abutting uses, including single detached dwellings, given the

typical planned locations of long-term care facilities in residential areas.

Table 1 – Zoning Data Table

Site Data (Residential District 3 (RD3.14 Multiple Dwelling, Assisted Living, Long Term Care Facility))

REQ’D/MAX./MIN. PROPOSED

Permitted Uses Assisted Living Units, Long Term Care Facility, Multiple Dwelling, Any Use Accessory to the Preceding Uses

Long Term Care Facility

Lot Coverage (max.) 40.0% 24.1%

Main Building Height (max.) 34.0 m 11.6 m (excluding mechanical penthouse as per

Section 5.35.1 of the Zoning By-Law)

Front Yard Depth (min.) 12.0 m 13.0 m

Rear Yard Depth (min.) 9.0 m 6.0 m

Side Yard Width (min.) 9.0 m 5.4 m

Landscaped Area (min.) 30% of lot area 37.6%

Gross Floor Area Ratio (max.) 1.80 1.42

Parking 48 spaces 97 spaces

The 3-storey building is a low-rise profile and is compatible with existing 1 and 2-storey single

detached dwellings that abut the subject lands to the west. The interface of the proposed

development and the abutting dwellings is typical of low-rise, medium density development. The

landscaped area between the lot line and the building may accommodate trees and other

vegetation. Details, including landscaping, will be reviewed and confirmed through the

subsequent Site Plan Approval stage.

The height, as well as scale and massing, are appropriate for the subject lands, and the location

and orientation allows for a compatible development that provides all the requisite components of

a successful long-term care facility that can be integrated seamlessly into the community. It is

noted that a long-term care facility has a significantly lower intensity and lower activity level than

an apartment building. Such lower levels of activity further contribute to the compatibility of the

proposed use.

The parking supply of 97 spaces is provided, which complies with the required rate of 1 per 4

beds (192 beds, 48 spaces required), as per Section 24.20.5 of the City of Windsor Zoning By-

Law.



17

Reduced Interior Side Yard and Rear Yard Setback

The intent of a minimum interior side yard and rear yard setbacks in a residential zone is to ensure

there is an adequate physical separation between buildings and lot lines to provide sufficient

outdoor area for residents and sufficient spatial buffering. The standard RD3.14 zone requires a

minimum 9.0m interior side yard and rear yard setback, which would include a building height of

34.0m. A minimum 5.5m interior side yard setback and a 6.0m rear yard setback are proposed,

with a much shorter building height of 11.6m (excluding the mechanical penthouse). As previously

noted, a 6.0m setback to a low intensity building is sufficient to provide spatial separation and

ensure compatibility between uses. Furthermore, it is anticipated that landscaping, including

trees, will be reviewed and confirmed through the Site Plan Approval process, providing additional

screening. As the south end of the subject lands will abut a future drive aisle (as an extension of

Palmetto Street), there is no need for buffering. Rather, only a functional setback is required to

ensure sufficient operation of the building. The proposed 5.5m setback allows for access to the

rear of the building and can also accommodate landscaping. As such, the proposed 5.5m setback

is appropriate.

The proposed site specific RD3.14 zone is intended to permit a desirable and valuable long-term

care facility. Given the analysis above, the proposed zone and zoning regulations are appropriate

for the development of the subject lands and will maintain a compatible interface with abutting

uses. The zone is consistent with the “Residential” designation in the City of Windsor Official Plan.

The proposed setbacks are consistent with the intent of the RD3.14 zone, as well as the intent of

the “Residential” land use designation in the City of Windsor Official Plan.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

TRANSPORTATION

A Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) was completed for the subject lands by Paradigm

Transportation Solutions Limited. Based on the findings of the assessment, it is recommended

that traffic volumes be accommodated by a full-turns access at the Banwell Road and Palmetto

Street intersection, and a right-in/right-out access to the north of Palmetto Street. This

recommendation includes mitigation measures, including the prohibition of U-turns at the Banwell

Road and Palmetto Street intersection.

SERVICING

A Sanitary and Storm Servicing Study was completed by Aleo Associates. Based on the findings

of the study, the municipal sanitary and storm sewers have sufficient capacity to accommodate

the proposed development.



18

CONCLUSION

The proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment seek to permit the

proposed 3-storey, 192 bed long term care facility on the subject lands. The proposed facility is

intended to help meet the needs of the aging population in Windsor, and to replace the existing

Banwell Gardens home to the east. Given the high demand for long-term care facilities across

the Province and in the City of Windsor, the proposed facility is a valuable and desirable use. The

spatial and land use context of the site is supportive of a long-term care facility, and there are no

undue, adverse impacts anticipated on abutting or adjacent lands. The proposal is appropriate for

the site and compatible with abutting lands.

Based on the above, and as detailed throughout this Planning Justification Report, the proposed

Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment is consistent with the intent and policies

of the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), the City of Windsor Official Plan, and the City of

Windsor Zoning By-Law. As such, the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law

Amendment are appropriate and represent good land use planning.


May 25, 2020 sent via email

Adam Szymczak, Senior Planner City of Windsor 350 City Hall Square West, Suite 210 Windsor, ON N9A 6S1 Re: Addendum to Planning Justification Report Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment 3175, 3195, 3215 Banwell Road Responsive Group Inc. Windsor, ON Our File: RPV/LON/18-01

Zelinka Priamo Ltd. is pleased to provide an addendum to the January 31, 2020 Planning Justification Report that was submitted in support of an Official Plan Amendment (OPA) application and Zoning By-Law Amendment (ZBA) application for the above noted lands to permit a residential care facility. This addendum is provided to reflect changes to the conceptual development plan as proposed by our client and owner of the subject lands, The Responsive Group Inc., and to address the updated 2020 Provincial Policy Statement, which came into effect May 1, 2020.

Revised Conceptual Plan

The original conceptual plan submitted in the OPA and ZBA applications is shown below in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Original Conceptual Site Plan (excerpt)


Addendum to January 31, 2020 Planning Justification Report May 25, 2020

Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Page 2

The revised concept plan is shown below in Figure 2:

Figure 2 – Revised Conceptual Site Plan (excerpt)

The revised concept shows an 'H' layout, as opposed to the modified'E' layout of the original plan. This revised building layout responds to both the operational needs of the proposed residential care home, and provides a much stronger streetscape presence along Banwell Road. The architectural qualities and design theme of the building, as shown in Figure 8 of the January 21 Planning Justification Report, are to remain generally unchanged.

The east wing of the building, facing Banwell Road, addresses the Banwell Road streetscape and provides a human-scale building close to the street edge. The proposed setback along Banwell Road is 3.5m at the closest point, allowing for a landscaped area between the building and the right-of-way. By locating a significant portion of the building towards Banwell Road, the west wing (at the rear of the site) can be reduced in length, thereby interfacing with fewer single detached dwellings to the rear.

Amenity space for the building's residents has been relocated internal to the site, and not directly exposed to Banwell Road. This arrangement provides for a more private and sheltered amenity space which will contribute to the quality of the development. A walking trail for residents is proposed along the west side (rear) of the building. It is noted that the walking trail will be buffered from the abutting single detached dwellings by the existing wood fence along the west lot line.

The revised concept maintains two vehicular accesses, one from Banwell Road, and one from the future Palmetto Street intersection. The intent of the two accesses is to separate staff and operational vehicles (e.g. truck deliveries) from resident and visitor vehicles; residents and visitors will utilize the south driveway off Palmetto Street. The




revised concept reduces the exposure of the service area to Banwell Road while maintaining separation from the single detached dwellings to the west.

A revised Traffic Impact Study to provide further justification for a full-turns access on Banwell Road, and to provide analysis demonstrating the safe operation of the driveway, will be submitted to the City shortly.

Overall, the revised concept plan remains appropriate for the development of the subject lands.

2020 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT

The 2020 Provincial Policy Statement ('PPS') took effect May 1, 2020, and replaces the 2014 PPS. All land use decisions are required to be consistent with the 2020 PPS.

Below is an analysis of revised PPS policies which are applicable to the present OPA and ZBA applications. Where the applications remain consistent with minor policy updates, no discussion is required or provided below.Policies that are not applicable to the applications are not discussed.

Section 1.1.1 has been amended to broaden the language permitting residential land uses, including "affordable and market-based"criteria. Notably, the wording applicable to the proposed use, being "housing for older persons" has not changed. The applications are not materially affected by these changes.

Section 1.1.1.e) provides greater clarity in planning for intensification and infrastructure. The proposed development is consistent with this policy by planning for the Banwell Road improvements and consulting with City of Windsor transportation staff regarding vehicular access.

Section 1.1.2 has been revised to increase the time horizon for land needs planning from 20 to 25 years. The proposed OPA to re-designate the subject lands is unlikely to affect the overall residential land supply of the City of Windsor, regardless of the 20 or 25-year time horizon.

A number of policies have been updated to reflect climate change, requiring that all land use decisions prepare for impacts of climate change. The proposed development is consistent with these policy updates by providing a modernized, efficient form of specialized housing on a site which will be designed to accommodate up-to-date stormwater management systems and infrastructure.

While providing additional consideration for the permission of residential uses to include "demographic changes and employment opportunities", Section 1.4.3.b).1 continues to require the permission of housing for "special needs requirements", which includes residential care facilities. As such the proposed applications remain consistent with this policy.




Section 1.7.1 has been updated to include the following subsection:

"1.7.1 Long-term economic prosperity should be supported by:

b) encouraging residential uses to respond to dynamic market-based needs and provide necessary housing supply and range of housing options for a diverse workforce;"

The proposed development is consistent with this new subsection by responding to both the market needs for long-term care housing, and the requirements of the Provincial government to both increase the supply of long-term care housing and remove or update older care homes. The proposed residential care home is to replace the existing Banwell Gardens home across the street.

Overall, the policy updates and changes to the 2020 PPS do not change our original opinion as to how the proposed development satisfies the intent of the PPS; and, it is our opinion thatthe present OPA and ZBA applications, as per the revised concept, remain consistent with the 2020 PPS.

We trust that the enclosed information is satisfactory. If you have any questions, or require further information, please do not hesitate to call.

Yours very truly,

ZELINKA PRIAMO LTD.

Mathew Campbell, CPT, BA Senior Planner cc. Greg Bowman, The Responsive Group Inc.


S 74/2020 OPA 131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 Appendix C Page C1 of C3

APPENDIX C - Extracts from City of Windsor Official Plan

VOLUME I – LAND USE

6.2 General Policies

TYPES OF

DEVELOPMENT

PROFILE

6.2.1.2 For the purpose of this Plan, Development Profile refers to the height

of a building or structure. Accordingly, the following Development

Profiles apply to all land use designations on Schedule D: Land Use

unless specifically provided elsewhere in this Plan:

(a) Low Profile developments are buildings or structures generally

no greater than three (3) storeys in height;

(b) Medium Profile developments are buildings or structures

generally no greater than six (6) storeys in height; and

(c) High Profile developments are buildings or structures generally

no greater than fourteen (14) storeys in height.

6.3 Residential

The lands designated as “Residential” on Schedule D: Land Use provide the main

locations for housing in Windsor outside of the City Centre Planning District. In order to

develop safe, caring and diverse neighbourhoods, opportunities for a broad range of

housing types and complementary services and amenities are provided.

The following objectives and policies establish the framework for development decisions

in Residential areas.

6.3.1 Objectives

RANGE OF

FORMS &

TENURES

6.3.1.1 To support a complementary range of housing forms and tenures in all

neighbourhoods.

NEIGHBOURHOODS 6.3.1.2 To promote compact neighbourhoods which encourage a balanced

transportation system.

INTENSIFICATION, INFILL &

REDEVELOPMENT

6.3.1.3 To promote selective residential redevelopment, infill and

intensification initiatives.

6.3.2 Policies

In order to facilitate the orderly development and integration of housing in Windsor, the

following policies shall apply.

PERMITTED

USES 6.3.2.1 Uses permitted in the Residential land use designation identified on

Schedule D: Land Use include Low, Medium and High Profile

dwelling units.



TYPES OF LOW

PROFILE

HOUSING

6.3.2.3 For the purposes of this Plan, Low Profile housing development is

further classified as follows:

(a) small scale forms: single detached, semi-detached, duplex and

row and multiplexes with up to 8 units; and

(b) large scale forms: buildings with more than 8 units.

LOCATIONAL

CRITERIA 6.3.2.4 Residential development shall be located where:

(a) there is access to a collector or arterial road;

(b) full municipal physical services can be provided;

(c) adequate community services and open spaces are available or

are planned; and

(d) public transportation service can be provided.

EVALUATION

CRITERIA FOR A

NEIGHBOURHOOD

DEVELOPMENT

PATTERN

6.3.2.5 At the time of submission, the proponent shall demonstrate to the

satisfaction of the Municipality that a proposed residential

development within an area having a Neighbourhood development

pattern is:


provincial legislation, policies and appropriate guidelines and

support studies for uses:

(i) within or adjacent to any area identified on Schedule C:

Development Constraint Areas and described in the

Environment chapter of this Plan;

(ii) adjacent to sources of nuisance, such as noise, odour,

vibration and dust;

(iii) within a site of potential or known contamination;

(iv) where traffic generation and distribution is a provincial or

municipal concern; and

(v) adjacent to heritage resources.


secondary plan or guideline plan affecting the surrounding area;

(c) compatible with the surrounding area in terms of scale, massing,

height, siting, orientation, setbacks, parking and amenity areas;

(d) provided with adequate off street parking;

(e) capable of being provided with full municipal physical services

and emergency services; and

(f) facilitating a gradual transition from Low Profile residential

development to Medium and/or High profile development and

vice versa, where appropriate.



VOLUME I – TOOLS

11.6.3 Zoning By-law Amendment Policies

AMENDMENTS

MUST CONFORM 11.6.3.1 All amendments to the Zoning By-law(s) shall conform with this Plan. The

Municipality will, on each occasion of approval of a change to the zoning by-

law(s), specify that conformity with the Official Plan is maintained or that the

change will be in conformity upon the coming into effect of an amendment to

the Official Plan.

EVALUATION

CRITERIA 11.6.3.3 When considering applications for Zoning By-law amendments, Council shall

consider the policies of this Plan and will, without limiting the generality of the

foregoing, consider such matters as the following:

(a) The relevant evaluation criteria contained in the Land Use Chapter of

this Plan, Volume II: Secondary Plans & Special Policy Areas and other

relevant standards and guidelines;


(c) The comments and recommendations from municipal staff and

circularized agencies;

(d) Relevant provincial legislation, policies and appropriate guidelines; and

(e) The ramifications of the decision on the use of adjacent or similar lands.


S 74/2020 OPA 131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 Page D1 of D3

APPENDIX D - Extracts from Zoning By-law 8600

SECTION 3 – DEFINITIONS

3.10 DEFINITIONS

BUILDING means a structure, consisting of a wall, roof and floor, or any one or more of them,

or a structural system serving the function thereof, including all the works, fixtures and

service systems appurtenant thereto, but does not include the following: access area,

collector aisle, driveway, parking aisle or parking space not in a parking garage; fence;

patio; sign as defined by the Windsor Sign By-law.

ACCESSORY BUILDING means a completely detached building used for an accessory

use of the lot, for one dwelling unit where permitted by Section 5.99.80, or for any

combination thereof.

MAIN BUILDING means a building used for the main use of the lot and may also include

in combination therewith an accessory use subject to any applicable provisions for an

accessory use.

DWELLING means a building or structure that is occupied for the purpose of human

habitation. A correctional institution, hotel, motor home, recreational vehicle, tent, tent

trailer, or travel trailer is not a dwelling.

LODGING HOUSE means a dwelling in which a minimum of four persons, not including

staff, are provided with lodging for hire, with or without meals.

A correctional institution, fraternity or sorority house, group home, hospital, hotel,

private home day care, religious residence or residential care facility is not a lodging

house.

RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY means a dwelling that is:

1. For the accommodation of eleven or more persons, exclusive of staff;

2. For persons requiring supervised or assisted living arrangements; and

3. Licensed or funded by the federal, provincial or municipal government.

A correctional institution, group home, hospital, hotel, lodging house, multiple

dwelling or religious residence is not a residential care facility.

MULTIPLE DWELLING means one dwelling containing a minimum of three dwelling

units. A double duplex dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, stacked dwelling, or

townhome dwelling is not a multiple dwelling.

DWELLING UNIT means a unit that consists of a self-contained set of rooms located in a

building or structure, that is used or intended for use as residential premises, and that

contains kitchen and bathroom facilities that are intended for the use of the unit only.

STRUCTURE means anything, including any component part, that is erected, built or

constructed and affixed to or supported by the ground.



SECTION 15 - COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS 2. (CD2.)

15.1 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 2.1 (CD2.1)


Bakery

Business Office

Child Care Centre

Commercial School

Confectionery

Food Outlet - Drive-Through

Food Outlet - Take-Out

Funeral Establishment

Garden Centre

Gas Bar

Medical Office

Micro-Brewery

Parking Garage

Personal Service Shop

Place of Entertainment and Recreation

Place of Worship

Professional Studio

Public Hall

Public Parking Area

Repair Shop – Light

Restaurant

Restaurant with Drive-Through

Retail Store

Temporary Outdoor Vendor’s Site

Tourist Home

Veterinary Office

Wholesale Store

Existing Automobile Repair Garage

Existing Service Station

Any use accessory to any of the preceding uses. An Outdoor Storage Yard is

prohibited, save and except, in combination with the following main uses:

Garden Centre, Temporary Outdoor Vendor’s Site, Existing Automobile Repair

Garage.

15.1.5 PROVISIONS

.4 Building Height – maximum 14.0 m

.10 Gross Floor Area – maximum

Bakery or Confectionary 550.0 m2

.26 A Temporary Outdoor Vendor’s Site is prohibited in a Business Improvement

Area.



SECTION 20 - SPECIFIC ZONING EXCEPTIONS IN CERTAIN

AREAS

(1) SITE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS

Certain parcels of land on the zoning district maps (ZDM) are delineated by a broken orange line

and identified by a zoning district symbol and a paragraph(s) of this subsection. Any parcel so

identified shall be considered as being within the zoning district symbol and shall be subject to

the provisions of that zoning district, the identified paragraph(s) of this subsection and any other

applicable provisions of this by-law. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this

Section and the provisions of the zoning district, the provisions of this Section shall apply.

Where an additional main use is permitted under this subsection, any use accessory thereto, not

including an outdoor storage yard except where permitted within the zoning district, shall also be

permitted subject to the provisions of the zoning district and any other provisions of this by-law

applicable to such accessory use.

181. For the lands comprising Parts 3 to 12 inclusive, and Parts 20 and 21, Plan 12R-21671

(west side of Banwell Road, south of Tecumseh Road East), the following shall be

additional permitted uses:

- hotel/motel

- funeral home

- medical, dental and optical laboratory

- health studio, club

- warehouse

- residential units located above the 1st storey

(ADDED by B/L 399-2004, Jan. 7, 2005; B/L 31-2013 March 28, 2013)


S 74/2020 OPA 131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 Appendix E Page E1 of E9

APPENDIX E – Consultations

The comments contained within this document are based on the original conceptual site plan dated February 23, 2020 circulated to departments and agencies on March 23, 2020. The revised conceptual site plan dated April 22, 2029 was circulated to Transportation Planning and Public Works for review and comment. Any additional comments regarding the revised conceptual plan are noted as such.

CANADA POST – Bruno DeSando, March 26, 2020

This development as described will receive mail delivery via a Community Mail Box in the area.

CITY OF WINDSOR – ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT – Wadah Al-Yassiri, May 20, 2020

The functional servicing study submitted by the applicant is proposing to use the existing 1050 mm storm sewer on Banwell Road as the outlet to this site at a release rate of 38 L/s. The release rate was confirmed with RC Spencer Associates Inc. (retained by the City of Windsor to complete the engineering design of Phase 1 of the Banwell EA) and with Dillon Consulting limited (acting as peer-reviewer for the stormwater component).

RC Spencer and Dillon Consulting note:

“As long as the design for the proposed development area is considered in the Banwell storm design, then the 38 L/s is sufficient. For example, if the SWM design for the proposed development area is to be a pumped system, the prolonged pump out rate needs to be taken into consideration in the design of the Banwell system, including the impacts of a sustained hydraulic guideline. If the proposed development area is proposed to be a gravity outlet system, then the SWM strategy must take into consideration the potential of backwater effects on its system due to the surcharging of the future Banwell system during larger storm events.

In summary, the 38 L/s is adequate for an allowable release rate for the site.”

CITY OF WINDSOR – ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT – RIGHT-OF-WAY DIVISION – Patrick Winters, April 17, 2020 (Revised May 20, 2020)

The subject lands at 3175, 3195 & 3215 Banwell Road, are designated Commercial Corridor by the City of Windsor Official Plan and zoned HCD2.1 by Zoning By-Law 8600. The Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Official Plan to change the land use designation on Schedule D: Land Use from Commercial Corridor to Residential, and an amendment to Zoning By-law 8600 from Commercial District 2.1 (CD2.1) to Residential District 3.14 (RD3.14) and adding site specific provisions to permit a 3-storey 192 bed Residential Care Facility (aka Long-Term Care Facility) development. We have reviewed the servicing requirements of the subject parcel and offer the following comments.

This site is located within the boundary of the Banwell Corridor Environmental Assessment, which identifies property acquisition is required from this parcel. We understand that the required land conveyance(s) satisfying the requirements of the EA were completed in 2019 and are registered on plan 12R-27789. We note that the City of Windsor is currently undertaking detailed Engineering Design required for the implementation of the Banwell EA. The applicant is required to comply with the criteria carried under the current design.



There is a 2100mmØ RCP sanitary sewer on Banwell Road and a 250mmØ santary sewer on Mulberry Road available to the site. There is also a 1050mmØ RCP storm sewer along Banwell Road. A functional servicing study for full municipal services (sanitary, storm, water) has been provided by the applicant which proposes to use the existing 250mmØ sanitary sewer on Mulberry Road as the sanitary outlet from this site. This is supported by Public Works. A reciprocal servicing agreement with the adjacent property at 3235-3295 Banwell Road is required.

Storm service is proposed to be provided by the existing 1050mmØ RCP storm sewer along Banwell Road at a rate of 38 L/s. This release rate has been confirmed with RC Spencer Associates and Dillon Consulting Limited as acceptable. On site storm water management is required to be completed in accordance with the Windsor/Essex Region Stormwater Standards Manual and site servicing plans, along with a site grading plan will be required. Clearance(s) are also required from ERCA as a portion of the property is within a hazard area regulated by the Conservation Authority.

Any redundant private drain connections are to be abandoned in accordance with the City of Windsor Engineering Best Practice B.P 1.3.3, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A sanitary sampling manhole will also be required.

We note that the proposed site plan depicts a shared driveway with the property located to the south at 3235-3295 Banwell Road. Again, a reciprocal agreement for access and services is required. A Right-of-Way permit is required for any work on the right of way. New driveway approaches shall be constructed of concrete as per AS-204, complete with straight flares and no raised curbs within the right-of-way. Banwell Road currently lacks sidewalks as well as curb and gutter. Therefore, the applicant is required to contribute the sum of $20,500.00 towards the future construction of a sidewalk on Banwell Road, as well as a sum of $11,000.00 for the similar future construction curb and gutter.

In summary, we have no objections to this rezoning application, subject to the following; [Note: conditions can be imposed during site plan control]:

• Site Plan Control Agreement – The applicant enters into an agreement with the City of Windsor for all requirements under the General Provisions of the Site Plan Control Agreement for the Engineering Department.

• Site Servicing Plans – The owner agrees to submit site servicing plans for the subject lands to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official, the City Engineer, and ERCA in regulated areas, prior to the issuance of any construction permits for the subject lands.

• Servicing Study – The owner agrees, at its own expense, to retain a Consulting Engineer to provide a detailed servicing study report on the impact of the increased flow to the existing municipal sewer system, satisfactory in content to the City Engineer and prior to the issuance of a construction permit. The study shall review the proposed impact and recommend mitigating measures and implementation of those measures.

• ERCA Requirements – The owner(s) further agrees to follow all drainage and flood proofing recommendations that the Essex Region Conservation Authority (ERCA) may have with respect to the subject land, based on final approval by the City Engineer. If applicable, the Owner will obtain all necessary permits from ERCA with respect to the drainage works on the subject lands.

• Sidewalks – The owner(s) agrees to pay to the Corporation, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the sum of $20,500.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of a concrete sidewalk on the Banwell Road frontage of the subject lands.



• Curbs and Gutters – The Owner further agrees to pay to the Corporation, prior to the issuance of a construction permit, the sum of $11,000.00 being the Owner’s contribution towards the future construction of concrete curb and gutter on the Banwell Road frontage of the subject lands.

• Reciprocal Access & Services – The owner agrees to enter into a reciprocal agreement with the abutting property owners for access and services.

• Sanitary Sampling Manhole – The owner agrees for all non-residential uses, to install a sanitary sampling manhole accessible at the property line of the subject lands to the City Engineer at all times. The determination of the requirement or interpretation if a sampling manhole exists or exceptions to such, will be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact Sandy Mio, of this department at 519-255-6257, ext. 6216.

CITY OF WINDSOR – ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES – Anne Marie Albidone, March 24, 2020

No Concerns from Environmental Services.

CITY OF WINDSOR – HERITAGE PLANNER – Kristina Tang, April 15, 2020

There is no apparent built heritage concern with this property. It is located on an area of low archaeological potential. The Applicant should be notified of the following archaeological precaution.

1. Should archaeological resources be found during grading, construction or soil removal activities, all work in the area must stop immediately and the City’s Planning & Building Department, the City’s Manager of Cultural Affairs, and the Ontario Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries must be notified and confirm satisfaction of any archaeological requirements before work can recommence.

2. In the event that human remains are encountered during grading, construction or soil removal activities, all work in that area must be stopped immediately and the site secured. The local police or coroner must be contacted to determine whether or not the skeletal remains are human, and whether the remains constitute a part of a crime scene. The Local police or coroner will then notify the Ontario Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries and the Registrar at the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services if needed, and notification and satisfactory confirmation be given by the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries.

Contacts:

Windsor Planning & Building Department: 519-255-6543 x6179, [email protected]

Windsor Manager of Cultural Affairs: Cathy Masterson, 519-253-2300x2724, [email protected]

Ontario Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries

Archaeology Programs Unit, 1-416-212-8886, [email protected]

Windsor Police: 911

Ontario Ministry of Government & Consumer Services

Registrar of Burial Sites, War Graves, Abandoned Cemeteries and Cemetery Closures, 1-416-212-7499, [email protected]



CITY OF WINDSOR – SITE PLAN APPROVAL OFFICER – Jason Campigotto, April 17, 2020

The development proposal is defined as ‘Major Development’ through By-law 1-2004, as such, shall be subject to Site Plan Control. Additional information regarding the Site Plan Approval review process, including current applications and fees can be found online at:

https://www.citywindsor.ca/residents/planning/Land-Development/Site-Plan-Control/Pages/Site-Plan-Control.aspx

CITY OF WINDSOR - TRANSPORTATION PLANNING – OPA/Rezoning Comments - Juan Paramo, April 22, 2020

Overall, Transportation Planning supports the subject Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment. The following requirements are expected to be satisfied through Site Plan Control.

• Banwell Road is a municipal roadway classified by the Official Plan as a Class 2 Arterial with a required right-of-way of 42 metre. The Banwell Road Environmental Assessment has been completed for this section of Banwell, and the recommended design does not require any additional land for infrastructure improvements.

• All new exterior paths of travel must meet the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).

• All new accesses shall conform to the TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads and the City of Windsor Standard Engineering Drawings AS-204.

• A Transportation Impact Study has been received in conjunction with this application. Additional comments on the TIS will be provided separately.

CITY OF WINDSOR - TRANSPORTATION PLANNING – Transportation Impact Study Comments – Jeff Hagan - April 7, 2020

We have reviewed the transportation impact study report for the above-noted application (“3175 Banwell Road Transportation Impact Study” dated February 4, 2020, by Jim Mallett, Rajan Philips, and Maddison Murch of Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited). Our comments are below.

Overall, the report establishes that the traffic impacts of the proposed development can be accommodated by the surrounding road network, but the report does not justify the need for the proposed right-in/right-out access on Banwell Road.

All issues noted with the report deal with specifics of site layout and site access that would be subject to consideration at the site plan application stage and are beyond the scope of the review required for a zoning application.

Detailed comments are as follows:

1. Site Accesses: The report does not justify the need for the proposed right-in/right-out on Banwell Road.

a. The justification offered – i.e. that it is desirable to separate resident traffic from staff and delivery traffic – could be addressed if the conceptual site layout shown in Figure 3.1 were modified to allow two connections to Driveway ‘A’.



b. Providing a second access on Banwell is unlikely to eliminate truck traffic from Driveway ‘A’. Regardless of the driveway configuration for 3175 Banwell Road, it is likely that Driveway ‘A’ will experience delivery traffic associated with the future development to the south.

c. The report’s analysis of the single-access scenario indicates that a single access can accommodate all site traffic at a satisfactory level of service.

d. Notwithstanding the comments above, since site access and site layout are beyond the scope of the rezoning application, these issues may be addressed at the site plan approval stage.

2. Trip Distribution: The rationale for the trip distribution assumed (Table 3.3) is unclear.

a. The discussion in Section 3.2 suggests that peak hour site trips are mainly associated with employee arrivals and departures at shift change. Typically, the origin (for trips into the site) or departure (for trips from the site) for commuting trips is the employee’s home and would not change from the AM peak to the PM peak.

b. This issue is not significant enough to require the report to be resubmitted, but if the report is revised for other reasons, justification for the approach used – where the trip distribution for these trips varies between the AM peak and the PM peak – should be provided.

3. Trip Assignment: The report considers the volume of site trips making U-turns on Banwell Road to be negligible. As a basis for this assumption, it recommends prohibiting U-turns at the Banwell/Palmetto intersection and “assigning parking in the parking area served by the RIRO access to employees who will not have to make U-turns at Banwell Road intersections.”

a. The conceptual site plan provided (Figure 3.1) indicates that more than a third of the parking supply for the site will be accessible only by the right-in/right-out access at Driveway ‘B’, leaving the south parking area (61 spaces, including 8 accessible spaces) for the bulk of the 115 day shift employees, plus all visitor parking. Unless the site layout is modified from the site concept plan provided, it seems unlikely that the assisted living home will be able to place the restrictions on parking as recommended by the report.

b. It is unclear whether there would be any “employees who will not have to make U-turns at Banwell Road intersections,” since commuting trips are generally to and from the employee’s home (e.g. employees whose origin is from the north for arrival will generally have a destination to the north when they depart).

c. Since the issues noted above only apply for scenarios with a right-in/right-out access on Banwell Road, it is not necessary to revise the report to address this comment unless the applicant seeks approval for a right-in/right-out access on Banwell Road as part of their site plan application.



Transportation Impact Study – Additional Comments based on Revised Conceptual Site Plan– Jeff Hagan – May 5, 2020

I thought I should call your attention to an issue with the relationship between the development application for 3175 Banwell and the detailed design for Banwell Phase 1 (Tecumseh to Palmetto) that Engineering is undertaking right now.

The site plan shows the proposed right-in/right-out entrance right near the transition point between the median and the two-way left turn lane. Here is an excerpt from the EA approved design - the hand-drawn red line shows the approximate location of the proposed access. North is right:

The access location shown in the revised site plan is a tricky spot for an access in the EA design. It's right at the transition point between the median and the two-way left turn lane, so for it to work as a right-in/right-out access or an all-moves access, modifications to the design for Banwell would be needed.

Engineering is planning to tender and construct the project this year, so the design should be completed very soon. They have taken existing and planned accesses into account, but they have not considered the unapproved requested new access for this application.

If access to Banwell is approved, Transportation Planning may request either changes to the access location (recognizing that this will have implications for the site layout) or off-site improvements.

The overall implications for this, that need to be addressed in either the revised TIS, an updated site plan, or both:

• Any access to Banwell would need to be justified.

• If a Banwell access is justified:

o For an access at the proposed location:

▪ If right-in/right-out, the median will likely need to be extended as an off-site improvement at the applicant's expense.

▪ If all-moves, the median will likely need to be cut back as an off-site improvement at the applicant's expense to allow the two-way left turn lane to be fully developed.

o Any access north of the proposed location will be at a two-way left turn lane and should be analyzed as an all-moves access.



o Any right-in/right-out access without a median extension should be located to the south in the area where a median will be provided.

• The analysis of any right-in/right-out access scenario should include an analysis of expected queueing for the northbound left at Banwell & Tecumseh and the southbound left at Banwell & Palmetto to confirm that the design storage length is sufficient with site traffic from the development.

o It should be noted that the analysis done to date for the Banwell detailed design has identified concerns about the capacity of the northbound left turn movement at Banwell & Tecumseh.

The project manager for Banwell Phase 1 is Wadah Al-Yassiri and is the best person to contact for specifics about the Banwell design.

ENWIN UTILITIES - Hydro Engineering – Cecile Dalgleish, March 25, 2020

No Objections. ENWIN has overhead 27.6kV primary conductor on the east side of Banwell. Attached sketch for reference.

We recommend referring to the Occupational Health & Safety Act for the minimum safe limits of approach for equipment during construction.



ENWIN UTILITIES - Water Engineering – Cecile Dalgleish, March 25, 2020

Water Engineering has no objections to the rezoning

ESSEX REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY - Fernando Cirino, March 25, 2020

Delegated Responsibility to Represent Provincial Interest in Natural Hazards (PPS) And Regulatory Responsibilities of The Conservation Authorities Act

The following comments reflect our role as representing the provincial interest in natural hazards as outlined by Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement of the Planning Act as well as our regulatory role as defined by Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act.

The above noted lands are subject to our Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation under the Conservation Authorities Act (Ontario Regulation No. 158/06). The parcel falls within the regulated area of the Parent Outlet Drain. The property owner will be required to obtain a Permit and/or Clearance from the Essex Region Conservation Authority prior to any construction or site alteration or other activities affected by Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act.

Watershed Based Resource Management Agency

The following comments are provided in an advisory capacity as a public commenting body on matters related to watershed management.

SECTION 1.6.6.7 Stormwater Management (PPS, 2014)

ERCA has concerns with the potential impact of the quality and quantity of runoff in the downstream watercourse due to the proposed development on this site. ERCA recommends that stormwater quality and stormwater quantity will need to be addressed up to and including the 1:100 year storm event and be in accordance with the guidance provided by the Stormwater Management Planning and Guidance Manual, prepared by the Ministry of the Environment (MOE, March 2003) and the "Windsor-Essex Region Stormwater Management Standards Manual".

We therefore request inclusion of the following conditions in the Development Agreement:

1. That the developer undertakes an engineering analysis to identify stormwater quality and quantity measures as necessary to control any increases in flows in downstream watercourses, up to and including the 1:100 year design storm, to the satisfaction of the Municipality and the Essex Region Conservation Authority.

2. That the developer installs stormwater management measures identified above, as part of the development of the site, to the satisfaction of the Municipality and the Essex Region Conservation Authority.

3. That the developer obtains the necessary permit or clearance from the Essex Region Conservation Authority prior to undertaking site alterations and/or construction activities.

Planning Advisory Service To Municipalities - Natural Heritage Policies of the PPS

The following comments are provided from our perspective as a service provider to the Municipality on matters related to natural heritage and natural heritage systems as outlined in Section 2.1 of the PPS. The comments in this section do not necessarily represent the provincial position and are advisory in nature for the consideration of the Municipality as the planning authority.



The subject property is not within or adjacent to any natural heritage feature that may meet the criteria for significance as defined by the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). Based on our review, we have no objection to the application with respect to natural heritage policies.

Final Recommendation

If you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact the undersigned.

Sincerely, Fernando Cirino, MUD

Resource Planner

WINDSOR FIRE & RESCUE SERVICES – John Lee, March 23, 2020

No concerns from WFRS for change of zoning.

NO COMMENT RECIEVED FROM:

CITY OF WINDSOR

CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL

ENGINEER/PLAN EXAMINER

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

PARKS DEVELOPMENT

PERMIT SERVICES

REAL ESTATE SERVICES

TRANSIT WINDSOR

ZONING CO-ORDINATOR

BELL CANADA

CANADA MORTGAGE & HOUSING CORPORATION

COGECO CABLE

ENBRIDGE GAS (Union Gas)

GREATER ESSEX COUNTY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

WALPOLE ISLAND FIRST NATIONS

WINDSOR-ESSEX COUNTY HEALTH UNIT



Subject: Approval of a Plan of Condominium with Exemption under Section 9(3) of the Condominium Act –Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc. 737

Ouellette Ave. – CDM 001-20 [CDM-6041] ; Ward 3

Moved by: Councillor Holt Seconded by: Member Rondot


THAT the application of Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc. for an exemption under

Section 9(3) of The Condominium Act for approval of a plan of condominium (Standard Condominium), comprised of 10 additional dwelling units, as shown on the attached

Maps No. CDM-001/20-1 to CDM 001/20-6, within in an existing condominium tenured Multiple Dwelling structure designated ; Essex Condominium Plan (ECP) 169, City of Windsor; located at 737 Ouellette Avenue BE APPROVED for a period of three (3)

years. Carried.

Report Number: S 75/2020 Clerk’s File: ZP/13761


the same.

Item No. 8.8


Page 1 of 5


Subject: Approval of a Plan of Condominium with Exemption under Section 9(3) of the Condominium Act –Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc. 737 Ouellette Ave. – CDM 001-20 [CDM-6041] ; Ward 3

Reference:

Date to Council: June 8, 2020 Author: Jim Abbs

Senior Planner - Subdivisions 519 255 6543 x6317 [email protected]


Report Date: May 19, 2020 Clerk’s File #: ZP/13761


Recommendation:

THAT the application of Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc. for an exemption under

Section 9(3) of The Condominium Act for approval of a plan of condominium (Standard Condominium), comprised of 10 additional dwelling units, as shown on the attached

Maps No. CDM-001/20-1 to CDM 001/20-6, within in an existing condominium tenured Multiple Dwelling structure designated ; Essex Condominium Plan (ECP) 169, City of Windsor; located at 737 Ouellette Avenue BE APPROVED for a period of three (3)

years.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:


Location: West side of Ouellette Avenue, between Elliott Street West and

Wyandotte Street West., (737 Ouellette Avenue)

Ward: 3 Planning District: 01- City Centre ZDM: 7

Applicant: Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc. (Roy Jason Ashdown)

Authorized Agent: Ryan Beauchamp


Page 2 of 5

Proposal:

The applicant is requesting the approval of a Draft Plan of Condominium. The applicant

proposes that 10 new units be added to the existing Condominium Multiple Dwelling. 737 Ouellette was converted from Rental tenure to Condominium in 2016. (CDM 007/09). Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc has converted underutilized common space

and oversized units to 10 new residential Dwelling Units. For these units to be registered as condominium units, Skyline must receive Municipal approval. No other

changes are proposed.

The subject site was subject to a successful application for condominium conversion (CDM 007/09) and is Registered as Plan of Condominium (ECP-169)

Figure 1: Location Map


Page 3 of 5

Plan of Condominium: (See Appendix A)

Site Information:


Mixed Use (Very

High) (City Centre

Planning Area)

Commercial District

3.1 (CD3.1)

Multiple Dwelling Building

(Existing) Multiple Dwelling

Building

LOT WIDTH LOT DEPTH AREA SHAPE

38.6 m 55.1 m +/-2092 m2

rectangular

All measurements are for the entire parcel and are approximate.

Neighbourhood Characteristics:

Ouellette Avenue is a mixed use corridor, generally consisting of buildings with commercial and/or office uses on the main floor with residential dwellings above. The

building fronts onto Ouellette Avenue, a Class II Arterial road. However, the parking areas are accessed from Pelissier Street.

The Transway 1A, 1C, Central 3, and the Ottawa 4 bus routes operate on Ouellette Avenue at the front of the building.

Discussion:

Planning Analysis:

Statutory Regulations:

Under Section 9 of The Condominium Act, an owner may request approval of a plan of condominium subject to Section 51 of The Planning Act (subdivisions). As such, the

usual approval process for plans of subdivision is invoked, i.e. review by municipal and provincial agencies, public notification, draft plan approval, a condominium agreement

and final registration.

The Condominium Act also provides that owners can be exempted from the above mentioned Planning Act provision if the approval authority (i.e. the City of Windsor) is of

the opinion that "such exemption is appropriate in the circumstances". The reasons for exemptions are not specified, but usually applicants can be exempted if the following

conditions are satisfied:

(i) that all municipal requirements and conditions have been addressed (for example by an approved application for rezoning and/or site plan control);

and

(ii) that the building(s) is suitable for a condominium by virtue of design and

amenities.


Page 4 of 5

The proposed condominium complies with the above conditions.

Official Plan:

The subject property is designated “Mixed Use -Very High” on Schedule "E" - City Centre of the City of Windsor Official Plan. The designation is intended to accommodate high density dwelling types that will contribute to the mix of housing forms, tenures and

price levels in the area.

The City of Windsor has policies in the Official Plan for approval of a plan of

condominium with exemption under Section 9 of the Condominium Act. Applications for exemptions may be considered by Council if:

(a) a residential building is constructed or a building permit for its construction

has been issued;

(b) the development has received site plan control approval; and

(c) the development (new proposed units) do not contain any occupied residential rental units.


Zoning By-Law

The property is currently zoned Commercial District (CD)3.1 under Zoning By-law 8600.

The existing mixed use building on the property is permitted under the CD3.1 category. Building permits have been issued and construction has begun for the development.

Risk Analysis:

N/A

Financial Matters:

N/A

Consultations:

As a result of the previous circulation of an application for conversion to condominium tenure to various municipal departments and agencies/bodies for review and comment,

no circulation was undertaken for this condominium approval application. Municipal and agency requirements have been addressed and implemented through the conversion to condominium tenure, and the registration of a final plan of condominium. (File CDM-

007/09, registered as ECP-169 on June 16, 2016.)

Public Notice:

No public notification is required where exemptions are requested and the development is properly zoned for the permitted use. Nevertheless, notice was mailed to all property owners within 120 metres (400 feet) and notice was also given in the Windsor Star.


Page 5 of 5

Conclusion:

The application has been processed and evaluated with regard to both The Planning Act and The Condominium Act, as well as the City of Windsor Official Plan, and is in conformity with the zoning regulations and the City of Windsor Official Plan. Municipal

requirements regarding this development have been addressed through the conversion to condominium tenure.

It is recommended that this application for approval be exempted from Section 51 of The Planning Act (per Section 9(3) of The Condominium Act). This means that the owner can proceed directly to registration following submission of an approved final plan

of condominium.



Thom Hunt, City Planner


SAH OC

Approvals:

Name Title

Michael Cooke Manager of Planning Policy/Deputy City

Planner




Onorio Colucci Chief Administration Officer

Notifications:

Name Address Email

Skyline Real Estate Holdings Inc. (Ryan

Beauchamp)

301-5 Douglas Street, Guelph ON N1H 2S8

[email protected]

Appendices:

1 Appendix A Plan of Condominium


Appendix A : Plan of Condominium S 75/2020 CDM 001/20 [CDM6041]

CDM-001/20-1


CDM-001/20-2


CDM001/20-3


CDM001/20-4


CDM001/20-5


CDM001/20-6



Subject: Approval of a Plan of Condominium with Exemption under Section 9(3) of the Condominium Act – Piroli Construction Inc. 850 Wyandotte

Street W. – CDM 002-20 [CDM-6053]; Ward 3

Moved by: Councillor Sleiman Seconded by: Councillor Morrison


THAT the application of Piroli Construction Inc. for an exemption under Section 9(3) of

The Condominium Act for approval of a plan of condominium (Standard Condominium), comprised of 152 dwelling units, as shown on the attached Map No. CDM-002/20-1 and CDM-002/20-2 within in a newly constructed Multiple Dwelling structure on a parcel

legally described as; Part of Lots 34 to 42, (inclusive) Registered Plan 71, Part of Lots 148 to 155 (Inclusive), Part of Alley, Part Lane, Registered Plan 282 and Part of Block 'Z', Registered Plan 469, City of Windsor; located at 850 Wyandotte Street West BE APPROVED for a period of three (3) years.

Carried.

Report Number: S 76/2020 Clerk’s File: ZP/13820


the same.

Item No. 8.9


Page 1 of 8


Subject: Approval of a Plan of Condominium with Exemption under Section 9(3) of the Condominium Act – Piroli Construction Inc. 850 Wyandotte Street W – CDM 002-20 [CDM-6053]; Ward 3

Reference:

Date to Council: June 8, 2020 Author: Jim Abbs

Senior Planner - Subdivisions 519 255 6543 x6317 [email protected]


Report Date: May 19, 2020 Clerk’s File #: ZP/13820


Recommendation:

THAT the application of Piroli Construction Inc. for an exemption under Section 9(3) of

The Condominium Act for approval of a plan of condominium (Standard Condominium), comprised of 152 dwelling units, as shown on the attached Map No. CDM-002/20-1 and

CDM-002/20-2 within in a newly constructed Multiple Dwelling structure on a parcel legally described as; Part of Lots 34 to 42, (inclusive) Registered Plan 71, Part of Lots

148 to 155 (Inclusive), Part of Alley, Part Lane, Registered Plan 282 and Part of Block 'Z', Registered Plan 469, City of Windsor; located at 850 Wyandotte Street West BE APPROVED for a period of three (3) years.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:


Location: North east corner of Wyandotte Street West and Crawford Avenue (850

Wyandotte Street West)

Ward: 3 Planning District: 16- University ZDM: 3

Applicant: Piroli Construction Inc. (Robert Piroli)

Authorized Agent: Robert G. Millson


Page 2 of 8

Proposal:

The applicant is applying for an exemption under Section 9(3) of The Condominium Act

for approval of a plan of condominium for a single structure containing a total of 152 dwelling units.

The subject site has received Site Plan Approval (File SPC-006/19) registered as

instrument CE882704, on April 24, 2019 which permitted a total of 152 multiple dwellings. The agreement covers a range of municipal and agency requirements to be

completed by the owner including items such as the provision of landscaping, parking, parkland conveyance, levies and lighting, all required prior to the issuance of a construction permit.

Figure 1: Location Map


Page 3 of 8

Plan of Condominium:

CDM-002/20-1


Page 4 of 8

CDM-002/20-2

Site Information:


Mixed Use (Special

Policy Area1.46)

Residential District

3.16 (RD3.16)

Multiple Dwelling Building

(Under Construction) vacant

LOT WIDTH LOT DEPTH AREA SHAPE

119.17m 125.88m 14,848 sq m / 1.48 ha

Irregular

All measurements are for the entire parcel and are approximate.


Page 5 of 8

Neighbourhood Characteristics:

The surrounding land uses consist of a mix of residential, commercial, industrial,

and transportation uses. To the north are low-density residential uses along both sides of Crawford Avenue, a vacant parcel on the west side of Crawford fronting on University Avenue West (former Grace Hospital site), and a vacant parcel

owned by others fronting on Salter Street. CP Railway operates a railyard approximately 280 m to the southeast and a rail corridor adjacent to the subject

parcel.

North east of the rail corridor is a low density residential neighbourhood. This residential

neighbourhood continues south of Wyandotte Street West, east of the rail corridor.

Commercial uses are located along Wyandotte Street West, a major east-west arterial road that connects the west end of the City, the downtown, and the east end of the city. To the south, on the east side of Crawford, is a major industrial use,

BASF Canada. BASF also has parking lots east of the CP rail corridor, just south of Wyandotte Street on both sides of Caron Avenue. Further south is a Hydro One

transformer facility. On the west side of Crawford are commercial uses including a restaurant with drivethrough, a bingo facility and a grocery store. The commercial corridor of Wyandotte Street West extends westerly, interspersed with some

residential uses and vacant lots. To the northwest is a low-density residential neighbourhood.

Wyandotte Street West is a Class II Arterial Road and Crawford Avenue is a

Class I Collector Road . Public transit is available via the Crosstown 2, Central 3, and Central 3W buses on Wyandotte Street and Crawford Avenue, immediately

adjacent to the subject lands, the Transway 1C bus on University Avenue West, is approximately 500 m to the north, and the Dougall 6 bus on Janette Avenue and Bruce Avenue, is 400 m to the east.

Discussion: Planning Analysis:

Statutory Regulations:

Under Section 9 of The Condominium Act, an owner may request approval of a plan of condominium subject to Section 51 of The Planning Act (subdivisions). As such, the usual approval process for plans of subdivision is invoked, i.e. review by municipal and

provincial agencies, public notification, draft plan approval, a condominium agreement and final registration.

The Condominium Act also provides that owners can be exempted from the above mentioned Planning Act provision if the approval authority (i.e. the City of Windsor) is of the opinion that "such exemption is appropriate in the circumstances". The reasons for

exemptions are not specified, but usually applicants can be exempted if the following conditions are satisfied:


Page 6 of 8

(i) that all municipal requirements and conditions have been addressed (for example by an approved application for rezoning and/or site plan control);

and

(ii) that the building(s) is suitable for a condominium by virtue of design and amenities.


Official Plan:

The subject property is designated “Mixed Use” on Schedule "D" - Land Use of the City of Windsor Official Plan. The designation is intended to accommodate high density dwelling types that will contribute to the mix of housing forms, tenures and price levels

in the area.

The City of Windsor has policies in the Official Plan for approval of a plan of

condominium with exemption under Section 9 of the Condominium Act. Applications for exemptions may be considered by Council if:

(a) a residential building is constructed or a building permit for its construction

has been issued;

(b) the development has received site plan control approval; and

(c) the development (new proposed units) do not contain any occupied residential rental units.


Zoning By-Law

The property is currently zoned Residential District (RD)3.16 under Zoning By-law 8600. The Multiple Dwelling building on the property is permitted under the RD3.16 category.

Building permits have been issued and construction of the building is nearing completion

Risk Analysis:

N/A

Financial Matters:

N/A

Consultations:

Municipal and agency requirements have been addressed and implemented through the

site plan control approval process, and the registration of a site plan agreement. (File SPC-006/19 registered as instrument CE882704, April 24, 2019)


Page 7 of 8

Public Notice:

No public notification is required where exemptions are requested and the development

is properly zoned for the permitted use. Nevertheless, notice was mailed to all property owners within 120 metres (400 feet) and notice was also given in the Windsor Star.

Conclusion:

The application has been processed and evaluated with regard to both The Planning

Act and The Condominium Act, as well as the City of Windsor Official Plan, and is in conformity with the zoning regulations and the City of Windsor Official Plan. Municipal requirements regarding this development have been addressed in the site plan control

agreement and the draft plan of condominium is consistent with the approved site plan (File SPC-006/19 registered CE882704, April 24, 2019)

It is recommended that this application for approval be exempted from Section 51 of The Planning Act (per Section 9(3) of The Condominium Act). This means that the owner can proceed directly to registration following submission of an approved final plan

of condominium.



Thom Hunt, City Planner


SAH OC

Approvals:

Name Title

Michael Cooke Manager of Planning Policy/Deputy City

Planner




Onorio Colucci Chief Administration Officer

Notifications:

Name Address Email

Piroli Construction /Inc. 1500 Ouellette Avenue, Suite 201, Windsor ON

[email protected]


Page 8 of 8

Name Address Email

N8X 1K7

Robert G. Millson Professional Corporation

1500 Ouellette Avenue, Suite 305, Windsor ON N8X 1K7

[email protected]

Appendices:



Subject: Response to B3/2020 Directing Administration to Report Back with a Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program and List of

Funded CIPs

Moved by: Councillor Holt Seconded by: Councillor Sleiman


THAT the report of the Planner III Special Projects dated April 27, 2020 entitled “Response to B 3/2020 Directing Administration to Report Back with a Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program and List of Funded CIP’s” BE RECEIVED for

Information; and,

THAT a micro grant program for the Downtown Community Improvement Plan, using the Ford City Community Improvement Plan as the basis, BE APPROVED.

Carried. Report Number: S 68/2020

Clerk’s File: Z/10320


not the same.

Item No. 8.10


Page 1 of 4


Subject: Response to B3/2020 Directing Administration to Report Back with a Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program and List of Funded CIPs

Reference:

Date to Council: June 8, 2020 Author: Laura Diotte, MCIP, RPP

Planner III - Special Projects 519-255-6543 ext. 6396 [email protected]


Report Date: April 27, 2020 Clerk’s File #: Z/10320


Recommendation:

THAT Report S68/2020 BE RECEIVED for Information.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

On January 27, 2020 at the Special Meeting of Council, Council approved the following (B3/2020) in response to Report C5/2020 (Report C5/2020 attached as Appendix A):

I. That the report of the Planner III – Special Projects dated January 9, 2020 entitled “Response to CR504/2019 requesting all Community Improvement Plans be Provided to Council during Budget Deliberations” BE RECEIVED for

information; and,

II. That Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to Council with options and

process related to a Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program to the Downtown CIP; and,

III. That Administration BE DIRECTED to provide a list of current Community

Improvement Plans (CIP), and whether or not these CIPs are funded.


Page 2 of 4

Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program

A grant program offered for neighbourhood rehabilitation generally consists of grants for private residential homeowners or tenants to make improvements to residential buildings for the collective betterment of the neighbourhood. In Windsor, Ford City and

Sandwich Town CIPs offer financial grants for the purposes of residential building improvements.

In October 2017, staff recommended a Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program under the Downtown CIP which was intended to provide financial assistance to property owners and tenants to promote the maintenance and improvement of

residential properties within targeted residential neighbourhoods in order to help improve the aesthetic quality and living conditions in the residential neighbourhoods

surrounding the downtown core. The program details are contained within Appendix B.

Council did not approve the Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program as proposed by staff in October 2017.

Funded CIPs

Report C5/2020 provides an overview of the active and current CIPs and their fund

balance (see Appendix A). One additional CIP within the City offers financial incentives and is funded, being the Little River Acres Community Improvement Plan. Report C5/2020 did not mention the Little River Acres CIP due to the fact that the CIP was

approved in 2005 and the City has not received an application from a property owner under the grant program. Additionally, the funds are now approved for capital improvements, which are described in the discussion section below.

Discussion: Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program

If Council wishes to reconsider the Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program

and include it in the Downtown CIP, they can choose to amend the Downtown CIP. Council can direct staff to amend the Downtown CIP to include Appendix B attached to this report. An amendment to a CIP is similar to an Official Plan Amendment where

public notice is given, a public meeting is held, and an appeal period follows.

Little River Acres Community Improvement Plan

Capital Project (#7041913) was set aside to provide ongoing assistance to implement financial programs and capital improvements, as identified in Recommendation 6 of the Little Rivers Acres CIP adopted by CR232/2005, and to implement Phases 1 through 4

of the Little River Acres Park Redevelopment Plan as per CR45/2007 (See Appendix C).

The project had an approved budget of $800,000 and currently has a remaining balance available of $76,040. A majority of the fund has been spent on Phase I which included, the design and implementation of the following park amenities, accessible playground,

multi-use walking trial, new parking lot, new park electrical service with perimeter


Page 3 of 4

pathway lighting, benches, grading, drainage in-ground trash and recycle receptacles and tree planting. Phase I of the Little River Acres CIP is almost complete with the

exception of the sports court and some other drainage work required in the park. In order to proceed with these outstanding items more funding is required.

Risk Analysis:

There is low risk associated with the subject report as it only provides requested

information to Council.

Financial Matters:

Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program

Should City Council amend the Downtown CIP to include the Neighbourhood

Residential Micro-Grant Program this program would be funded by the Community Development Planning Fund (Project #7011022) which has an available balance of

$88158.

Consultations:

Heidi Baillargeon, Manager of Parks Development

Conclusion:

This report is provided for information only as requested by Council.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

Don Nantais Financial Planning Administrator

Neil Robertson Manager of Urban Design

Thom Hunt City Planner/Executive Director of Planning and Building Services



Joe Mancina Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Councillor Bortolin [email protected]


Page 4 of 4

Name Address Email

Councillor Gignac [email protected]

Appendices:

1 Appendix A - Report C5/2020

2 Appendix B - Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program 3 Appendix C - Little River Acres Community Improvement Plan (Park Redevelopment


Page 1 of 10


Subject: Response to CR504/2019 requesting all Community Improvement Plans be Provided to Council During Budget Deliberations

Reference:

Date to Council: Jan 27, 2020 Author: Laura Diotte, MCIP, RPP Planner III - Special Projects 519 255-6543 x6396 [email protected] Planning & Building Services Report Date: 1/9/2020 Clerk’s File #: Z/10320


RECOMMENDATION:

I. That Report C5-2020 BE RECEIVED for information.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

N/A

BACKGROUND:

On October 7, 2019 Council passed the following resolution (CR504/2019):

“That all City Community Improvement Plans BE PROVIDED to Council during budget deliberations for review.”

This resolution was made at the time Council considered Report S118/2019 titled Update on Status of the Sandwich CIP for Further Incentives and Improvements, which was prepared in response to CQ28-2018, which requests:

“...that Planning and Building department provide Council with an update on the status of the Sandwich Town Community Improvement Plan (CIP) and further determine if additional incentives and improvements could be made.”

The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the Community Improvement Plans available within the City of Windsor. The discussion section will review the


Page 2 of 10

purpose and financial incentive programs offered through each CIP and the financial matters section will provide a snapshot of key statistics. Each CIP has a monitoring program built into the CIP, which outlines reporting and review cycle timelines. At the time of review (usually every 5 years after approval of the individual CIP), staff will provide comprehensive statistics, analysis of each program, and recommendations relating to any amendments. The Economic Revitalization and Brownfield Redevelopment CIPs are currently under review with updates to be provided to Council later in 2020. Section 28 of Ontario’s Planning Act gives municipalities power to implement Community Improvement Plans, which are meant to target areas in need of improvement because of “age, dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement, unsuitability of buildings or for any other environmental, social or community economic development reason” (Section 28 (1) of the Planning Act). Therefore, as shown on the map contained in Appendix A, the Community Improvement Project Areas are located in areas where these conditions are present. Tailored incentive packages are created for each CIP area to stimulate investment that is intended to act as a catalyst for other investment in the area. Council has also approved two City wide CIPs that target economic development and brownfield remediation. DISCUSSION:

The City has six (6) active CIPs that offer financial incentives to encourage tailored development/redevelopment in targeted neighbourhoods, targeted economic sectors or for the purposes of brownfield remediation.

The following is an overview of the CIPs, their purpose, and the financial incentive programs offered:

Economic Revitalization Community Improvement Plan

The purpose of this CIP is to encourage new investment in targeted economic sectors for the purposes of diversifying the local economy and creating/retaining jobs.

The following financial incentive programs are offered City-wide:

Business Development Grant Program is available to new manufacturing businesses creating a minimum of 50 new jobs or new businesses in other eligible sectors creating a minimum of 20 new jobs;

Business Retention and Expansion Grant Program is available to existing manufacturing businesses creating or retaining a minimum of 50 jobs or other eligible businesses creating more than 20 new jobs or retaining a minimum of 35 jobs;

Small Business Investment Grant Program is available to new or existing manufacturing businesses that have less than 50 employees or other eligible businesses that have less than 20 employees; and

Development Charges Grant Program may provide a grant equivalent to the development charges owning.


Page 3 of 10

Grants are funded via increase in property value assessment and municipal tax levy (e.g. 100% of the increase in municipal tax levy may be rebated annually for up to 10 years to offset eligible investment costs).

Brownfield Redevelopment Community Improvement Plan

The purpose of this CIP is to encourage the study, clean-up, and redevelopment of properties that may have been contaminated by past industrial or commercial uses. The following financial incentive programs are offered City-wide:

The Feasibility Study Grant Program offers up to $7,500 (50% of the total study costs) for an eligible feasibility study (e.g. structural analysis, evaluation of mechanical/electrical systems, concept plans, market analysis);

The Environmental Site Assessment Grant Program offers up to $15,000 (50% of the total study cost) toward a Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), designated substances and hazardous materials survey, remedial action plan, or risk assessment. If two studies are required the program can offer up to $25,000;

If remediation or risk assessment work is required the Brownfields Tax Assistance and Rehabilitation Grant Programs, offers annual grants equivalent to 70% of the municipal property tax increase (or 100% for a LEED certified project) created by investment in the project for up to 13 years after project completion; and

Properties approved to participate under the Rehabilitation Grant Program also receive a 60% development charge reduction.

Downtown Windsor Enhancement Strategy and Community Improvement Plan: The Downtown Windsor Enhancement Strategy and Community Improvement Plan offers grants to encourage projects that will enhance downtown. Grants are offered for the conversion of existing upper storey space to new residential units, the development of new residential units, retail enhancements, and facade improvements. The following financial incentive programs area offered within the Downtown Windsor Community Improvement Project Area:

Upper Storey Residential Conversion Grant Program offers a grant of $5,000 for every new residential unit created on the upper storey(s) of an existing mixed use building, up to a maximum of $50,000 per property.

New Residential Development Grant Program offers a grant of $2,500 for every new residential unit, up to a maximum of $50,000 per property.

Retail Investment Grant Program offers a reimbursement grant up to 50% of eligible costs for improvements to a maximum amount of $15,000 per retail unit in a building that has had a vacant ground floor retail and commercial use storefront(s) for at least 6 months immediately prior to application to the program and will be occupied by an eligible new retail business.

Building/Property Improvement Tax Increment Grant Program offers an annual grant equal to 100% of the increase in municipal property taxes for five years,


Page 4 of 10

with the possibility of an extension up to a total of ten (10) years, after the project is completed and reassessed to help offset the costs of rehabilitating and redeveloping properties, as long as such development results in an increase in assessment and therefore an increase in property taxes.

Commercial/Mixed Use Building Facade Improvement Grant Program offers a grant program, whereby property owners, tenants and/or assignees will be eligible to receive a grant for 50% of the eligible costs of the facade improvements, up to $20,000 per property. At the discretion of Council, the grant can be increased by up to $10,000 per property/project that meet criteria outlined in the Downtown CIP.

Sandwich Town Community Improvement Plan: The purpose of this CIP is to revitalize Sandwich Town and help the community achieve the documented vision and goals, as well as addressing the issues and building on the strengths. The following financial incentive programs are offered:

Commercial/ Mixed Use Building Facade Grant Program provides a grant to promote the rehabilitation, restoration and improvement of commercial and mixed use buildings equal to 70% of the cost of eligible façade and storefront improvement/ restoration works to commercial and mixed use buildings. The Maximum grant per property/project is $15,000. The maximum can be increased by up to $10,000 for properties/projects that also require side and/or rear façade improvements when highly visible from Sandwich Street, and for properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. This grant is only available in the Commercial Core and residential area (Target Areas 1 and 3).

Commercial/ Mixed Use Building Improvement Loan Program provides a 0% interest loan equal to 70% of cost of eligible interior/exterior building maintenance and improvements to commercial and mixed use buildings. The Minimum Loan is $10,000 and the Maximum Loan is $30,000 per property/project. This grant is only available in the commercial core and residential area (Target Areas 1 and 3).

Revitalization Grant Program provides a grant for rehabilitating or developing buildings and property by providing a financial incentive that reduces the tax increase that can result when a property is improved. The program provides an annual grant equal to 70% of the increase in the municipal portion only of the property taxes for up to 10 years after project completion. The project must result in an increase in assessment and property taxes. The Grant is available in the entire CIP Area.

Commercial Core Feasibility Study Grant Program provides a grant equal to 50% of the cost to assist applicants with determining the feasibility and cost of adaptively reusing, rehabilitating, retrofitting, redeveloping, or developing a commercial or mixed use building. The grant can also be used for other studies such as archeological studies or brick and mortar analysis. Maximum grant per property/project is $5,000 with a maximum of one feasibility study per property/project. The grant is only available in the Commercial Core (Target Area 1).


Page 5 of 10

Development Charge Grant Program provides a grant equal to between 50% and 100% of the City Development Charge paid to promote redevelopment on commercial and mixed use properties. The grant is based on LEED certification. The grant is only available in the Commercial Core (Target Area 1). This grant has never been used because most owners do not want to spend the extra cost to bring buildings to LEED certification. Also, since development charges were lowered significantly in the older core areas of the City there is no real reason to try and reduce development charges any further.

Development and Building Fees Grant Program provides a Grant equal to 100% of the fees paid for a wide range of development application and building permit fees once the project is completed. The Grant is available in the entire CIP Area.

Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program provides a grant equal to 50% of the cost of eligible exterior building maintenance and property improvement for residential properties. Minimum grant is $2,000 and the Maximum grant is $15,000 per property. Maximum of one application per property. This grant promotes maintenance and physical improvement of property and because there is a maximum of one application per property this promotes a more comprehensive improvement.

At its regular meeting held on October 7, 2019, Council passed a resolution (CR503/2019 DHSC 89) to amend the Sandwich Town CIP. This plan will be amended in the future to include additional financial incentives.

Building Facade Improvement Program for Main Streets CIP: The Program builds on recent investment in municipal infrastructure improvements, such as road rehabilitation and streetscape projects and leverages public investment by encouraging the physical improvement of building facades along traditional Main Streets by offering a Commercial/Mixed-Use Building Façade grant.

Through the Financial Incentive Program, the City will match 50% of the costs for eligible building facade and storefront restoration improvements to commercial and mixed-use buildings within the designated Main Street area up to a maximum of $30,000 per project to a maximum of $60,000 per project for larger buildings with multiple storefronts. Grants will also be provided for certain building and development fees for eligible projects. All improvements are reviewed by the Planning & Building Department based on the Urban Design Guidelines identified in the CIP.

There have been discussions regarding amending this CIP to include additional incentive programs for traditional main streets included within this CIP.

Ford City Community Improvement Plan: This CIP captures the goals and vision gathered through background studies, community conversations and surveys. The following incentive programs are offered:

Municipal Development Fees Grant Program: property owners are eligible to receive a grant for 100% of the specified Municipal Development Fees, up to a


Page 6 of 10

maximum of $50,000 per property. Remaining Municipal Development Charges are also eligible for the grant for projects on Infill Catalyst Sites.

New Residential Development Grant Program: property owners are eligible to

receive a grant of $2,500 for every new residential unit, up to a maximum of $50,000 per property. A minimum of two (2) new residential units must be created in order to be eligible. Projects on Infill Catalyst Sites are eligible for a grant increase of up to $5,000 per unit, up to $50,000.

Building/Property Improvement Tax Increment Grant Program an annual grant equal to 100% of the increase in municipal property taxes for ten (10) years, after the project is completed and reassessed.

Retail Investment Grant Program: A grant up to 50% of eligible costs for improvements to a maximum amount of $15,000 per retail unit in a building, up to a maximum of $30,000 per property.

Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program: grant equal to 50% of the cost of eligible exterior building maintenance and property improvement works to residential properties. The minimum grant per property will be $1,000, up to a maximum of $15,000, with a maximum of one (1) application per property.

RISK ANALYSIS:

There is low risk associated with this report. The report is provided for information purposes only, and to provide information about existing financial incentive programs offered through approved CIPs within the City of Windsor.

FINANCIAL MATTERS:

Budget Summary of the CIP Grant Programs:

Each CIP has its own capital project or fund account that is used to facilitate the various grant programs offered under each CIP (excluding the tax base grant programs). The table below details each CIP, the capital project or fund associated with the program, number of applications, total grants approved and the uncommitted budget balance.

Table 1: Life to Date Programs Summary

CIP Capital

Project/Fund

Number of Approved

Applications

Total Grants

Approved

Uncommitted Balance

Brownfield Redevelopment CIP (Feasibility and Environmental Study Grant)

Brownfield Strategy/Remediation Account (Project # 7069003)

21 $347,268.50 $633,083

Downtown CIP (New Residential Development Grant, Retail Investment Grant, Upper Storey Residential Conversion, Commercial/Mixed Use Building

City Centre Community Development Planning Fund

18 $527,022 $138,158


Page 7 of 10

CIP Capital

Project/Fund

Number of Approved

Applications

Total Grants

Approved

Uncommitted Balance

Facade Improvement Grant) (Project #7011022)

Sandwich Town CIP (Commercial/ Mixed Use Building Facade and Grant Program, Commercial/ Mixed Use Building Improvement Loan Program, Commercial Core Feasibility Study Grant Program, Development Charge Grant Program, Development and Building Fees Grant Program, Neighbourhood Residential Revitalization Grant)

Sandwich Community Development Plan (Project #7076176)

9 $284,205 $363,704

Building Facade Improvement CIP

Building Facade Improvement Program—Reserve Fund 156

4 $106,105 $28,832

Ford City CIP (Municipal Development Fees Grant Program, New Residential Development Grant Program, Retail Investment Grant Program, Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program)

The Ford City CIP (Project #7181046)

11 $101,695 $148,305

As shown in the table above, the funding for the Downtown CIP and Building Facade Improvement programs are now near depletion. The Downtown CIP began implementation in November 2017 and Council can expect an application in February totaling $50,000 in grant fund requests. Staff still receive inquiries and expect other applications to be submitted by property owners and tenants.

Tax Increment-Based CIP Grant Programs:

The Economic Revitalization, Brownfield Redevelopment, Downtown, Sandwich Town, and Ford City CIPs contain grant programs that are funded through increases in property value assessment and municipal tax levy (i.e. no reserve account is associated with the grant programs). The City retains the amount of pre-development (base) municipal taxes and grants back up to 100% of the increase in municipal tax levy annually for a specified time.

Tax increment-based grants are considered foregone municipal tax levy that would otherwise be used to offset future budget pressures. The grants have no impact on the capital budget accounts that fund related CIP grant programs.


Page 8 of 10

The table below summarizes key statistics (please note there are no tax increment-based grants to report under the Ford City CIP):

Table 2: Grant Approvals Funded by Municipal Tax Increment

CIP Number of Approved

Applications

Estimate Value of Approved Tax

Increment Grants

Estimate of Increase in

Property Value Assessment

Estimate of Private Sector Investment*

Economic Revitalization CIP

36 $21,621,570 $48,468,960 $254,960,195

Brownfield Redevelopment CIP

5 $7,802,541 $74,399,070 $119,813,597

Downtown CIP 8 $10,805,152 $51,584,075 $108,270,069

Sandwich Town CIP

7 $592,350 $4,170,653 $6,488,156

* The estimate of private sector investment is provided by the applicant at the time of application. Private sector investment shown above includes all programs under each respective CIP (e.g. programs funded by capital budget accounts and municipal tax increment.

It is noted that the information provided in the table above represent estimates of grant requests that have come forth and have been approved by Council. From these approvals, actual redevelopment has taken place on approximately 20 applications to date with grants being paid on 16 of said applications which have completed agreements and received the new assessment values as determined by MPAC. Estimated grant payments for 2020 (included in the 2020 budget) based on these executed agreements is $1,050,000.

CONSULTATIONS:

All CIPs were subject to stakeholder and public consultation as part of the approval process, including public meetings, a statutory public meeting and circulation among internal City staff and the Province.

CONCLUSION:

Staff provide this information to Council during budget deliberations, as requested in CR504/2019.

Approvals:

Name Title

Laura Diotte Planner III – Special Projects


Page 9 of 10

Name Title

Greg Atkinson Planner III – Economic Development

Kevin Alexander Planner III – Special Projects

Don Nantais Financial Planning Admin.


Thom Hunt City Planner/Executive Director of Planning and Building Services



Janice Guthrie Deputy Treasurer Taxation and Financial Planning



Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices:

1 Appendix A - Community Improvement Plan Project Area


Page 1 of 10


financial incEntivEs programs / 195community improvEmEnt plan

Downtown winDsor EnhancEmEnt stratEgy anD community improvEmEnt planDRAFT 08/29/2017

9.2.8 Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program

Purpose

The Little Things Matter Program – Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program is intended to provide somefinancialassistancetopropertyownersandtenantstopromote the maintenance and improvement of residential properties within targeted residential neighbourhoods in order to help improve the aesthetic quality and living conditions in the residential neighbourhoods surrounding the downtown core.

Description

The Little Things Matter Program – Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program will consist of a grant program whereby property owners and tenants will be eligible to receive a one-time matching micro-grant for 50% of the eligible costs, up to $500, for projects that result in minor residential building and/or property improvements that help to improve the aesthetic quality of and living conditions in the neighbourhood.

The Little Things Matter Program – Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program requires a 100% matching contribution by the property owner or tenant to the total cost of the eligible project.

The maximum grant per property will be $500, with a

maximum of one application per property.

Program Details

Applicants are eligible to apply for funding under this program, subject to meeting the general program requirements,thefollowingprogramspecificrequirements,and subject to the availability of funding as approved by Council:

1. The Little Things Matter Program – Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program will provide funds up to a maximum of $500 per project provided that the applicant can demonstrate a 100% matching contribution. The matching component can include any combination of volunteer labour, donated materials, donated professional services and/or cash.

2. If the applicant is not the owner of the property, the applicant must provide written consent from the owner of the property on the application.

3. The following types of exterior building maintenance and property improvement works are considered eligible for a grant under this program:

• Complete yard clean up;

• Cleaning, painting, repair or replacement of fences and fence components;

• Cleaning, painting, repair or replacement of

The Neighbourhood Residential Mi-cro Grant Program


heinbud

Text Box

APPENDIX B

196 / financial incEntivEs programs community improvEmEnt plan

Downtown winDsor EnhancEmEnt stratEgy anD community improvEmEnt plan DRAFT 08/29/2017

exterior facade materials;

• Repair/replacement of front doors, windows and porches;

• Repair/replacement of cornices, parapets, eaves and other architectural details;

• Landscaping, including walkways and permanent plant materials (to a maximum 15% of the approved grant amount); and

• Other similar repairs/improvements as may be approved by the City Planner.

4. All eligible works must be visible from the road right-of-way and must be acceptable to and approved by the City.

5. The maximum grant per property will be $500, with a maximum of one application per property per year.

6. The applicant will be required to submit a complete application to the City describing in detail the project that is planned. This may include a written summary, quotes, contracts and other details as may be required to satisfy the City with respect to conformity of the project with the CIP. The applicant must be prepared to justify that each element of the grant application, in the amount proposed, is required to complete the proposed project. The application must be submitted to the City prior to City’s approval of financialincentivesfortheproject.

7. Prior to the approval of a Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant, City staff may need to inspect the residence to review its condition and the proposed improvement plans.

8. Determination of compliance with the requirements of this program and the amount of the grant (within the permitted terms of this program) is at the discretion of and subject to the approval of the City Planner.

9. The City Planner at his/her sole discretion can deny a Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant to any project that they deem to be inappropriate, not meeting the intent of this program, not in the public interest and/or not contributing to the goals and objectives of this CIP. The City Planner’s decision can be appealed to City Council for a finaldecision.

Geographic Eligibility

The Little Things Matter Program – Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program is applicable to the entire Community Improvement Project Area for projects that meet the program requirements outlined above.

Approval Authority

Given the small amount of the grant and the need to expedite the approval process, the City Planner will be the approval authority for the Little Things Matter Program – Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant Program.

The City Planner will document each approval and submit a description of each approval as a Communication agenda item to Council for information purposes.

Grant Calculation

The amount of the grant will be determined based upon thetotalvalueof thedefinedeligible costs divided by two, with the amount of the grant capped at $500 per project.

Grant Payment

Fifty percent (50%) of the Neighbourhood Residential Micro-Grant will be made to the grant recipient upon the Citybeingsatisfiedthatthegrantrecipienthascompliedwith all terms and conditions of the application procedure, and delivered on the project by the mutually agreed upon deadline.

Theremainingfiftypercent(50%)of theNeighbourhoodResidential Micro-Grant will be made to the grant recipient upon the completion of the project.

Grant Adjustments

Thesecondfiftypercent(50%)of theNeighbourhoodResidential Micro-Grant may be reduced and/or withheld if theprojecthasnotmadesignificantprogressbythemutually agreed to milestones and/or deadlines.














Postma Halberstadt CR456/2007

I. That the Redevelopment Concept Plan for Little River Acres Park, attached hereto as Schedule ?A?, BE APPROVED; and

II. That the Parks and Facility Operations Department BE DIRECTED to implement Phases 1 through 4 of the Redevelopment Concept Plan in accordance with the Phasing Plan attached hereto as Schedule ?C?, using funds allocated in Project #7041913 (Little River Acres CIP Implementation); and

III. That the City Solicitor BE DIRECTED to seek acquisition of two (2) lots using existing parkland acquisition funds, for the purpose of creating pedestrian access at the South side of Little River Acres Park; and

IV. That the Parks and Facility Operations Department BE DIRECTED to proceed with an application for re-zoning of the east portion (2.3 acres) of the existing 10.5 acre park, as depicted in the design concept plan attached hereto as Schedule ?A?, inclusive of an additional public meeting.

Carried.

Report Number 13109 Z/7147 C1 APPENDICES Redevelopment Plan Phasing Plan Internal Distribution Planning [Chris Brown] Acting City Planner [Jim Yanchula] General Manager, Public Works Executive Director of Parks & Facility Operations General Manager, Community & Protective Services City Solicitor Chief Financial Officer and City Treasurer External Distribution

David Masse

Little River Acres Residents Assoc.

[email protected]




Subject: Application by the Registered Owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.) of 3311 Peter Street for an exemption from Demolition Control By-law 20-2007

and an application for Financial Incentives under the Sandwich Community Improvement Plan (Ward 2)

Moved by: Councillor Holt

Seconded by: Councillor Morrison


I. THAT the Chief Building Official BE AUTHORIZED to issue a demolition permit

to the registered owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.), under an Agreement of Purchase

and Sale, to demolish a one (1) storey single unit detached dwelling located at3311 Peter Street (see Appendix ‘A'), to construct a one (1) storey single familyresidential dwelling with a secondary suite when an executed Site Plan Control

Agreement has been registered on title with the appropriate securities to ensurethe redevelopment occurs within a specified time period to fulfill the conditions of

the Site Plan Control Agreement; and,

II. THAT any minor changes BE SUBJECT to the approval of the City Planner and

Chief Building Official at the time of issuance of the Building Permit; and,

III. THAT the Chief Building Official BE DIRECTED to require, as a condition of the

demolition permit:i. The Redevelopment identified in Appendix 'B' and Site Plan be

substantially complete within two (2) years following the issuance of thedemolition permit;

ii. If the redevelopment, including construction of a new building, is notsubstantially complete within two (2) years of the commencement of thedemolition the Clerk enter the sum of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000)

on the collectors roll of the property and prepare a certificate forregistration; and,

IV. THAT the City Solicitor BE DIRECTED to register the certificate in the land

registry office against the property; and,

V. THAT the request for incentives under the Sandwich Incentive Program made by

the registered owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.), of the property located at 3311Peter Street, BE APPROVED for the following programs:

Item No. 8.11


i. Development and Building Fees Grant for 100% of the Development and Building Fees identified in the Sandwich CIP (+/-$11,823.00);

ii. Revitalization Grant Program for 70% of the municipal portion of the tax increment for up to 10 years (+/-$1,561.00 per year); and,

VI. THAT the CAO and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to sign the Sandwich Incentive

Program Agreement for the Revitalization Grant in accordance with all applicable

policies, requirements, and provisions contained within the Olde Sandwich Towne Community Improvement Plan to the satisfaction of the City Planner as to

content, the City Solicitor as to legal form, and the CFO/City Treasurer as to financial implication; and,

VII. THAT grants approved SHALL LAPSE if the applicant has not completed the

work and fulfilled the conditions within 2 years of the approval date.

Carried. Report Number: S 69/2020

Clerk’s File: ZS/13670


the same.


Page 1 of 10


Subject: Application by the Registered Owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.) of

3311 Peter Street for an exemption from Demolition Control By-law 20-2007

and an application for Financial Incentives under the Sandwich Community

Improvement Plan (Ward 2)

Reference:


Author: Kevin Alexander, Senior Planner Special Projects

519-255-6543 ext. 6732 [email protected]

Planning & Building Services Report Date: April 28, 2020

Clerk’s File #: ZS/13670


Recommendation:

I. THAT the Chief Building Official BE AUTHORIZED to issue a demolition permit

to the registered owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.), under an Agreement of Purchase and Sale, to demolish a one (1) storey single unit detached dwelling located at

3311 Peter Street (see Appendix ‘A'), to construct a one (1) storey single family

residential dwelling with a secondary suite when an executed Site Plan Control Agreement has been registered on title with the appropriate securities to ensure

the redevelopment occurs within a specified time period to fulfill the conditions of the Site Plan Control Agreement;

II. THAT any minor changes be subject to the approval of the City Planner and

Chief Building Official at the time of issuance of the Building Permit;

III. THAT the Chief Building Official BE DIRECTED to require, as a condition of the

demolition permit:

i. The Redevelopment identified in Appendix 'B' and Site Plan be

substantially complete within two (2) years following the issuance of the demolition permit;

ii. If the redevelopment, including construction of a new building, is not substantially complete within two (2) years of the commencement of the demolition the Clerk enter the sum of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000)

on the collectors roll of the property and prepare a certificate for registration;


Page 2 of 10

IV. THAT the City Solicitor BE DIRECTED to register the certificate in the land

registry office against the property;

V. THAT the request for incentives under the Sandwich Incentive Program made by

the registered owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.), of the property located at 3311 Peter Street, BE APPROVED for the following programs:

i. Development and Building Fees Grant for 100% of the Development and Building Fees identified in the Sandwich CIP (+/-$11,823.00);

ii. Revitalization Grant Program for 70% of the municipal portion of the tax increment for up to 10 years (+/-$1,561.00 per year);

VI. THAT the CAO and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to sign the Sandwich Incentive

Program Agreement for the Revitalization Grant in accordance with all applicable

policies, requirements, and provisions contained within the Olde Sandwich Towne Community Improvement Plan to the satisfaction of the City Planner as to

content, the City Solicitor as to legal form, and the CFO/City Treasurer as to financial implication;

VII. THAT grants approved SHALL LAPSE if the applicant has not completed the

work and fulfilled the conditions within 2 years of the approval date.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

On January 26, 2009, City Council passed by-laws to establish the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Plan (By-law 22-2009), Olde Sandwich Towne Community Improvement Plan (By-law 27-2009), and Supplemental Development and Urban

Design Guidelines (By-law 28-2009). These By-laws came into effect on October 18, 2012. One of the key recommendations of the Olde Sandwich Towne Community

Improvement Plan (Sandwich CIP) is the implementation of the Incentive Program(s).

On June 17, 2013 through M265-2013 Council activated the following Incentive Programs from the Sandwich Incentive Program:

a) Commercial/Mixed Use Building Facade Grant Program

b) Revitalization Grant Program

c) Commercial Core Feasibility Grant Program

d) Development Charge Grant Program

e) Development and Building fees Grant Program

f) Neighbourhood Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program.


Page 3 of 10

On June 17, 2013 Council also received the Development Review Process for development applications within the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District (HCD)

area, and within the Sandwich Community Improvement Plan (CIP) Area (outside of the Sandwich HCD Area) (M264-2013).

Discussion:

On December 12, 2019, Julie Touma part principal of one of the registered owners

(from 1603965 Ontario Ltd.), who is the applicant under an Agreement of Purchase and Sale for the property located at 3311 Peter Street (See Appendix ‘A’ for location map), applied under the Sandwich Incentive Program for the purpose of constructing a one (1)

storey single family residential dwelling with a secondary suite. The owner has also applied for an exemption under Demolition Control By-law 20-2007 to demolish the

existing (1) storey single unit (according to Tax Assessment information) detached dwelling located at 3311 Peter Street.

The property is located within the Olde Sandwich Towne Community Improvement Plan

(Sandwich CIP) area, and for the purpose of financial incentives, located within Target Area 3. As per recent inspections conducted by the Building Department, the subject

property is in poor condition with extensive damage resulting from a fire, including structural openings in the roof, soffit, and exterior walls. The property has also been identified as being within an area of High Archaeological Potential, however an

Archaeological Study will not be required given the scope of the proposed redevelopment. The property is located outside of the Sandwich Heritage Conservation

District (HCD).

One of the general requirements of Section 10.3 q) of the Sandwich CIP requires that approval of any application for the financial incentive program is based on the

compatibility of the proposed use with the vision and goals of the CIP, the Sandwich Community Planning Study (CPS), and the Olde Sandwich Towne Supplemental

Development and Urban Design Guidelines (Sandwich Urban Design Guidelines) and any other guidelines applicable to the CIP area. The following identifies how this particular development addresses section 10.3 (q) of the CIP.

Sandwich Vision and Design Guidelines

The Sandwich CIP and CPS

The construction of the proposed building located at 3311 Peter Street is consistent with the Vision and Goals for Sandwich Town and addresses the following goals from the Sandwich CIP which were derived through the Sandwich CPS process:

Appearance and Community Image—the demolition of the existing single unit residential dwelling will provide sufficient lot coverage to construct a one (1) storey

single family residential dwelling with a secondary suite. This development will provide an opportunity to attract new residents to the area and also improve the visual appearance of the neighbourhood. The proposal will also provide additional residential

units while conforming to the neighbourhood character.

Sandwich CIP Urban Design Guidelines


Page 4 of 10

The proposed development is in keeping with the Sandwich Urban Design Guidelines, in terms of siting and scale, use of materials, proportion, height and built form, profile

and selection of materials. Assurance that the proposal will conform to Section 2.0 of the Sandwich Urban Design Guidelines will be carried out through the Site Plan Control process and approvals.

Exemption to Demolition Control By-law 20-2007

The existing (1) storey single unit detached dwelling located at 3311 Peter Street is

currently vacant and is best described to be in ‘Poor’ condition resulting from fire damage. Based on a visual inspection of the building exterior conducted by Building Department staff in December 2018, the dwelling has been observed to have extensive

fire damage, including structural openings in the roof, soffit, and exterior walls. As a result, an Order to Repair (#18-169009) was issued by the Building Department under

the City’s Property Standards By-law 147-2011. To date, the dwelling has been properly secured with boarding at all openings to address the safety concerns, however repairs to the defects identified in the Order to Repair remain outstanding as the owner intends

to demolish the dwelling and redevelop the site.

Section 3 of the Demolition Control By-law states that “...no person shall demolish the

whole or any part of any residential property in the area of demolition control unless the person is the holder of a demolition permit issued by the council...” The decision to issue (or not issue) a demolition permit is at City Council’s sole d iscretion.

Section 5 of the Demolition Control By-law states that “Council shall, on an application for a demolition permit, issue a demolition permit where a building permit has been issued to erect a new building on the site of the residential property to be demolished”

Section 6 states that a demolition permit may be issued on the following conditions:

(a) That the applicant for the demolition permit construct and substantially complete

the new building to be erected on the site of the residential property to be

demolished by not later than such date as may be determined by Council,

provided, however, that such date is not less than two years from the day

demolition of the existing residential property is commenced;

(b) that, on failure to complete the new building within the time specified in the permit

issued under Section 5, the Clerk shall be entitled to enter on the collectors roll,

to be collected in like manner as municipal taxes, such sum of money as may be

determined by Council but not in any case to exceed the sum of twenty

Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) for each dwelling unit contained in the residential

property in respect of which the demolition permit is issued, and such sum shall,

until payment thereof, be a lien or charge upon the land in respect of which the

permit to demolish the residential property is issued.

The applicant has indicated in their application that they intend to construct a one (1)

storey single family residential dwelling with a secondary suite that meets the intent of the Sandwich CIP Urban Design Guidelines. Processing this application is consistent


Page 5 of 10

with the recommendation of the Sandwich CIP regarding continuing to process Demolition Control By-law exemption requests.

The plan to demolish the existing one (1) storey single unit detached dwelling and to replace it by constructing a one (1) storey single family residential dwelling with a secondary suite is also in keeping with Section 1.27.12, Vol. II of the City’s Official Plan

regarding Demolition within the Olde Sandwich Towne Community Improvement Plan (CIP) area. The applicant will be required to submit the following prior to obtaining a

Building Permit to demolish:

(a) a plan for redevelopment in conformity with the Official Plan and Zoning By-law requirements (all plans will be reviewed to ensure compliance the Official Plan

and Zoning By-law),

(b) an executed Site Plan Control Agreement ; and

(c) appropriate securities to ensure the redevelopment occurs within a specified

time period and to fulfill the conditions of the Site Plan Control Agreement

Demolishing the existing one (1) storey single unit detached dwelling to construct a larger one (1) storey single family residential dwelling with a secondary suite provides additional residential units, improved living spaces for residents, and a visual

enhancement to the neighbourhood. The proposed improvements are consistent with the intent of the Demolition Control By-law.

Sandwich Incentive Program

The proposal is located within Target Area 3 of the Sandwich CIP Area and eligible for

the following Incentive programs. The eligible costs for each incentive program are based on the costs estimates provided by the applicant, as the project is implemented these costs could fluctuate slightly which could have a minor impact on the eligible costs

for each incentive program. The application is consistent with the general program requirements identified in Section 10.3 of the CIP, and with the following program

specific requirements:

Development and Building fees Grant Program

The purpose of the program is to provide an additional incentive to augment the other

incentive programs and to facilitate and spur adaptive re-use, redevelopment and new construction. The program provides a grant equal to 100% of the fees paid for the

eligible types of development applications and building permits. The applicant is required to apply for the following applications and pay the following fees which are eligible under this program:

Site Plan Control--$5,940.00

Building Permit(s)--$3,765.00;

Parkland Dedication--$1,815.00;

Demolition Permit(s)--$303.00


Page 6 of 10

TOTAL $11,823.00

Revitalization Grant Program

The purpose of this program is to use the tax increase that can result when a property is

rehabilitated, redeveloped, or developed to provide assistance in securing the project financing and offset some of the costs associated with the rehabilitation. The program

will provide an annual grant equal to 70% of the increase in City property taxes for 10 years after project completion as long as the project results in an increase in assessment and therefore an increase in property taxes. Based on the project

description and current value vs. estimated post-project assessment value of land and buildings identified in the Grant Application, the property assessment is expected to

increase.

The confirmed current value assessment of the subject property located at 3311 Peter Street is $53,000 (2019). The owner currently pays annual total property taxes of

$948.38 (based upon 2019 tax levies). The municipal portion, to which the grant would apply, is $863.05. The Applicant’s Estimated Post-Project Value of Land and Buildings

based on the cost of construction is $250,000. However, some of the proposed costs which will be incurred, although eligible for purposes of the application, may not result in a direct increase in assessment value. In other words, the grant is calculated and paid,

not on the post-project value or projections made in this report, but on the actual post-development value assessment, as determined by MPAC after project completion. The MPAC Post-Redevelopment Property Value Assessment for a similar property in the

vicinity (constructed in 2018) was $190,000. Given the similarity in scale and geographic area to the subject property, we project that the Estimated Post-

Redevelopment Property Value Assessment for 3311 Peter Street will be approx. $190,000. The grant will however be based upon the actual tax increment once the assessment has been determined by MPAC.

For illustrative purposes, the table below identifies the annual grant equal to 70% of the increase in City property taxes for 10 years after project completion, based on the

Current Value Assessment and the (projected) Estimated Post Project Assessment Value. The taxes retained by the City over the duration of the grant program is equal to a 30% increase of the tax increment. After completion of the grant program (10 years),

the City will collect the full value of municipal taxes ($3,094 annually).


Page 7 of 10

Estimated Grant Calculation - (3311 Peter Street)

Year of Grant

Pre Development Municipal Taxes

Post Development Municipal Taxes

Value of Grant (Tax Increment @ 70%)

Taxes

Retained by City

1* $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

2 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

3 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

4 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

5 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

6 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

7 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

8 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

9 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

10 $863 $3,094 $1,561 $1,533

Total $8,630 $30,940 $15,610 $15,330

* Year 1 commences after development is completed and the property has been reassessed by MPAC

Note: Totals include cents not shown above. The Value of Grant is 70% of the difference between the Post Development Municipal Taxes minus the Pre Development Municipal Taxes.

Assumptions

Current Property Value Assessment $53,000


Page 8 of 10

2019 Residential Tax Rate (municipal portion) 1.628394%

Current Municipal Tax Levy $863

Investment (Estimated Eligible Costs) $250,000

Estimated Post-Redevelopment Property Value Assessment $190,000

Estimated Post-Redevelopment Municipal Taxes $3,094

Property assessment values are assumed to remain constant throughout the period of the grant program for purposes of pro-forma calculations. Actual grant amounts will be calculated on an annual basis throughout the lifespan of the program and will be retroactive to date of completion, prorated for part year(s)

Risk Analysis:

The Building Department has not received nor conducted a review of the building plans

to confirm compliance with the Ontario Building Code and applicable law (e.g. zoning by-law). A review of the drawings will be conducted to ensure that the City’s incentives are being used appropriately and the City is receiving good value for the public

investment allocated through the Sandwich Incentive Program(s) “toolkit”. As a requirement of Section 28 (7.3) of the Planning Act, Administration has confirmed that

the Grant amount does not exceed the total cost of the project.

The Development and Building Fees Grant Program will not be disbursed until all work is completed and inspected by Administration as per the Site Plan Control Agreement

and Building Permit. The Revitalization Grant Program will not be dispersed until an agreement for the Sandwich Incentive Program have been registered on title between the owner and the City of Windsor and the property taxes for the applicable year paid.

There is little risk associated with approval of a tax increment-based grant such as the Revitalization Grant Program as the payments commence after the eligible work has

been completed and the property reassessed by MPAC, and will only continue if the development remains eligible in accordance with the Sandwich CIP. Should the development fail to meet its requirements under the CIP, grant payments would cease.

Financial Matters:

There is currently $674,909 in Account 7076176-Sandwich Community Development Plan to disperse the Development and Building Fees Grant identified in the table below

for this project. However, $382,756 has been pre-committed through other applications approved by City Council, leaving $292,153 in available funds for new commitments. If this report is approved, $280,330 will remain in the account. The Discussion Section of

this report also identifies which programs and how much of a grant the applicant is eligible for under the Sandwich Incentive (s) Program(s) “toolkit”


Page 9 of 10

Eligible Incentive Programs Grant

Development and Building Fees Grant

Note: Development and Building Fees are paid upfront by the applicant and these fees are approximate and can change at the time of Building Permit

$11,823.00

Revitalization Grant

*$1,561 per year between years 1 to 10 $15,610.00

Total $27,433.00

Except for the Revitalization Grant, the owner will be reimbursed through Account

7076176-Sandwich Community Development Plan. The Revitalization Grant is funded through the municipal portion of the annual tax levy.

Consultations:

The Planning and Building Department has consulted with the agent for 3311 Peter

Street through the Sandwich Incentive(s) Program application and all other aspects of the Development Review Process including the Site Plan Control Application. For the

purpose of determining grant amounts, Carolyn Nelson (Manager of Property Assessment, Taxation & Financial Projects) was consulted. The Office of the City Treasurer was consulted regarding annual Tax Assessment information and the

Estimated Post-Redevelopment Property Value Assessment. The Development and Building fees Grant were determined through consultation with Pablo Golob, Research

and Design Support Planner, and Enrique Silveyra, Customer Service Representative from the Planning and Building Department. Rob Vani, Manager of Inspections/Deputy CBO was consulted regarding the condition of the existing residential dwelling unit.

Conclusion:

The demolition of the existing residential dwelling unit located at 3311 Peter Street will provide sufficient lot area to allow the owner (1603965 Ontario Ltd.) to construct a one (1) storey single family residential dwelling with a secondary suite, thereby meeting the

intent of Demolition Control By-law 20-2007. The new residential development will also provide an opportunity to attract new residents to the neighbourhood and improve the

physical appearance of the area through the redevelopment of a derelict property. The incentive program application meets all of the eligibility criteria as identified in the


Page 10 of 10

Discussion section of this report and is compatible with the Sandwich Urban Design Guidelines.

There are sufficient funds in the Sandwich Community Development Plan Fund to provide the Development & Building Fees grant amount which has been applied for by the applicant for this project with the Revitalization Grant portion funded through the

municipal portion of the annual tax levy. Therefore, Administration recommends that the application request by the owner of 3311 Peter Street for incentives under the

Sandwich Incentive Program be approved. `


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title



John Revell Chief Building Official

Thom Hunt City Planner/Executive Director

Wira H.D. Vendrasco Deputy City Solicitor


Janice Guthrie Deputy Treasurer Taxation &Revenue Taxation & Financial Projects



Notifications:

Name Address Email

Julie Touma, 1641 Provincial Road, Windsor, ON N8W 5V7

[email protected]

1603965 Ontario Ltd. 2480 Skinner Street,

Windsor, ON N9H-2R5

Appendices:

1 Appendix A - LOCATION MAP & EXISTING CONDITIONS

2 Appendix B - PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT


APPENDIX ‘A’

LOCATION MAP & EXISTING CONDITIONS


GOOGLE STREETVIEW SEPTEMBER 2017


APPENDIX ‘B’

PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT








Subject: Close the Westerly 6.1m Portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard ROW and 4.87m wide East/West Alley, Abutting the Property Known as 7467 St.

Rose Avenue - Applicant: Glenn Murray - SAA/5550 - Ward 6

Moved by: Councillor Holt Seconded by: Councillor Sleiman


I. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of the existing Alley

Closure By-law 774 A between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle ViewBoulevard, south of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 1” and shown on DrawingNo. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE ASSUMED for subsequent closure;

and,

II. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of existing Alley ClosureBy-law 774A between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle View Boulevard, south

of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 1” and shown on Drawing No. CC -1733attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the applicant

subject to the following:

a) Easement subject to their being accepted in the City’s standard form andin accordance with the City’s standard practice, be granted to:

a. Bell Canada, Cogeco Connexion, and Enwin Utilities Ltd; andb) That the applicant enter an agreement with The Corporation of the City of

Windsor to purchase the portion of the alley shown as PART 1 on Drawing

No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”; and,

III. THAT Conveyance Cost for “Part 1” shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached asAppendix “A” BE SET for alleys abutting lands zoned Residential RD1.2 at $1.00

plus deed preparation fee and proportionate fee and proportionate share of the

survey costs as invoiced to The Corporation of the City of Windsor by an OntarioLand Surveyor; and,

IV. THAT the westerly 6.1m portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard right-of-way, southside of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 2” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE ASSUMED for subsequent closure; and,

V. THAT the westerly 6.1m portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard right-of-way, south

side of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 2” and shown on Drawing No. CC-

Item No. 8.12


1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the applicant


a) Easement, subject to their being accepted in the City’s standard form and in accordance with the City’s standard practice, be granted to:

a. Cogeco Connexion, Enbridge Gas and Enwin Utilities Ltd; and b) That the applicant enter an agreement with The Corporation of the City of

Windsor to purchase the portion of the right-of-way shown as PART 2 on

Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”; and,

VI. THAT Conveyance Cost for “Part 2” shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A” BE SET at $3,937 per front metre without easements and $1,969

per front metre with easements, survey cost included; and,

VII. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of the existing Alley Closure By-law 774 A between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle View

Boulevard, south of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 3” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE ASSUMED for subsequent closure;

and,

VIII. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of existing Alley Closure

By-law 774A between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle View Boulevard, south of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 3” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the owner of 7439

St. Rose Avenue subject to the following: a) Easement subject to their being accepted in the City’s standard form and

in accordance with the City’s standard practice, be granted to: a. Bell Canada, Cogeco Connexion, and Enwin Utilities Ltd; and

b) That the owner of 7439 St. Rose Avenue enter an agreement with The Corporation of the City of Windsor to purchase the portion of the alley shown as “Part 3” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as

Appendix “A”; and,

IX. THAT Conveyance Cost for Part 3 shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A” BE SET for alleys abutting lands zoned Residential RD1.2 at $1.00


survey costs as invoiced to The Corporation of the City of Windsor by an Ontario Land Surveyor; and,

X. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of existing Alley Closure

By-law 774A between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle View Boulevard, south

of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 4” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the owner of 921

Belle Isle View Boulevard subject to the following: a) Easement subject to their being accepted in the City’s standard form and

in accordance with the City’s standard practice, be granted to:

a. Bell Canada, Cogeco Connexion, and Enwin Utilities Ltd; and


b) That the owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard enter an agreement with The Corporation of the City of Windsor to purchase the portion of the alley

labelled as ”Part 4” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”; and,

XI. THAT Conveyance Cost for Part 4 shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as

Appendix “A” BE SET for alleys abutting lands zoned Residential RD1.2 at $1.00

plus deed preparation fee and proportionate fee and proportionate share of the survey costs as invoiced to The Corporation of the City of Windsor by an Ontario

Land Surveyor; and,

XII. THAT the owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard ENTER an agreement with

The Corporation of the City of Windsor to purchase their half of the north/south alley closed by By-law RVSD 958 labelled as ”Part 5” and shown on Drawing No.

CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”; and,

XIII. THAT Conveyance Cost for Part 5 shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A” BE SET for alleys abutting lands zoned Residential RD1.2 at $1.00


survey costs as invoiced to The Corporation of the City of Windsor by an Ontario Land Surveyor; and,

XIV. THAT The City Planner BE REQUESTED to supply the appropriate legal

description, in accordance with Drawing No. CC-1733, attached as Appendix “A”;

and,

XV. THAT the owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard BE REQUESTED to obtain a

permit to maintain the driveway approach to City Standard AS-221 or AS-222, upon closure and acquisition of Part 4 as shown on Drawing No. CC-1733; and,

XVI. THAT The City Solicitor BE REQUESTED to prepare the necessary by-law(s);

and,

XVII. THAT The Chief Administrative Officer and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to sign

all necessary documents approved as to form and content satisfactory to the City

Solicitor; and,

XVIII. THAT the matter BE COMPLETED electronically pursuant to By-law Number

336-2003. Carried.

Report Number: S 227/2019 Clerk’s File: SAA2020


the same.


Page 1 of 20


Subject: Close the Westerly 6.1m Portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard ROW, Abutting the Property Known as 7467 St. Rose Avenue and Close the 4.87m wide East/West Alley between Belle Isle View Boulevard and Fairview Boulevard South of St. Rose Avenue and Purchase a Portion of the Closed North/South Alley between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle View Boulevard, South of St. Rose Avenue - Applicant: Glenn Murray - SAA/5550 - Ward 6

Reference:

Date to Council: 6/8/2020 Author: Christopher Aspila MCIP, RPP Senior Planner - Policy & Special Studies

Phone: 519-255-6543 x6446 Planning & Building Services

Report Date: 11/22/2019 Clerk’s File #: SAA2019


Recommendation:

I. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of the existing Alley

Closure By-law 774 A between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle View

Boulevard, south of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 1” and shown on Drawing

No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE ASSUMED for subsequent closure;

II. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of existing Alley Closure


of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 1” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733

attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the applicant


a) Easement subject to their being accepted in the City’s standard form and



b) That the applicant enter an agreement with The Corporation of the City of

Windsor to purchase the portion of the alley shown as PART 1 on Drawing

No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”;


Page 2 of 20

III. THAT Conveyance Cost for “Part 1” shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as



survey costs as invoiced to The Corporation of the City of Windsor by an Ontario

Land Surveyor;

IV. THAT the westerly 6.1m portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard right-of-way, south

side of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 2” and shown on Drawing No. CC -

1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE ASSUMED for subsequent closure;

V. THAT the westerly 6.1m portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard right-of-way, south

side of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 2” and shown on Drawing No. CC-

1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the applicant


a) Easement, subject to their being accepted in the City’s standard form and


a. Cogeco Connexion, Enbridge Gas and Enwin Utilities Ltd; and

b) That the the applicant enter an agreement with The Corporation of the City

of Windsor to purchase the portion of the right-of-way shown as PART 2

on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”;

VI. THAT Conveyance Cost for “Part 2” shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as

Appendix “A” BE SET at $3,937 per front metre without easements and $1,969

per front metre with easements, survey cost included;

VII. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of the existing Alley

Closure By-law 774 A between Fairview Boulevard and Belle Isle View

Boulevard, south of St. Rose Avenue, labelled as “Part 3” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”, BE ASSUMED for subsequent closure;

VIII. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of existing Alley Closure



attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the owner of 7439

St. Rose Avenue subject to the following:




b) That the owner of 7439 St. Rose Avenue enter an agreement with The

Corporation of the City of Windsor to purchase the portion of the alley


Page 3 of 20

shown as “Part 3” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as

Appendix “A”;

IX. THAT Conveyance Cost for Part 3 shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as




Land Surveyor;

X. THAT the portion of the 4.87m wide east/west alley east of existing Alley Closure



attached as Appendix “A”, BE CLOSED AND CONVEYED to the owner of 921

Belle Isle View Boulevard subject to the following:




b) That the owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard enter an agreement with

The Corporation of the City of Windsor to purchase the portion of the alley

labelled as ”Part 4” and shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as

Appendix “A”;

XI. THAT Conveyance Cost for Part 4 shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as




Land Surveyor;

XII. THAT the owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard ENTER an agreement with

The Corporation of the City of Windsor to purchase their half of the north/south

alley closed by By-law RVSD 958 labelled as ”Part 5” and shown on Drawing No.

CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”;

XIII. THAT Conveyance Cost for Part 5 shown on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as




Land Surveyor;

XIV. THAT The City Planner BE REQUESTED to supply the appropriate legal

description, in accordance with Drawing No. CC-1733, attached as Appendix “A”;


Page 4 of 20

XV. THAT the owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard BE REQUESTED to obtain a

permit to maintain the driveway approach to City Standard AS-221 or AS-222,

upon closure and acquisition of Part 4 as shown on Drawing No. CC-1733;

XVI. THAT The City Solicitor BE REQUESTED to prepare the necessary by-law(s);

XVII. THAT The Chief Administrative Officer and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to sign

all necessary documents approved as to form and content satisfactory to the City

Solicitor; and

XVIII. THAT the matter BE COMPLETED electronically pursuant to By-law Number

336-2003.

Executive Summary:

N/A

BACKGROUND:

On May 17, 2018, Mr. Glenn Murray applied to close “the alley south of Lots 5 & 6 and portion of Belle Isle View west of sidewalk abutting Lot 6” as shown on the aerial photo

attached as Appendix “B”. The City’s EIS confirms that Glenn Murray and Sara Murray are owners of the property at the southwest corner of St. Rose and Belle Isle View,

abutting the subject areas of closure, municipally known as 7467 St. Rose Ave.

The applicant provided the following reason for requesting the closure of the subject portion of Belle Isle View Boulevard:

“Excess easement west of sidewalk on Belle Isle View. I wish to properly landscape and properly grade the property to avoid flooding. Additionally, with the acquisition of the redundant City easement my property line will match the lot line of neighbours to the north and south on the west

side of Belle Isle View. I have reviewed this request with the Engineering & Legal Departments. In the future I plan on an addition to my home and I would like ample property for coverage.”

Administration identified encroachment issues at neighbouring properties on the subject

east/west alley, the abutting east/west alley closed by By-law 774A and, the abutting north/south alley closed by Town of Riverside By-law 958. It is noted that this

north/south alley while closed, had not been purchased by an owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard. To avoid the creation of a remnant portion of City of Windsor owned alley without direct property access, Administration is requiring the purchase of this

portion of alley to be a condition of the applicant’s alley and right-of-way closure request.

In response to Administration’s concerns about creating a remnant portion of alley, the Planning Division contacted, the applicant, the owner of 7439 St. Rose Avenue and the owner of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard to confirm that they agree in writing to purchase

their respective portions of alley(s) and right-of-way should Council agree to Administration’s recommendations in this report.


Page 5 of 20

DISCUSSION:

There are three components to this application:

1. The east/west alley shown as Part 1, Part 3 and Part 4 on Drawing No. CC-1733;

2. The portion of the Belle Isle View Boulevard right-of-way shown as Part 2 on Drawing No. CC-1733; and

3. The existing north/south alley closure shown as Part 5 on Drawing No. CC-1733.

The following two Aerial Maps from the City’s EIS help provide additional context to the subject area of application.

The 2015 EIS photo shows the three components of the application. The open

east/west alley south of 7467 St. Rose and a portion of 7439 St. Rose and north of 921 Belle Isle View contains utilities and serves no municipal purposes.


Page 6 of 20

The Belle Isle View right-of-way abutting the applicant’s property is a municipal sidewalk. A 1917 survey, RP Plan 835, shows the width of the ROW as 34m, measured

from the east lot line of 7467 St. Rose to the west lot line of 7529 St. Rose. There appears to be no other municipal services located within the subject area, except the sidewalk. Therefore, it appears reasonable to conclude that extra wide ROW at the

subject location was meant to accommodate the public sidewalk.

The north/south alley abutting 921 Belle Isle View was closed by Town of Riverside By-

law 958 and was left as a remnant portion of the alley that was not purchased by property owners.

By 2017, there had been some changes to both the east/west alley and to the subject

ROW as shown in the above 2017 EIS photo. A large tree south of the dwelling at 7467 St. Rose that was partially located in the alley had been removed. The public sidewalk is relocated easterly, away from the applicant’s property, to line up with the sidewalk

next south and there appears to be no other municipal purpose for the extra 6.10m width of the Belle Isle View ROW. No changes were observed in the previously closed

section of the north/south alley to the rear of 921 Belle Isle View.


Page 7 of 20

The subject land is zoned Residential District 1.2 (RD1.2) by Zoning By-law 8600, and the RD1.2 zoning permits the following uses per building lot: One single-unit dwelling;

an existing duplex dwelling or existing semi-detached dwelling; and any use accessory to the foregoing uses.

The minimum building lot size for a single unit dwelling in the RD1.2 Zoning District is 9

metres (minimum lot width) and 360 square metres (minimum lot area).

The width of the subject area of closure is 6.10m (); therefore, the area of closure, by

itself, is NOT a buildable lot. The applicant has also stated that the reason for requesting the closure is to increase his property size to accommodate a future expansion of the existing building at 7467 St. Rose Avenue.

There are encroachments on the portion of the east/west alley between 7467 St. Rose Avenue and 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard as well as at 7439 St. Rose Avenue as

shown as Part 3 on Drawing No. CC-1733 attached as Appendix “A”. It is noted that a building permit was issued in 1980 for the garage at 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard that is encroaching in the east/west alley.

Planning Department’s analysis of the requested right-of-way and alley closures:

The first test is to determine whether the subject right-of-way and alley are dispensable.

To make such determination the guideline attached herein as Appendix “E” would be relevant as shown below:

a. Does the subject alley serve commercial properties?

The answer is NO.

b. Does the subject alley serve properties fronting on heavily traveled streets i.e. major arterial routes?

The answer is NO.

c. Does the subject alley contain sewers, and must the alley remain accessible for

servicing?

The answer is NO.

d. Does the subject alley serve as the only vehicular means of access to rear

parking areas and garages where the property has insufficient lot width for a side drive?

The answer is NO.

e. Does the subject alley contain Fire Department connections that are deemed to be necessary for firefighting access?

The answer is NO.

Based on the above, the Planning Division deems the portion of the Belle Isle View

right-of-way shown as “Part 2” on Drawing No. CC-1733 and the portion of the


Page 8 of 20

east/west alley south of St. Rose Avenue as “Part 1”, “Part 3” and “Part 4” on Drawing CC-1733 as “Dispensable”.

The portion of the north/south alley labelled as “Part 5” on Drawing No. CC-1733 was closed by former Town of Riverside By-law 958. Since the closure of this alley the owners and previous owners of 921 Belle Isle View did not purchase this portion of alley

and it has remained as a closed alley under the ownership of the former Town of Riverside and then after amalgamation, the City of Windsor. Upon review of this

application Administration observed that a remnant portion of City of Windsor owned alley would remain behind 921 Belle Isle View without public access. It was further noted that encroachments exist on this portion of closed alley.

In January 2020, Administration contacted the applicant to advise that the City of Windsor would support the application if all three components of the right-of-way and

the two alleys were closed. This would eliminate the risk the City of Windsor owning a remnant portion of closed alley without direct public access. Subsequently, the Planning Division in consultation with Legal and Real Estate Services contacted the

owners of 7467 St. Rose, 7439 St. Rose and 921 Belle Isle View by registered letter advising that in order to proceed with the application the City of Windsor needed all

parties agree to purchase the portions of alley or right-of-way subject to Council approval that corresponded to their respective properties.

By the end of February 2020, Administration had received written responses from all of

the property owners agreeing to the City of Windsor’s request and Administration could begin to proceed with processing the application as described above.

Administration’s recommendations are to close and convey the subject right-of-way and

alley to the corresponding property owners as indicated in the Recommendations section of this report.

RISK ANALYSIS:

The recommended closures will divest the City of associated liability risks and

maintenance costs.

FINANCIAL MATTERS:

The conveyance price for Part 2 as shown in Appendix “A” is set at $3,937 a front metre

without easements and $1,969 a front metre with easements, survey cost included.

The conveyance price for Part 1, Part 3, Part 4 and, Part 5 as shown in Appendix “A”

that are zoned RD1.2 is set at $1.00 plus deed preparation fee and proportionate share

of the survey cost as invoiced to The Corporation of the City of Windsor by an Ontario

Land Surveyor.


Page 9 of 20

CONSULTATIONS:

Consultations were held with City Administrative Departments and Utility Companies,

which resulted in the information outlined in Appendix “C” attached.

There were no objections from all of the municipal departments and all of the external

agencies contacted.

Engineering Division requires the owner of 921 Bell Isle View Boulevard to obtain a permit to maintain the driveway approach to City Standard AS-221 or AS-222.

Easements are requested by Bell Canada, Cogeco Connexion, Enbridge Gas and Enwin Utilities Ltd and are included as necessary in the corresponding

recommendations section of this report. MNSi initially requested easements and subsequently informed the Planning Division that they would no longer require easements for their services.

Notice of Development & Heritage Standing Committee meeting and Council meeting are published in the Windsor Star prior to each of the meetings. In addition, notice of

each of the public meetings will be mailed to any abutting/affected property owners prior to the meetings.

CONCLUSION:

The Planning Division recommends closure of the portion of the east/west alley shown

as “Part 1”, “Part 3” and “Part 4” on attached Appendix “A”, subject to easements as in

Recommendations II, VIII and X of this report in favour of Bell Canada, Cogeco

Connexion and Enwin Utilities.

The Planning Division recommends closure of the portion of the Belle Isle View Boulevard shown as “Part 2” on attached Appendix “A”, subject to easements as in

Recommendation V of this report in favour of Cogeco Connexion, Enbridge Gas and Enwin Utilities.

The Planning Division recommends sale of the portion of the previously closed

north/south alley shown as “Part 5” on Appendix “A” to the abutting property owner as in Recommendations XII and XIII of this report.

The closed portions of the east/west alley and Belle Isle View right-of-way are to be conveyed to the abutting property owners as in Recommendations II, V, VIII and X of this report.


N/A


Page 10 of 20

Approvals:

Name Title

Michael Cooke Manager of Planning Policy/Deputy City Planner

Thom Hunt City Planner / Executive Director Planning & Building


Shelby Askin Hager

City Solicitor and Corporate Leader Economic Development and Public Safety


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Councillor Jo-Anne Gignac City Hall Square W., Suite 220, Windsor Ontario N9A 6S1

[email protected]

Applicant:

Glenn Murray

7467 St. Rose Avenue,

Windsor, Ontario

N8S 1Y4

[email protected]

Joseph White and Kelly

Gherasim

921 Belle Isle View Boulevard,

Windsor, Ontario N8S 3G6

Douglas Paul Noble and Moira Lynn Noble

7439 St. Rose Avenue, Windsor, Ontario N8S 1Y4

Philip Desjardins 924 Fairview Boulevard,

Windsor, Ontario N8S 3E7

Appendices:

1. Appendix “A” – Drawing CC-1733

2. Appendix “B” – Aerial Photo 3. Appendix “C” – Consultations Table

4. Appendix “D” – Site Visit Photos 5. Appendix “E” – Classification of Alleys and Suitability for Closure


Page 11 of 20

Appendix ‘A’ – Drawing No. CC-1733


Page 12 of 20

Appendix ‘B’ – Aerial Photo


Page 13 of 20

Appendix ‘C’ – Consultations Table

Agency Comments

Fire and Rescue Services No concerns

Windsor Police Services The Windsor Police Service has no concerns or objections with this application. The nature of it and the expected

outcome from the closure will not create any discernible public safety issues.

Planning – Landscape Architect No objections

Parks & Facilities No objections

Public Works – Engineering The subject alley closure is approximately 4.87m wide, appears to be untraveled and composed of grass. The subject

portion of street closure is approximately 7.01m wide, appears to be untraveled and composed mostly of grass. There are no municipal sewers or manholes located in the closure.

There are hydro poles, utilities, guy wires and a Bell pedestal within the closure. An easement will be required for the

utilities. Also, there appears to be fences encroaching with the closure. The driveway approach for 921 Belle Isle View Blvd encroaches into the alley. A permit will be required by the

owner of 921 Belle Isle View to maintain the driveway approach to City Standard AS-221or AS-222. This alley and right-of-way appears to serve no useful purpose; therefore we

have no objections to the closure

Public Works – Environmental No concerns

Public Works – Transportation

Recommend keeping the right of way up to the front of the

house to maintain sightlines and for future road realignment or reconfigurations

Transit Windsor No comments received.

Bell Canada No easement required

Cogeco Cable Systems Inc. Easement protection required

Canada Post No comments received.

Rogers Communications No comments received.

Telus Communications No infrastructure in the area


Page 14 of 20

MNSi MNSi initially requested an easement however upon second

circulation no longer requires an easement.

EnWin Utilities – Hydro No Objection, however an easement named EnWin Ultilities Ltd. May be required in the S/W alley ( if closing) to

accommodate the existing overhead 120/240V hydro service.

Windsor Utilities – Water No objections

Enbridge Easement required along the Belle Isle View Blvd right-of-way.

Legal Department The conveyance price for PART 2 as shown in Appendix “A”

is set at $3,937 a front metre without easements and $1,969 a front metre with easements, survey cost included.

The conveyance price for PART 1, PART 3, PART 4 and, PART 5 as shown in Appendix “A” that are zoned RD1.2 is

set at $1.00 plus deed preparation fee and proportionate share of the survey cost as invoiced to The Corporation of the City of Windsor by an Ontario Land Surveyor.

Not withstanding the City’s current practice of dividing alleys evenly (half to each owner), the new property line should

align with the location of the driveway of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard.

OTHER:


Page 15 of 20

Appendix ‘D’ – Site Visit Photos

1. Looking north up Belle Isle View Boulevard towards St. Rose Avenue from south

of 921 Belle Isle View Boulevard.


Page 16 of 20

2. Looking west down the east/west alley from the intersection of the alley and the Belle Isle View sidewalk on the west side of Belle Isle View Boulevard.


Page 17 of 20

3. Looking southwest towards the alley across 7467 St. Rose Avenue from the west sidewalk along Belle Isle View Boulevard.


Page 18 of 20

4. Looking south along the west side of Belle Isle View Boulevard at the intersection with St. Rose Avenue from the northwest corner of the intersection.


Page 19 of 20

5. Looking south between 7467 St. Rose Avenue and 7439 St. Rose Avenue towards the closed north-south alley.


Page 20 of 20

Appendix ‘E’ – Classification of Alleys and Suitability for Closure

Classification of Public Rights-of-Ways:

Currently streets and alleys fall into four classifications on the basis of their usefulness:

(1) Alleys that are indispensable. These would be alleys serving commercial properties and properties fronting on heavily traveled streets i.e. major arterial routes and alleys which contain

sewers and must remain accessible for servicing; alleys or streets which serve as the only vehicular means of access to rear parking areas and garages where the property has insufficient lot width for a side drive; and, alleys which contain Fire Department connections that are deemed

to be necessary for firefighting access.

(2) Alleys that, have some usefulness, are nevertheless dispensable and may or may not be a complete liability.

(3) Alleys that appear to serve no useful purpose, either now, or anticipated. Such alleys are in residential areas and locations where generally the lots are wide enough for side drives, or

those alleys abutting parks and other parcels of land that do not require any servicing from the alley. Remnant or stub-end streets which are dead-ended and do not serve as access to other streets.

(4) Alleys lying in Holding zones and other similar undeveloped areas where the alley system is clearly obsolete and has never been developed, but where the City needs to keep its

options open until new area plans are prepared and development is imminent.

Suitability for Closing:

Following are the criteria and suitability for closing alleys in each of the above classifications.

Indispensable alleys should not be closed, conveyed, reduced or otherwise jeopardized

through minority interests unless a suitable substitute alley is opened in lieu thereof. They are essential from the viewpoint of fire protection, police protection, emergency

services (i.e. ambulance) and loading or unloading of goods, refuse collection, servicing of blocked sewers and utility services. Without such alleys, the above noted services would at least be more costly if not impossible to complete or adequately access; and

would noticeably interfere with street traffic, thereby reducing the access capacity of the adjacent arterial, collector, or street for business.

Alleys having some usefulness should be considered for closing only upon request of abutting owners rather than by encouragement of the City.

Alleys that serve no useful purpose should be closed if at all possible, and in fact the owners abutting thereon should be encouraged to accept conveyance.

Alleys that are clearly obsolete should not be closed unless there is a municipal need or specific development proposals acceptable to the City are submitted.



Subject: Minutes of the International Relations Committee of its meeting held February 26, 2020

Moved by: Councillor Morrison

Seconded by: Councillor Holt


THAT the minutes of the International Relations Committee of its meeting held February 26, 2020 BE RECEIVED for information.

Carried.

Report Number: SCM 97/2020 Clerk’s File: MB2020

Clerk’s Note: The recommendation of the Standing Committee and Advisory

Committee are the same.

Item No. 8.13



Subject: Minutes of the International Relations Committee of its meeting held February 26, 2020


International Relations Committee Meeting held February 26, 2020

A meeting of the International Relations Committee is held this day commencing at 3:30 o’clock p.m. in Room 204, 350 City Hall Square West, there being present the following members: Councillor Fred Francis, Chair Councillor Fabio Costante Councillor Gary Kaschak Councillor Ed Sleiman Jerry Barycki Ronnie Haidar William Ma Steven Spagnuolo L.T. Zhao Regrets received from: Daniel Ableser

Maria Belenkova Scott Despins Also present are the following resource personnel: Sandra Gebauer, Council Assistant Cathy Masterson, Manager of Cultural Affairs Karen Kadour, Committee Coordinator 1. Call to Order The Chair calls the meeting to order at 3:30 o’clock p.m. and the Committee considers the Agenda being Schedule A attached hereto, matters which are dealt with as follows: Addition to the Agenda Moved by Councillor Kaschak, seconded by Councillor Costante, That Rule 3.3 (c) of the Procedure By-law 98-2011 be waived to add the following additions to the Agenda:


International Relations Committee February 26, 2020 Meeting Minutes

Page 2 of 5

5.6 Fujisawa Mayor Election held on February 16, 2020 Carried. 2. Declaration of Conflict None disclosed. 3. Minutes Moved by Councillor Kaschak, seconded by Councillor Costante, That the minutes of the International Relations Committee of its meeting held November 27, 2019 BE ADOPTED as presented. Carried. 4. Business Items

4.2 Draft Letter to the Twin Cities on behalf of the Windsor-Essex Regional

Chamber of Commerce

The draft letter to be sent to the Twin Cities on behalf of the Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce is distributed and attached as Appendix “A”.

Moved by Councillor Costante, seconded by Councillor Sleiman,

That the draft letter to be sent to the Twin Cities on behalf of the Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce BE APPROVED.

Carried. 4.3 2020 Children’s Art Exchange

S. Gebauer advises an e-mail from Gunsan, South Korea was received with an inquiry asking whether the Children’s Art Exchange will once again be held in 2020. It is generally agreed the Children’s Art Exchange will be held in the Summer 2020. Moved by L. T. Zhao, seconded by R. Haidar, That the Children’s Art Exchange BE HELD in the Summer 2020. Carried.

4.1 Discussion regarding Options for a Sister City Initiative

City Council at its meeting held February 24, 2020 adopted CR99/2020, an excerpt of which follows:



Page 3 of 5

“That the International Relations Committee BE REQUESTED to review the $25,000 commitment for the You + Me sculpture project due to the updated information regarding the $50,000 financial commitment to this project by the Rotary Club or Windsor-Roseland; That the International Relations Committee RECONSIDER committing $25,000 in the You + Me sculpture project; and further, That, in the absence of the International Relations Committee reconsidering a $25,000 financial commitment, the International Relations Committee REPORT BACK to Council with their plan for the $25,000 that was previously committed to the You & Me sculpture project”. The Chair refers the Committee to the photographs of the Sister Cities posts located in San Francisco and Los Angeles. L. T. Zhao states that as part of a delegation to Gunsan, he viewed the Sister City Charter enclosed in a glass case in their city hall and children’s art on ceramic tiles which was very impressive. R. Haidar expresses concern there is not an area designated to showcase the City of Windsor’s relationship with the Sister Cities. C. Masterson indicates the Sister Cities Post monuments could be located at City Hall. The Chair proposes two possible projects to be funded by the previous conditional commitment of $25,000 for the sculpture project as follows:

Sister City Post with directional signs denoting the names of the Sister Cities

Permanent exhibit at City Hall which would display all of the Sister City Charters as well as some of the artifacts previously donated.

Moved by Councillor Kaschak, seconded by S. Spagnuolo, That APPROVAL BE GIVEN to an expenditure in the upset amount of $5,000 for the You + Me Sculpture Project and in lieu of the $25,000 conditional commitment for the Sculpture Project, that Administration BE REQUESTED to report back on the costs associated with the Sister Cities Post and options for a permanent twin city exhibit at City Hall. Carried. 5. Communications

5.1 Letter from the Changchun Foreign Affairs Office – Request for Medical Supplies



Page 4 of 5

A quote from Maxim Medical outlining the cost for the purchase of masks, eye

protective goggles, coveralls and gloves is distributed and attached as Appendix “B”. The Chair encourages the IRC to participate in this initiative and to provide medical

supplies to Changchun. Moved by Councillor Sleiman, seconded by Councillor Costante, That APPROVAL BE GIVEN to an expenditure in the upset amount of $2,000

(including shipping) for costs associated with the purchase of medical supplies to be sent to Changhun, China and further, that Administration BE REQUESTED to liaise with the Mayor’s Office regarding this initiative.

Carried. 5.6 Fujisawa Mayor Election held on February 16, 2020 A communique from the Policy Planning Department, Fujisawa City Hall and a

congratulatory letter to Mayor Tsuneo Suzuki on his re-election from Mayor Dilkens is distributed and attached as Appendix “C”.

5.4 Invitation to attend a Business Meeting with a delegation from Lublin in

Toronto on February 26, 2020 J. Barycki advises he will be attending the Business Meeting in Toronto along with

a representative from the Windsor Essex Economic Development Corporation on February 27, 2020.

5.5 Notes from Meeting on strengthening the cooperation as partners between

Windsor and Lublin – December 2019 J. Barycki states Krzysztof Zuk, Mayor of the City of Lublin, Lech Sprawka,

Lubelskie Voivode, and Zbigniew Wojciechowski, Vice Marshal of the Lubelski Voivodeship, emphasized the significance of the good relations of our cities as well as a desire to strengthen the cooperation as partners.

5.3 2020 Children’s Art Exchange S. Gebauer reports a request has been received for a delegation from Gunsan to

attend the Bluesfest Event in Windsor in July 2020.



Page 5 of 5

The Chair requests Administration contact Yi Yeongiu, International Cooperation Section, Gunsan City to gather further information, i.e. dates, delegation numbers and to report back.

6. New Business J. Barycki refers to the letter to Honourable Krzysztof Zuk, President of the City of

Lublin regarding the 20th Anniversary of the Windsor-Lublin partnership in 2020. He adds it will also be the 25th Anniversary of the Polish-Canadian Business and Professional Association of Windsor.

Moved by J. Barycki, seconded by Councillor Kaschak, That as the year 2020 will mark the 20th Anniversary of the Windsor-Lublin

partnership and the 40th Anniversary of the Windsor-Mannheim partnership, that the Office of the Mayor BE REQUESTED to extend an invitation for a delegation from Lublin to visit the City of Windsor in November 2020 and for a delegation for Mannheim, Germany to visit the City of Windsor on a date to be determined.

Carried. 7. Date of Next Meeting The next meeting will be held at the call of the Chair. 8. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting is adjourned at 4:25 o’clock p.m.

_____________________________

CHAIR

_____________________________ COMMITTEE COORDINATOR







Subject: EWSWA Annual Report - Essex-Windsor Residential Waste Diversion 2019 (dated March 31, 2020)

Moved by: Councillor McKenzie

Seconded by: Councillor Kaschak

Decision Number: ETPS 766

THAT the Essex Windsor Solid Waste Authority (EWSWA) Annual Report - Essex-Windsor Residential Waste Diversion 2019 BE APPROVED as presented.

Carried.

Report Number: SCM 175/2020

Clerk’s File: MB2020

Item No. 8.14



Subject: EWSWA Annual Report - Essex-Windsor Residential Waste Diversion 2019 (dated March 31, 2020)


Essex-Windsor Residential Waste Diversion 2019 Report Date: March 31, 2020



Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Residential Waste Diversion Rate 2019 1 2 PROGRAMS 2

2.1 Residential Recycling Blue Box Program 2 Table 1: Residential Recycling Blue Box Collection Tonnes by Month Comparison: 2018 with 2019 3

2.2 Recycling Residual Disposal 3 3 TONNES MARKETED 3

Figure 1: Percent of Tonnes for 2019 Marketed Recyclables 4 3.1 Fibres 4

Old Newspaper (ONP) 4 Old Corrugated Cardboard (OCC) 5 Hardpack 5 Fine Paper 5 Loose Fibre 5

3.2 Containers 5 Steel Cans 5 Aluminum Cans and Foil 6 Glass 6 Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 6 High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) 6 Polycoat and Gable Top 6 Mixed Plastics 7 Table 2: Marketed Fibres Summary Comparison: 2018 versus 2019 7 Table 3: Marketed Containers Summary Comparison: 2018 versus 2019 7 Table 4: Residential Recyclables Marketed Comparison: 2018 versus 2019 8 Table 5: Revenue Comparison: 2018 versus 2019 8 Table 6: Annual Revenue Comparison 9 Figure 2: Percent of Revenue Marketed in 2019 9

3.3 Markets 10 4 OTHER RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROGRAMS 11

4.1 White Goods 11 Table 7: Summary of White Goods Diversion for 2019 11 Table 8: 2019 White Goods Collected by Month in Municipalities across Essex County 12

4.2 Tires 13 4.3 Scrap Metal 13


4.4 Electronics Recycling 13 4.5 Deposit/Return Program 14

Table 9: Other Recyclables Comparison: 2018 versus 2019 14 5 Residential Organics 14 5.1 Yard Waste 14

Table 10: 2019 Yard Waste Summary for all sites 15 Table 11: Yard Waste Tonnes Comparison: 2018 versus 2019 15

5.2 Screened Compost Sales 15 Table 12: Compost Sales 2019 Summary 16

5.3 Backyard Composting 16 Table 13: Residential Organic Waste Reduction Comparison: 2017 — 2019 17

6 PROMOTION AND EDUCATION 17

6.1 School and Community Presentations 17 6.2 Special Community Events 17 6.3 On-going Public Education Activities 17 6.4 Gold Star Program 18 7 MUNICIPAL HAZARDOUS OR SPECIAL WASTES (MHSW) PROGRAM 19

7.1 MHSW Depots 19 Reuse Centre 19 Mercury Roundup Program 20 Table 14: Municipal Hazardous or Special Waste for 2019 in Litres 20 Table 15: Municipal Hazardous or Special Waste for 2019 in Kilograms 21 Table 16: MHSW Diversion Comparison: 2018 versus 2019 21

7.2 Waste Motor Oil 21 Table 17: Motor Oil Collected (Litres) 2016 through 2019 22

8 OVERALL SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL DIVERSION QUANTITIES 22

8.1 Residential Waste Diversion 22 Table 18: Residential Waste Diversion Activity 22

This document is formatted for accessibility and available in other formats upon request.


Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority Page 1

Essex-Windsor Residential Waste Diversion Annual Report for January – December 2019

1 Introduction The Annual Waste Diversion Report provides information on the waste diversion activities carried out by the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority during 2019 in compliance with Condition 5.2 of the Environmental Assessment Approval for the Essex-Windsor Regional Landfill.

1.1 Residential Waste Diversion Rate 2019 This report also provides the Authority with the ability to track any changes in the percentage of waste diverted through its waste diversion initiatives from year to year.

In 2019, the seven County of Essex municipalities and the City of Windsor delivered 102,452 tonnes of residential waste to the Regional Landfill. During the same time period, 56,047 tonnes of residential waste were diverted from the landfill via the blue and red box recycling program, municipal hazardous or special waste program, composting, and other waste diversion programs. These waste diversion initiatives resulted in a 2019 residential diversion rate of 34.4%. The 2018 diversion rate was 36.3%.


Residential Waste Diversion 2019 Report


2 Programs

2.1 Residential Recycling Blue Box Program The tonnes of residential recyclable materials collected curbside during 2019 totaled 25,426 tonnes. The overall tonnes of recyclables collected in 2019 were slightly lower compared to the 26,011 tonnes collected in 2018.

A monthly summary and comparison of the tonnes collected curbside from the City and the County in 2018 and 2019 is shown in Table 1. Collection of recyclables in the County was carried out under contract in 2019 by Windsor Disposal Services Ltd. Collection of recyclables in Windsor was carried out by Green For Life Environmental Inc.

All materials were processed at the Authority owned Essex-Windsor Material Recovery Facility (MRF), located at E.C. Row and Central Avenue in Windsor where Windsor Disposal Services via contract process delivered materials.

In addition to the residential recyclables collected curbside, 495 tonnes of recyclables were delivered to the Authority’s Public Drop Off Depots in 2019. This is down 33% from 2018 where 735 tonnes were delivered.




Table 1: Residential Recycling Blue Box Collection Tonnes by Month Comparison: 2018 with 2019

Month 2019 County of Essex Tonnes

2019 City of Windsor Tonnes

2019 Combined

Tonnes

2018 Comparable

Tonnes January 1,099.61 1,075.24 2,174.85 2,343.65

February 972.63 917.59 1,890.22 1,955.57

March 945.63 932.95 1,878.58 2,090.20

April 1,063.56 1,119.42 2,182.98 2,038.99

May 1,287.05 1,283.19 2,570.24 2,521.74

June 1,007.06 1,031.30 2,038.36 2,146.27

July 1,086.20 1,110.90 2,197.10 1,980.10

August 1,025.06 1,053.24 2,078.30 2,210.14

September 998.25 1,030.87 2,029.12 2,039.40

October 1,127.57 1,097.80 2,225.37 2,231.67

November 1,040.92 1,032.53 2,073.45 2,296.10

December 1,075.17 1,012.20 2,087.37 2,156.72

Column Totals: 12,728.71 12,697.23 25,425.94 26,010.55 Notes: The County of Essex includes the Town of Amherstburg, the Town of Essex, the Town of Kingsville, the Town of Lakeshore, the Town of LaSalle, the Municipality of Leamington and the Town of Tecumseh.

2.2 Recycling Residual Disposal Recycling Residual is the material that is left over after the processing of the recyclable materials are collected and delivered to the MRF. The residuals consist of contaminated materials, non-recyclable materials, and packaging materials used to secure recyclables placed in the recycle box. A total of 4,513.29 tonnes of recycling residuals was disposed of in 2019.

3 Tonnes Marketed For the purposes of waste diversion calculations, tonnes marketed are used instead of the tonnes collected curbside. The tonnes marketed by material type are shown in Table 2, 3 and 4. The Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority markets all materials processed through the MRF, and retains 100% of the revenue from the sale of materials. Revenue from the sale of




material in 2019 was approximately $2,070,666 (see Table 5) representing a basket-of-goods revenue of approximately $101/tonne compared to a basket-of-goods revenue of $134/tonne in 2018. A brief discussion on market conditions and prices for each of the materials follows.

Figure 1: Percent of Tonnes for 2019 Marketed Recyclables

Note: Due to rounding total tonnes marketed does not total 100%.

3.1 Fibres

Old Newspaper (ONP) Ontario market price trends are published annually by the Continuous Improvement Fund’s (CIFs) Price Sheet (January 2020). For 2019, ONP prices started the year at a high of $61 per tonne in January and then declined gradually to finally close out the year at $33 per tonne in December. The EWSWA average price for 2019 was $55 per tonne which is

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%

Old Newspaper

Cardboard (OCC)

Hardpack (OCC/OBB mix)

Mixed Glass

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)

Steel Cans

Mixed Plastics

Loose Fibre

High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE)

Aluminum Cans and Foil

Clear Glass

Polycoat/Gable top

Fine Paper

37.1%

20.8%

11.4%

11.1%

6.5%

3.3%

3.2%

2.5%

1.5%

1.4%

0.7%

0.4%

0.2%

Percent of Tonnes Marketed




higher than this provincially published CIF average of $44 per tonne. The EWSWA 2018 average price for ONP was $75 per tonne.

Old Corrugated Cardboard (OCC) The EWSWA price for old corrugated cardboard again started the year high at $122 per tonne and dropped due to global market conditions to a low of $60 per tonne by the end of 2019. The 2019 EWSWA average price per tonne was $81 compared to $126 in 2018. The Authority’s average price of $81 per tonne was just short of the provincial average of $84 per tonne per the CIF Price Sheet- January 2020.

Hardpack (OBB) (Example: cereal boxes, cardboard)

EWSWA’s prices for this cardboard/boxboard mix ranged from a high of $88 to a low of $1 per tonne in 2019. The 2019 EWSWA average price was $17 compared to $89 per tonne in 2018, again as a result of global market conditions. Even though market prices dropped severely in 2019, the Authority’s average price of $17 per tonne was slightly lower than the provincial average ($19 per tonne) per the CIF Price Sheet- January 2020.

Fine Paper Fine paper was sold in 2019 with an average price of $207 per tonne. This is a decrease compared to the $279 per tonne received in 2018 again as a result of the fibre market crisis.

Loose Fibre As a result of a major equipment changeover in the Fibre MRF in 2019, the Fibre MRF was unable to process incoming delivered materials for a few days. Therefore, all incoming materials during this timeframe to the Fibre MRF were shipped loose to a fibre recycling processor with no charge to the Authority due to fibre market conditions.

3.2 Containers

Steel Cans The pricing for steel cans ranged from a high of $333 per tonne to a low of $155 per tonne during 2019. The 2019 average price was $248 per tonne compared to $304 per tonne in 2018.




Aluminum Cans and Foil The pricing for aluminium cans ranged from a high of $1,615 per tonne to a low of $1,338 per tonne. The 2019 average price was $1,477 per tonne compared to $1,761 in 2018. Aluminum foil was sold at an average price of $374 during 2019.

Glass The average price for clear glass, marketed for new containers, in 2019 was $32 per tonne. This is slightly lower than the 2018 average price of $36 per tonne. Clear glass is the only product that is not marketed FOB (Freight On Board) at the Essex-Windsor MRF. Mixed coloured glass was delivered to the Regional Landfill for use as road base.

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (Example: Plastic Water Bottles)

PET prices ranged from a high of $493 per tonne to a low of $168 per tonne in 2019. The average price was $363 per tonne in 2019 which is lower than the 2018 average price of $438 per tonne.

High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (Example: Laundry Soap Bottles)

HDPE prices ranged from a high of $562 per tonne to a low of $315 per tonne in 2019. The average price was $431 per tonne in 2019 compared to the 2018 average price of $497 per tonne.

Polycoat and Gable Top (Example: Milk Cartons)

Five loads of polycoat were shipped out in 2019 at an average price of $32 per tonne compared to the average price of $76 per tonne in 2018.




Mixed Plastics (Example: tubs & lids, clamshells, trays, cups, plastic bottles, excludes polystyrene and plastic film bags)

In 2019, mixed plastic prices ranged from a high of $117 per tonne to a low of $80 per tonne. The average price was $110 per tonne in 2019 compared to the average price of $72 per tonne in 2018.

Table 2: Marketed Fibres Summary Comparison: 2018 versus 2019

Fibre Material 2019 Tonnes 2018 Tonnes % Change Old Newspaper (ONP) 7,608 11,472 -33.7% Cardboard (OCC) 4,269 4,062 5.1% Hardpack (OCC/OBB mix) 2,346 1,647 42.4% Fine Paper 36 81 -55.6% Loose Fibre 507 237 113.9%

Totals: 14,766 17,499 -15.6%

Table 3: Marketed Containers Summary Comparison: 2018 versus 2019

Container Material 2019 Tonnes 2018 Tonnes % Change Clear Glass 145 207 -30.0% Mixed Glass 2,288 2,446 -6.5% Steel Cans 672 773 -13.1% Aluminum Cans and Foil 281 298 -5.7% Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 1,334 1,554 -14.2%

High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) 300 312 -3.8%

Polycoat/Gable top 91 97 -6.2% Mixed Plastics 656 718 -8.6%

Totals: 5,767 6,405 -10.0%




Table 4: Residential Recyclables Marketed Comparison: 2018 versus 2019

Tonnes Marketed 2019 Tonnes 2018 Tonnes a) Total Tonnes Marketed 20,533 23,904

b) ICI Tonnes (435) (746)

Net Marketed Residential Recyclables 20,098 23,158 Notes: a) Total Tonnes Marketed less b) ICI Delivered Tonnes = Net Marketed Residential Recyclables.

Table 5: Revenue Comparison: 2018 versus 2019

Recyclable Material 2019 Revenue 2018 Revenue

Old Newspaper (ONP#8) $421,670 $858,637

Cardboard (OCC) $344,893 $513,125

Hardpack $38,712 $146,834

Fine Paper $7,416 $22,470

Loose Fibre $0 $1,182

Clear Glass $4,668 $7,407

Steel Cans $166,520 $235,222

Aluminum Cans and Foil $398,545 $525,109

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) $483,675 $680,412

High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) $129,411 $155,100

Polycoat/Gable top $2,932 $7,330

Mixed Plastics $72,224 $51,916

Total Revenue $2,070,666 $3,204,744




Table 6: Annual Revenue Comparison Year Revenue 2014 $3,306,026 2015 $3,101,234 2016 $3,414,055 2017 $4,241,411 2018 $3,204,744 2019 $2,070,666

Figure 2: Percent of Revenue Marketed in 2019

Note: Due to rounding total revenue marketed does not total 100%.

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)

Old Newspaper

Aluminum Cans and Foil

Cardboard (OCC)

Steel Cans

High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE)

Mixed Plastics

Hardpack

Fine Paper

Clear Glass

Polycoat/Gable top

Loose Fiber

23.4%

20.4%

19.2%

16.7%

8.0%

6.2%

3.5%

1.9%

0.4%

0.2%

0.1%

0.0%

Percent of Revenue Marketed




3.3 Markets While delivered tonnages for 2019 were similar to 2018, there was a significant reduction in revenue generated in 2019 from the recycling markets. Due to import regulations changing in China, the North American recycling markets in 2019 finally hit an all-time low. This impacted domestic markets in 2019 as witnessed by oversaturation with recycling materials and thereby imposing greater demands (e.g., quality specifications enforced, dropping prices) to domestic sellers like EWSWA.

As a result, early in 2019, the fibre markets were hit hardest, as prices fell to an all-time low and eventually stabilized at this new low market price by the end of the year. Container market prices didn’t start their decline until late summer. It is important to note that while prices for containers dropped, this decrease was nowhere near the significance of the hardship experienced in the fibre markets in 2019. These significant market changes are reflected in Table 5 on page 9 of this report. More importantly, due to many EWSWA strategies like: pre-establishment in the domestic market, efforts of Waste Diversion staff to produce higher quality materials through continuous improvement efforts and capital investment, and ongoing successful work with buyers and contractors, EWSWA was able to move all materials in 2019.




4 Other Residential Recycling Programs

4.1 White Goods Since 1991, white goods, such as fridges, stoves, air conditioners, washers, dryers, freezers dishwashers, etc. have been restricted from landfill disposal. In 2019, curbside collection of white goods from County municipalities captured 1,738 white good units (approximately 156 tonnes).

While the City of Windsor did not operate a white goods collection program during 2019 there were also 193 tonnes of white goods delivered to the Public Drop Off Depots for a combined total of approximately 349 tonnes. Using the Resource Productivity & Recovery Authority (RPRA) Municipal Datacall residual percentage of 20%, approximately 279 tonnes of white goods were recycled and diverted. Table 8 details the white goods collection program for each of the municipalities in the County of Essex by month during 2019.

Table 7: Summary of White Goods Diversion for 2019

White Goods Summary 2019 Tonnes Curbside Collection Converted to Tonnes 156.42

Drop Off Depots 192.92

Total White Goods Tonnes 349.34

Less 20% Residual Calculation Amount (69.87)

Total Tonnes Recycled and Diverted 279.47




Table 8: 2019 White Goods Collected by Month in Municipalities across Essex County

Month Tecumseh Essex LaSalle Amherstburg Leamington Kingsville Total for Month

January 7 13 22 21 11 24 98

February 8 18 20 29 16 20 111

March 12 15 19 24 14 17 101

April 11 18 32 29 17 20 127

May 18 9 34 29 34 27 151

June 17 25 39 43 24 29 177

July 16 20 32 44 22 28 162

August 22 21 20 32 25 33 153

September 20 30 30 35 26 12 153

October 14 22 42 34 35 28 175

November 28 31 37 42 30 30 198

December 15 26 20 22 17 32 132

Total Units 188 248 347 384 271 300 1,738 Notes: 1,738 units with the average weight of 90 kilograms per unit results in diversion of approximately 156.42 tonnes; there was no Tonnes reported for Lakeshore in 2019.




4.2 Tires In 2019, EWSWA like all other municipalities transitioned their tire recycling program early in the year from the Ontario Tire Stewardship Used Tires Program to the Used Tire program under Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority (RPRA). RPRA’s goal is to support a waste-free Ontario, where all resources are reused and recycled through the new Individual Producer Responsibility (IPR) framework. This is due to the Tires Regulation under the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act, 2016 (RRCEA) that designated tires as the first material under Ontario’s IPR framework to transition.

While automotive tire recycling is now offered at many locations across Essex-Windsor, EWSWA does still collect and recycle used tires through the new RPRA program. In 2019, RPRA Datacall resulted in diversion of approximately 2,830.90 tonnes of used tires in the Essex-Windsor area.

4.3 Scrap Metal There are 40-yard roll off bins located at the Public Drop-off Depot for collection of ferrous and non-ferrous scrap metal material. The metals are sold through a competitive bid process to local scrap dealers. In 2019, approximately 588.08 tonnes of metals were collected and recycled. While the Authority does not advertise that it accepts other metal household objects besides steel cans in the blue box program, the Authority does receive and does try to capture any metal objects which are called “mixed metal”. An additional 71.86 tonnes of mixed metals were received in 2019 for a total of 660 tonnes of scrap metal.

4.4 Electronics Recycling Under contract to the Authority, Greentec supplies roll off bins for the collection of electronics at the Authority’s Public Drop-off Depots. EWSWA staff place the electronic items from the public in these bins. In 2019, a total of 316.61 tonnes of computers, televisions, audio visual equipment, and various electronic items were collected through the Waste Electrical and Electronics Equipment (WEEE) stewardship program. Based on a residual portion of 20%, the total electronics recycled was approximately 253.29 tonnes.




4.5 Deposit/Return Program The Authority implemented a capture program at its Material Recovery Facility for deposit/return containers (i.e. aluminum beer cans; glass, wine and spirit bottles) that were placed curbside for blue box collection and continued to be successful in 2019. During 2019, approximately 39 tonnes of deposit/return containers were received at the MRF and are included as part of the 2,196.94 tonnes that were diverted throughout Essex-Windsor as part of the Deposit/Return & Stewardship Program. The 2,197 diversion tonnes figure is calculated as part of the 2019 Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority Datacall and is based on the Essex-Windsor population as determined by the latest Statistics Canada Census data.

Table 9: Other Recyclables Comparison: 2018 versus 2019

Recyclable Material 2019 Tonnes

2018 Tonnes

% Change

White Goods (all sites) 279 227 42.73%

Used Tire Program 2,831 2,831 0.00%

Scrap & Mixed Metal 660 644 2.48%

Electronics 253 270 -6.30%

Deposit/Return & Stewardship Program 2,197 2,197 0.00%

Total Other Recyclables 6,220 6,169 1.56% Note: RPRA Datacall calculation is based on population for Used Tire Program and Deposit/Return & Stewardship Program in the Essex-Windsor area as reported by the Statistics Canada Census. .

5 Residential Organics

5.1 Yard Waste Grass, leaves, tree trimmings and brush are restricted from disposal at the Essex-Windsor Regional Landfill Site. As a result many local municipalities have established separate collection systems for yard waste, including special collections in January for Christmas trees. Furthermore, individual residents and grounds maintenance contractors also brought yard waste to one of the three yard waste depots operated by the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority in 2019.

The Essex-Windsor area accepts the use of paper bags, wheeled carts, garbage bins and cardboard boxes for the collection of yard waste. Plastic




bags are not accepted. Approximately 30,293 tonnes of yard waste was received in 2019, which a decrease of 12% compared to the 34,435 tonnes delivered in 2018.

Table 10: 2019 Yard Waste Summary for all sites

Material Type Windsor Public Drop Off

Kingsville Transfer Station 2

Regional Landfill

Municipal Delivered 11,315 1,736 4,374

Residential Delivered 4,969 1,150 163

Total Res. Organics 16,284 2,886 4,537

ICI Organics and Pallets 492 341 5,753

Grand Total (Tonnes) 16,776 3,227 10,290 Note: ICI is Industrial, Commercial and Institutional delivered material type.

Table 11: Yard Waste Tonnes Comparison: 2018 versus 2019

Material Type 2019 Tonnes 2018 Tonnes Municipal Delivered 17,425 15,959

Residential Delivered 6,282 7,462

Total Res. Organics 23,707 23,421

ICI Organics and Pallets 6,586 11,014

Grand TOTAL (Tonnes) 30,293 34,435 Note: ICI is Industrial, Commercial and Institutional delivered material type.

5.2 Screened Compost Sales The Authority undertakes an in depth process to the organics and yard waste it receives to turn it into saleable, quality compost. The composting process involves grinding up yard waste and placing it in long rows called ‘windrows’. The material is turned frequently and the temperature is maintained above 55 degrees Celsius in order to kill any pathogens or weed seeds. Once the compost has matured it is tested, screened, and then sold for use in landscaping, as well as flower and vegetable gardens.

In 2019 compost was sold as bulk (delivered or pick-up), bag your own, and prepackaged items as listed in Table 12.




Table 12: Compost Sales 2019 Summary

Compost Material Quantity Sold Tonnes Delivered 750 cubic yards 441

Bulk Sales 25,251 cubic yards 14,848

Bag Your Own Compost 1,488 bags 40

Prepackaged Garden Gold Compost 11,998 bags 228

Total: 15,557 Notes: Prepackaged bag weights are based on approximately 19 kg/bag; bag your own compost is approximately 27 kg/bag and bulk compost is approximately 588 kg/cubic yard.

Under contract to the Authority, Frank Dupuis Landscaping and Trucking provided delivery services for the sale of 441 tonnes of bulk compost to local residents. Also 14,848 tonnes in bulk sales were sold to residents and businesses at EWSWA Depots. Additionally, about 11,998 prepackaged bags of compost were sold at the Depots. Many residents also bagged their own compost at one of the depots. The combined total weight of compost sold was approximately 15,557 tonnes. In 2019, compost sales totaled $227,185.

5.3 Backyard Composting Backyard composters (BYC) with the brand name “The Earth Machine” and “The Green Cone” were sold to Essex-Windsor residents in 2019. The Earth Machine was sold through local Home Hardware stores year-round. Both units were sold during the Truckload Sale held in the City of Windsor. Approximately 37 Earth Machine units were sold through the Home Hardware stores and 217 units were sold during the truckload and miscellaneous sales for a total of 254 units sold in 2019. There were 94 Green Cones sold in 2019. This brings the cumulative total to 752 Green Cones distributed since 2010, which is when they were first introduced to the area. The combined BYC distributed in 2019 was 348 units bringing the total number of units sold since 1988 to 39,881 units.

Current research has indicated that approximately 100 kg/year/BYC is diverted as a result of the backyard composting program. This translates into 3,988 tonnes of organic waste diverted from the landfill through this program. This does not consider homemade composters or composting done independent of the Authority’s backyard composting program.




Table 13: Residential Organic Waste Reduction Comparison: 2017 — 2019

Residential Organic Programs 2019 Tonnes 2018 Tonnes 2017 Tonnes

BYC Program 3,988 3,953 3,912

Mulching Blades 1,343 1,343 1,343

Yard Waste (Residential) 23,707 23,421 19,099

Total Residential Organics 29,038 28,717 24,354 Notes: The mulching blade program was no longer directly offered through EWSWA after 2001. Even though mulching blades and mowers are used by residents in the area, it can’t be measured for the purposes of this report; therefore, no increase in diversion is indicated.

6 Promotion and Education

6.1 School and Community Presentations In 2019, Authority staff conducted 24 presentations at various locations where 2,544 people from community groups, events, open houses, schools etc. attended. The emphasis in 2019 presentations was placed on how to reduce, reuse and recycle plastic.

6.2 Special Community Events Authority staff organized displays and talked to area residents at various special events scheduled at the Horticultural Show, Earth Day Celebrations and the Truckload Sale. There were 65 special events serviced with recycling in 2019. Many special event venues have implemented their own sustainable recycling program throughout the season (April through September) and do not require the per event service offered by EWSWA.

6.3 On-going Public Education Activities The Authority maintains a Waste Reduction Hotline (1-800-563-3377), a website (www.ewswa.org), and an annual newsletter called EnviroTips which is delivered to each household and is available online.

E-newsletters are also part of the program as they are low cost and reach residents quickly and effectively. The Authority has 2,964 e-newsletter subscribers. Industry standards indicate that a decent open rate is anything between 20-33%. Open rates for e-newsletters are as follows: Truckload Sale 63%; Gold Box, 87%; Waste Reduction Week, 63%.




The EWSWA website (www.ewswa.org) is updated on a regular basis to provide detailed information and public education to residents. Topics covered range from waste management and reduction, to details about waste diversion activities. Residents have access to instructions, tenders, reports, calendars, acceptable recycle box materials, incentives, etc. In 2019 there were approximately 38,000 hits on the website bringing the total hits to 281,077 hits since the launch of the new website in 2012; the monthly average hits in 2019 had a duration of approximately 1.47 minutes. The ‘What Goes Where’ material search database resulted in 8,598 searches; municipal calendar searches were at 13,396 and PDO, Windsor at 8,164 searches in 2019. In 2019, method of access by device was 53.6% mobile; 39.5% desktop computer and 6.9% tablets.

Recycle Coach is an app which makes recycling and collection schedule information easy to find. The app is continuously developing new programs that combat complacency and gets people re-engaged in recycling. It promotes best practices ideas on better waste management to improve outcomes such as increasing the amount recycled, proper disposal and diversion of solid waste, etc. In 2019, EWSWA made it a priority to promote this app and get local residents onboard with accessing information around solid waste through this app. As a result, increased metrics listed below were noted for Recycle Coach in 2019:

9,619 total subscribers 130,743 resident interactions in 2019 10,895 average monthly resident interactions

EWSWA also continues to maintain a presence in social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter. EWSWA started with 30 Twitter followers in January 2015 and had 755 followers by December 2019. EWSWA has 1,130 followers on Facebook with the highest reach of 17,200 on the “What is the Oops Sticker?” in a 2019 post.

6.4 Gold Star Program In 2016, the Authority launched a new recycling incentive program aimed at increasing public awareness regarding the red and blue box recycling program. Residents were encouraged to apply for a new “Gold Recycling Box” through a program that evaluated their curbside recycling, provided feedback and rewarded successful recyclers with a gold box. The program’s




ultimate objective is to decrease the amount of contamination being put out by residents and thereby decrease the amount of contamination at the MRFs. The program was renewed in 2017 and 2,050 residents registered for the “Gold Star” program. In 2017, 1,000 households were inspected and 604 gold boxes were awarded. In 2018, the fourth round of inspections were undertaken to complete the inspections of all 2,050 residents who registered in 2017. During 2018, 613 gold boxes were awarded. The program continued in 2019 being offered to the first 300 online applicants; 284 gold boxes were awarded in 2019 to keep offering this positive brand to the public.

7 Municipal Hazardous or Special Wastes (MHSW) Program

7.1 MHSW Depots The Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority opened its Windsor MHSW Depot in October 1995. In addition to the Windsor facility, the Authority opened a second MHSW Depot at Transfer Station No. 2 in the Town of Kingsville in 1997. A third depot was opened at the Essex-Windsor Regional Landfill Site in October 2013. The Depots replaced the annual Household Chemical Waste Days held in Essex-Windsor. All facilities were operated year-round in 2019. A total of 596,936 litres and 112,741 kg of MHSW materials were delivered to the sites in 2019. See Table 14 and 15 for details.

Reuse Centre A Reuse Centre has been operational at the Windsor MHSW facility since 1995.

Paint is distributed in both 1-gallon and 5-gallon pails for reuse. According to the records, 2,785 residents accessed the Reuse Centre and took 57,908 products or approximately 83,516 kg of paint and miscellaneous materials in 2019 compared to 54,555 products or 77,853 kg of reusable materials in 2018.

Demand for the Reuse Centre remains high, however quantities available depend largely on how good the products are that are delivered by households to the facility.




Mercury Roundup Program In June 2019, the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority launched Mercury Roundup: an initiative designed to divert a toxic chemical—liquid mercury—from the waste stream. In partnership with Scout Environmental, and with funding from the Ontario Trillium Foundation, Essex-Windsor has become one of the first environmentally conscious municipalities to launch the Mercury Roundup program that will expand to six other Ontario municipalities by 2021. Residents who dropped off a product containing mercury received a free digital thermometer. Since June 2019, 118 products were received equalling about 0.6443 kilograms of mercury.

Table 14: Municipal Hazardous or Special Waste for 2019 in Litres

Material MHSW from Facilities

Reuse Centre Quantities

Total Litres

Adhesives/Flammable Liquids 62,704 20,077 82,781

Aerosols 10,068 1,390 11,458

Antifreeze (Glycol) 9,447 0 9,447

Corrosive Liquid 6,162 343 6,505

Inorganic Acids 1,022 0 1,022

Paints & Coatings 222,554 52,927 275,481

Pesticides 6,600 692 7,292

Waste Oils (hydraulic fluid) 19,500 0 19,500

Recyclable Waste Oil 183,450 0 183,450

Total MHSW Litres 521,507 75,429 596,936


http://www.mercuryroundup.ca/barrie

http://www.mercuryroundup.ca/barrie



Table 15: Municipal Hazardous or Special Waste for 2019 in Kilograms

Material MHSW from Facilities

Reuse Centre Quantities

Total Kgs

Car Batteries 30,350 0 30,350

Dry Cell Batteries 3,026 0 3,026

Fire Extinguishers 2,241 0 2,241

Fluorescents/Misc. Lamps/Ballasts 23,635 0 23,635

Inorganic Oxidizers 2,641 8,087 10,728

Mercury (HG items)/Lead 513 0 513

Pharmaceuticals 1,226 0 1,226

Plastic Used Oil Containers 16,991 0 16,991

Propane Cylinders 4,577 0 4,577

Propane Tanks/Misc. Tanks 18,093 0 18,093

Rechargeable & Mixed Batteries 1 0 1

Corrosive Solids (e.g. cement) 471 0 471

Waste Oil Filters 889 0 889

Total MHSW Kilograms 104,654 8,087 112,741

Table 16: MHSW Diversion Comparison: 2018 versus 2019

Blank cell 2019 Tonnes 2018 Tonnes MHSW Recycled or Reused 709 723 MHSW not Recycled (18) (19)

Total MHSW Diverted 691 704

7.2 Waste Motor Oil Waste motor oil is collected curbside with the residential recycling program. As well, residents are able to deliver oil to the MHSW facilities. The quantity of waste motor oil collected during 2019 was 183,450 litres, which is down by 0.8% compared to the 184,950 litres collected in 2018. The quantity of oil collected by month is shown in Table 17 with historical data over four years.




Table 17: Motor Oil Collected (Litres) 2016 through 2019 Month 2019 Litres 2018 Litres 2017 Litres 2016 Litres

January 8,875 10,225 14,680 9,390 February 6,025 4,950 8,700 12,480 March 11,025 13,100 7,311 10,160 April 20,850 20,800 20,320 20,771 May 17,950 22,750 21,600 22,683 June 20,900 16,400 18,400 21,685 July 20,075 20,150 20,575 16,310 August 18,725 16,350 17,300 18,245 September 17,950 15,325 14,450 20,401 October 15,275 18,425 14,900 16,716 November 14,275 13,425 20,200 18,840 December 11,525 13,050 7,950 8,000 Total: 183,450 184,950 186,386 195,681

8 Overall Summary of Residential Diversion Quantities

8.1 Residential Waste Diversion Table 18 summarizes the residential waste diversion activities detailed in this report.

Table 18: Residential Waste Diversion Activity

Residential Waste Diversion Summary 2019 Tonnes 2018 Tonnes

Net Marketed Recyclables-Table 4 20,098 23,158

Other Recycling Programs-Table 9 6,220 6,169

Yard Waste, BYC & Mulching Blades-Table 13 29,038 28,719

MHSW Waste including Motor Oil-Table 16 691 704

Total Residential Tonnes Diverted 56,047 58,750




For further information please contact the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority Hotline at 1-800-563-3377.

Catherine Copot-Nepszy Manager, Waste Diversion

Eli Maodus General Manager

Report prepared by: Margaret Shires, Administrative Assistant




Subject: EWSWA Regular Board Meeting Minutes February 4, 2020

Moved by: Councillor Costante Seconded by: Councillor Francis


THAT the minutes of the Essex Windsor Solid Waste Authority (EWSWA) of its meeting held February 4, 2020 BE RECEIVED.

Carried. Report Number: SCM 176/2020

Clerk’s File: MB2020

Item No. 8.15



Subject: EWSWA Regular Board Meeting Minutes February 4, 2020


Meeting Date:

Time:

Location:

Attendance

Board Members:

EWSWA Staff:

City of Windsor Staff:

Essex-Windsor Solid Waste AuthorityRegular Board Meeting

MINUTES

February 4, 2020

4:00 PM

Essex County Civic & Education Centre – Room C 360 Fairview Avenue West, Essex Ontario

Fabio Costante Gary Kaschak - Chair Kieran McKenzie Jim Morrison Ed Sleiman Aldo DiCarlo – Vice Chair Hilda MacDonald Gary McNamara Eli Maodus Michelle Bishop Tom Marentette Cathy Copot-Nepszy Teresa Policella Anne Marie Albidone Tony Ardovini Dwayne Dawson

County of Essex Staff: Mary Birch

Sandra Zwiers Absent: Drew Dilkens

Marc Bondy Natasha Couvillion

Cindy Becker

City of Windsor City of Windsor City of Windsor City of Windsor City of Windsor County of Essex County of Essex County of Essex (Ex-Officio) General Manager Manager of Finance & Administration Manager of Waste Disposal Manager of Waste Diversion Executive Secretary Manager of Environmental Services Deputy Treasurer Financial Planning Executive Director of Operations Director of Council & Community Services/Clark Director of Financial Services/Treasurer City of Windsor (Ex-Officio) County of Essex Manager of Performance Measurement & Financial Administration Financial Planning Administrator

1. Call to Order

As the Board’s Chair and Vice Chair have yet to be elected for 2020, the General Manager called the meeting to order at 4:02 pm.

Page 1 of 11 Council Agenda July 13, 2020

Page 323 of 413

Regular Board Meeting MINUTES February 4, 2020

2. Welcome to Board Member/Windsor Councillor Mr. Fabio Costante

The General Manager introduced City of Windsor Councillor Fabio Costante. Mr. Costante will sit on the Board for 2020 and again in 2022. Deputy Mayor Leo Meloche will return to the Board in 2021.

The Board was advised that on January 29, 2020 that the General Manager and the Manager of Finance and Administration had an orientation meeting with Mr. Costante. The General Manager introduced the Manager of Waste Diversion and the Manager of Waste Disposal to Mr. Costante.

3. Election of Chair and Vice Chair for 2020

The General Manager noted that for 2020 the Chair will be elected from the City of Windsor representatives and the Vice Chair will be elected from among County of Essex representatives. He called for nominations for Board Chair from among the City of Windsor representatives.

Mr. Sleiman nominated Mr. Kaschak for Board Chair.

The General Manager called 2 additional times for nominations for the position of Board Chair. None were noted. He then asked Mr. Kaschak if he would stand for the Board Chair position.

Mr. Kaschak accepted the nomination as Board Chair.

Moved by Ed Sleiman Seconded by Jim Morrison THAT Gary Kaschak, City of Windsor Councillor, is named as Board Chair for the period ending December 31, 2020.

1-2020 Carried Unanimously

Mr. Kaschak assumed the Chair position and continued the election process.

The Chair called for nominations for a Board Vice Chair from among the County representatives.

Mr. McNamara nominated Aldo DiCarlo for Board Vice Chair.

The Chair called 2 additional times for nominations for the position of Board Vice Chair. None were noted. The Chair then asked Mr. DiCarlo whether he would stand for the Board Vice Chair position.

Mr. DiCarlo accepted the nomination as Board Vice Chair.

Moved by Gary McNamara Seconded by Hilda MacDonald


Page 324 of 413


THAT Aldo DiCarlo, Mayor of Amherstburg is named as Board Vice Chair for the period ending on December 31, 2020.


4. Closed Meeting

Moved by Aldo DiCarlo Seconded by Ed Sleiman THAT the Board move into a closed meeting pursuant to Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2011, as amended for the following reason(s):

(f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose


5. Declaration of Pecuniary Interest

The Chair called for any declarations of pecuniary interest and none were noted. He further expressed that should a conflict of a pecuniary nature or other arise at any time during the course of the meeting that it would be noted at that time.

6. Approval of the Minutes

A. December 3, 2019 Regular Meeting Minutes

Moved by Kieran McKenzie Seconded by Aldo DiCarlo THAT the minutes from the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority Regular Meeting, dated December 3, 2019, be approved and adopted.

7. Business Arising from the Minutes

No other items were raised for discussion.

8. Correspondence

There were no correspondence items for consideration.

9. Delegations

There were no delegations present.



Page 325 of 413


10. Waste Disposal

A. Tender Results for Front End Wheel Loader for Transfer Station #2

The Manager of Waste Disposal referred to page 10 of the agenda package. The report is to recommend the award of tender for one Caterpillar 938M Front-End Loader and a 5-year or 10,000-hour service contract to Toromont Cat.

The Manager of Waste Disposal explained that the Loader is to be used at the Transfer Station in Kingsville to load waste trailers for transport to the Regional Landfill. The new Loader will replace an existing 7-year old Caterpillar 930K Loader. The existing Loader will be re-allocated and placed into service at the Regional Landfill and will replace a 2007 Caterpillar 938G Front End Wheel Loader which has reached the end of its useful life. The front-end loaders at the Regional Landfill are primarily used in the production of compost from the yard waste collection program.

The tender was issued on December 27, 2019. The tender was emailed to 6 different equipment suppliers, posted on Biddingo, MERX and EWSWA websites and advertised in the Windsor Star and County newspapers. The tender closed on January 23, 2020 and bid packages were received from Toromont Cat and Brandt Tractor Inc. A public tender opening took place at 1:05 pm on Thursday, January 23, 2020. The bid packages were reviewed for compliance with no issues.

The Manager of Waste Disposal stated that Toromont submitted the lowest overall bid which includes a maintenance contract. He also stated that although Brandt was lower on their maintenance contract, their overall bid was still higher than Toromont.

The Manager of Waste Disposal stated that the delivery date of May 29, 2020 committed by Toromont meets the Authority’s needs.

The Manager of Waste Disposal referred to the table on page 11 of the agenda package which outlines the tender prices received by Toromont and Brandt.

The Manager of Waste Disposal stated that the loader will be used for 7 years. After the five-year maintenance contract, the cost of the maintenance for the remaining 2 years will be on a time and materials basis and will be included in annual budgets at the time.

The Manager of Waste Disposal stated that the purchase of the new loader will be funded by at least $40,500 from the sale of the 2007 loader with the balance being funded by Equipment Replacement Reserve. He also stated that there will be no negative impact on the 2020 budget.

The Manager of Waste Disposal asked if there were any questions.

Mr. Morrison asked if the loader is expected to last 7 years. The Manager of Waste Disposal stated that the current loader is 13 years old. It has been used at Transfer Station #2 for 7 years and the other 6 years at the Regional Landfill. Mr. Morrison


Page 326 of 413


asked if either one of the suppliers would be interested in a 10-year maintenance contract. The Manager of Waste Disposal stated that the suppliers do not offer that term.

Mrs. MacDonald asked how much is put away in the Equipment Replacement Reserve. The Manager of Finance and Administration stated that 7 years ago the Authority switched to a smaller loader but continued to contribute to the reserve based on a higher cost larger loader. She also stated that the reserve earns interest which serves to cover price increases over the years.

Mr. McKenzie asked if the trade-in value is built into the budget. The Manager of Finance and Administration stated yes it is and further that the foreign exchange rate is factored in the budget. She also stated that most of the equipment purchased 7 years ago was purchased at par or at a very low exchange rate.

Mr. McKenzie asked why the larger piece of equipment is being considered. The Manager of Waste Disposal stated that the smaller loader is not heavy enough. He explained that the Authority used to have a larger loader and have decided to back to the larger piece of equipment.

Moved by Gary McNamara Seconded by Ed Sleiman

1. THAT the Board approve the acquisition of a Caterpillar 938M Front End Wheel Loader as supplied by Toromont Cat at a cost of $279,900 plus applicable taxes.

2. THAT the Board approve a 5-year, 10,000-hour (whichever comes first) service contract at a pre-tax cost of $7.78 per hour for the Caterpillar 938M Front End Wheel Loader as supplied by Toromont Cat.


11. Waste Diversion

A. Plastic Bags and Blue Box Collection

The Manager of Waste Diversion stated that effective June 1, 2020, the EWSWA’s Waste Diversion Department along with the Environmental Services Department of the City of Windsor, as well as other contractors and municipalities, will launch the “No Plastic Bags…Period!” Recycling Campaign.

The Manager of Waste Diversion explained that buyers in the domestic recycling market are imposing higher quality demands on municipalities like EWSWA who sell their recyclable goods to them. This has forced EWSWA to further monitor the issues that were impeding the Authority to meet these quality standards. She explained that audits were done to see what is causing the contamination. She stated the largest culprit of the contaminated material is plastic bags. The plastic bags are getting caught in processing equipment and causing operational issues and often end up in the final product.


Page 327 of 413


The Manager of Waste Diversion stated that EWSWA and the City of Windsor collaborate often to discuss recycling issues. As a result of the audits, market conditions, issues at the curbside and processing issues, City of Windsor and EWSWA Administration have agreed that a campaign that bans plastic bags in curbside recycling collection must be undertaken.

The Manager of Waste Disposal explained that the education campaign will be launched in late March with the 2020 City of Windsor calendar launch and a media kick-off event. The campaign will include promotion through events, information, Annual Truckload Sale and media campaigns. Curbside audits will be done as well as MRF audits to monitor the impact of the campaign.

As of June 1, 2020, EWSWA and City of Windsor Administration will use the early part of June to support Windsor users who are having issues with collection to create a soft-launch support system. In the City of Windsor, door hangers will be left on resident’s doors to explain why the recycling was not collected. In the County, “OOPS” stickers will be left with the recycling boxes indicating why their recycling was not collected.

The Manager of Waste Diversion stated that there is no financial budget impact.

Mr. Sleiman asked how should residents dispose of the plastic bags. The Manager of Waste Diversion stated residents should reuse them or place them in the garbage.

Mr. McNamara stated that Sobey’s will no longer be providing plastic bags in their stores. He stated that maybe there should be recognition to stores that do this. The Manager of Waste Diversion stated that maybe EWSWA could acknowledge them through social media.

Mr. McKenzie asked how will the public react to this change. The Manager of Waste Diversion stated that usually the public does not like change. She explained that the Peel Region implemented this campaign a few years ago and have significantly reduced plastic bags in their program.

Mr. McKenzie asked if there will be a follow-up to the residents that have door hangers left at their home.

City of Windsor’s Manager of Environmental Services, Anne-Marie Albidone, explained that contracted City of Windsor blue box collector GFL notes on their trip sheet the residents that require a door hanger and they call 311. Then 311 will follow-up with a City of Windsor supervisor and a service request will be initiated.

The Manager of Waste Diversion stated that “OOPS” stickers are used in the County. When the resident receives an “OOPS” sticker the resident usually calls to find out why their recycling was not collected and EWSWA staff educates them on what should be placed in the recycling bins.


Page 328 of 413


Mr. Kaschak asked if GFL collection drivers are receptive to placing the door hangers. Ms. Albidone stated that City of Windsor supervisory staff will place the door hanger with the information provided through the trip sheet.

Moved by Ed Sleiman Seconded by Gary McNamara THAT the Board receive the “No Plastic Bags…Period! Recycling Campaign” Report as information.


B. Extension of Windsor Disposal Contracts for Recycling Processing & County Blue Box Collection and Recycling Repairs and Maintenance

The General Manager referred to page 16 of the agenda package.

The General Manager stated that the report is to recommend that the Board authorize Authority Administration to engage in discussions with Windsor Disposal Services (WDS) regarding the extension of the contracts for the Recycling Processing and County Blue Box Collection and Recycling Repairs and Maintenance.

The General Manager also stated the if WDS agrees to engage in discussions, that the Board authorize the General Manager along with the Board Chair and Vice Chair to engage in negotiations.

Moved by Kieran McKenzie Seconded by Ed Sleiman THAT the Board approve Authority administration to engage in discussions with Windsor Disposal Services Ltd. (WDS) regarding the extension of:

(a) a combined contract for the Processing of all recyclables delivered to Essex-Windsor’s two Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) and for the Curbside Collection of Blue Boxes in the seven County Municipalities

(b) a contract for the Repairs & Maintenance of Recycling Processing Equipment in the two EWSWA MRFs.

Moved by Kieran McKenzie Seconded by Ed Sleiman THAT if WDS is agreeable to the extensions that the Board authorize the General Manager to consult with the Chair and Vice Chair in regards to any price increases, and, pending successful negotiations to execute extension agreements as follows:

(a) THAT the EWSWA exercise the 2-year extension option as contained within the current agreement pertaining to the Processing of all recyclables delivered to Essex-Windsor’s two Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) and for the Curbside Collection of Blue Boxes in the seven County Municipalities so that the contract


Page 329 of 413


will be extended from its current expiry date of November 30, 2020 to December 31, 2022.

(b) THAT a further extension clause be included in the Processing and Collection agreement that will allow for variable extension terms to cover the period January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2025.

(c) THAT the EWSWA exercise the 2-year extension option as contained within the current agreement pertaining to the Repairs & Maintenance of Recycling Processing Equipment in the two EWSWA MRFs so that the contract will be extended from its current expiry date of November 30, 2020 to December 31, 2022.

(d) THAT a further extension clause be included in the Repairs & Maintenance agreement that will allow for variable extension terms to cover the period of January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2025.


12. Finance and Administration

A. 2020 Budget Approval Update

The Manager of Finance referred to page 19 of the agenda package. She stated that on January 27, 2020, Authority Administration attended Windsor City Council to present the 2020 Budget. She stated that Windsor City Council resolved to approve the Authority’s budget at that meeting without any presentation by Authority staff and without any questions to Authority staff. She stated that a full 2020 budget has now been approved by both Essex County Council and the City of Windsor Council.

Moved by Gary McNamara Seconded by Fabio Costante THAT the Board receive the EWSWA 2020 Budget Approval Status Report as information.


B. 2019 Budget Projection Update

The Manager of Finance referred to page 21 of the agenda package regarding a 2019 revenue projection update. She stated that on December 3, 2019 the Authority Board was advised of additional contaminated soil material being delivered to the Regional Landfill from a local construction project. This large construction project along with additional un-projected greenhouse vines and waste material has resulted in an additional $980,000 in revenue for 2019.


Page 330 of 413


The Manager of Finance stated that recycling commodity prices are still struggling and the revenue earned from the sale of recycled material was $67,700 lower than projected for 2019.

The additional net revenue serves to increase the 2019 projected surplus. A full year end report for 2019 will be provided to the Board in May when the audit is completed by KPMG.

Mr. McKenzie asked where would the money be allocated if the Authority realizes an actual surplus. The Manager of Finance stated that it would be included in the Rate Stabilization Reserve.

Mr. Morrison asked if the Authority is receiving a lot of soil from the new bridge project and if more soil is expected from this project. The Manager of Finance stated the Authority has received approximately 13,000 tonnes of soil material as of January 31, 2020. She stated that she will provide an update for January – March 2020 at the May Board meeting. She stated that the 2020 budget includes 20,000 tonnes of episodic waste which is what this type of material is considered.

Moved by Aldo DiCarlo Seconded by Hilda MacDonald THAT the Board receive the 2019 Budget Projection Update Report as information.


C. Summary of Legal Accounts

Moved by Gary McNamara Seconded by Ed Sleiman THAT the Board authorize the payment of the legal account as summarized.


13. Other Items

No other items were raised for discussion.

14. By-Laws

A. By-Law 1-2020

Being a By-Law to Authorize the Execution of an Agreement between the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority and Toromont Ltd. for the Supply of a Front-End Loader and a Five-Year Service Contract for use at Transfer Station #2 in Kingsville.

Moved by Aldo DiCarlo Seconded by Gary McNamara


Page 331 of 413


THAT By-Law 1-2020, Being a By-Law to Authorize the Execution of an Agreement between the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority and Toromont Ltd. for the Supply of a Front-End Loader and a Five-Year Service Contract for use at Transfer Station #2 in Kingsville.


B. By-Law 2-2020

Being a By-Law to Authorize the Extension of Agreements between the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority and Windsor Disposal Services Ltd. for (a) Recycling Processing and County Blue Box Collection and (b) Recycling Repairs and Maintenance.

Moved by Aldo DiCarlo Seconded by Gary McNamara THAT By-Law 2-2020, Being a By-Law to Authorize the General Manager, in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair, to extend the Agreements between the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority and Windsor Disposal Services Ltd. for (a) Recycling Processing and County Blue Box Collection and (b) Recycling Repairs and Maintenance.


C. By-Law 3-2020

Being a By-Law to Confirm the Proceedings of the Board of the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority.

Moved by Aldo DiCarlo Seconded by Gary McNamara THAT By-Law 3-2020, Being a By-Law to Confirm the Proceedings of the Board of the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority be given three readings and be adopted this 4th

day of February, 2020. 13-2020

Carried Unanimously

15. Future Meeting Dates

Tuesday, March 3, 2020 – no meeting planned Tuesday, April 7, 2020 Tuesday, May 5, 2020 Tuesday, June 2, 2020 Tuesday, July 7, 2020 Wednesday, August 12, 2020 Tuesday, September 1, 2020 Tuesday, October 6, 2020 Tuesday, November 3, 2020 Tuesday, December 1, 2020


Page 332 of 413


16. Adjournment

Moved by Ed Sleiman Seconded by Jim Morrison THAT the Board stand adjourned at 5:17 pm.

All of which is respectfully submitted.


llija Maodus General Manager

Page 11 of 11



Subject: Traffic Calming - Adapting to COVID-19 Emergency - City-Wide

Moved by: Councillor Kaschak Seconded by: Councillor McKenzie


THAT, for the duration of the municipal declared state of emergency, the requirement for resident petitions in the Traffic Calming Policy BE WAIVED; and,

THAT Administration BE DIRECTED to use 311 polls in place of these petitions.

Carried.

Report Number: S 64/2020

Clerk’s File: MH/13786 & ST2020

Clerk’s Note: The recommendation of the Standing Committee & Administration are

the same.

Item No. 8.16


Page 1 of 6


Subject: Traffic Calming - Adapting to COVID-19 Emergency - City-Wide

Reference:


Author: Jeff Hagan Transportation Planning Senior Engineer

519-255-6267 ext 6003 [email protected]

Report Date: April 6, 2020 Clerk’s File #: MH/13786 ST2020


Recommendation:

That, for the duration of the municipal declared state of emergency, the requirement for resident petitions in the Traffic Calming Policy BE WAIVED, and Administration BE

DIRECTED to use 311 polls in place of these petitions.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

Traffic Calming

Traffic calming reviews and projects on City of Windsor streets are governed by the Traffic Calming Policy. The current version of the Traffic Calming Policy was adopted by

Council in September 2015. A flowchart of the review process for traffic calming requests is attached as Appendix 1.

The Environmental Assessment Act excludes traffic calming projects from

environmental assessment requirements; because of this, Council has the freedom to establish or adjust review and approval processes for traffic calming as it sees fit.

COVID-19 Crisis

In response to the COVID-19 crisis, a state of emergency was declared provincially on March 17, 2020, and in the City of Windsor on March 20, 2020.


Page 2 of 6

As of the date of this report, both declarations remain in effect. Administration is unable to hold traditional, in-person public open houses because of the ongoing restrictions on

public gatherings.

Discussion:

Administration continues to receive and review traffic calming requests during the declared emergency.

Issues resulting from the COVID-19 crisis have caused challenges in implementing the Traffic Calming Policy; these issues are summarized in Table 1, along with proposed approaches for Council’s consideration to address these issues.

Traffic Calming Process Step

Issue Proposed Approach

Traffic Data

Collection

Current traffic volumes are not reflective of

typical conditions.

Use a GPS-based service to obtain traffic data from before COVID-19

restrictions were in place.

Petition Circulating petitions door-to-door is inconsistent

with social distancing.

Allow the following measures for the duration of the declared emergency:

Replace petition with a survey through 311

Notify residents in petition area with a mailed notice

Public Meeting Currently, in-person public open houses

cannot be held.

Replace the in-person public

open house with an online public meeting

Provide options for residents without internet access to receive

meeting materials and submit comments.

Extend the length of the

comment period to allow more time for questions and answers

by phone

Further discussion on each item is provided below:

Traffic Data Collection

The COVID-19 outbreak has caused a sharp reduction in motor vehicle travel. Because of this, any traffic data collected now would not be reflective of normal conditions.

Within the past few years, certain companies have begun offering various products that can provide traffic counts based on GPS data and other sources from cell phones,


Page 3 of 6

connected vehicles (e.g. OnStar-equipped vehicles), ridesharing services, and freight vehicle tracking services.

Recently, as this technology has matured and as these data sources have become more prevalent, these services have become a viable source of traffic data in some circumstances. Administration is in the process of purchasing a subscription to

Streetlight Data, a service that already has GPS-based traffic data for 2019 for all Windsor streets; this has enabled the review of traffic calming requests – as well as

certain other reviews that rely on traffic data – to continue despite the current inability to collect data by traditional methods.

Since the Traffic Calming Policy does not specify any particular method for traffic data

collection, this approach does not require any waiver or amendment to the Policy.

Petition

To confirm a minimum level of neighbourhood support for traffic calming, the Traffic Calming Policy calls for requestors to circulate a petition to a one-block area; 60% support from this area is required for the project to proceed.

Current restrictions on face-to-face contact make it impractical for a resident to circulate a petition door-to-door.

An alternative that would not require face-to-face contact would be to replace the paper survey with a poll through 311. Residents in the petition area would be notified by a mailed letter.

Current Petitions

As of the date of this report, there are 11 traffic calming petitions that have been sent to requestors for circulation that have not yet expired and have not yet been returned.

Should Council approve this temporary modification to the Traffic Calming Policy, these requestors will be contacted to confirm the status of their petitions and to offer them the

option of replacing their petitions with a poll through 311.

Public Meeting

The Traffic Calming Policy identifies a number of required points of public consultation.

One such point is a public meeting where the draft traffic calming plan is presented to residents for feedback.

Administration proposes that during the time that an in-person public meeting would not be in keeping with physical distancing restrictions and guidelines, any public meetings required by the Traffic Calming Policy be held online.

The Policy does not specify that the meeting must be in-person, so this change in approach does not require a waiver of the Policy.


Page 4 of 6

In order to ensure that the public consultation is robust and that residents without internet access have an opportunity to review and comment on materials presented to

the public, the following measures are proposed:

Current outreach methods to continue:

o Meeting notices will be delivered to properties in the project area

o Any BIAs, neighbourhood associations, or other local groups in the project area will be contacted

o Meeting materials will be posted on the City web site

o Meeting notices will be published in the Windsor Star, City social media accounts, and Snap’d City event listings.

Adaptations to address COVID-19:

o Notices delivered to residents will identify that meeting materials can be

mailed to residents on request.

o Comment periods after meetings will be lengthened to allow additional resident questions and comments by phone, email and mail.

“Pilot” Before Traffic Calming Policy Update

The Traffic Calming Policy is due for its 5-year review in September 2020. Alternative

approaches taken in response to the COVID-19 emergency allow for the evaluation of new approaches that could be considered by Council for inclusion in a Traffic Calming Policy update.

With traditional traffic data collection using automatic traffic recorders and tubes placed across the roadway, traffic data cannot be collected in summer months (since traffic

volumes are not representative of normal conditions) or during the winter maintenance season (since the tubes are vulnerable to damage by plows). Because of this, even under ideal conditions, traffic calming requests may wait for up to several months to be

reviewed.

In contrast, the purchase of a subscription to a GPS-based traffic data service will allow

the review time for traffic calming requests to decrease significantly, since traffic data is available immediately at all times of year.

GPS-based traffic data services also allow types of analysis that were not practical

previously, such as directly measuring the percentage of trips on a street that are cut-through traffic. These capabilities may create opportunities for new approaches that

Council may choose to incorporate into the Traffic Calming Policy; an evaluation and recommendations will be included when the draft Traffic Calming Policy update is brought forward for Council’s consideration.


Page 5 of 6

Risk Analysis:

No critical or significant risks have been identified.

The traffic data subscription service is currently available from only one supplier. This situation creates a minor to moderate risk of potential for cost increases from year to

year. Since the Corporation would not be obligated to renew the subscription, Administration recommends that this risk be tolerated.

Financial Matters:

The current annual cost for GPS-based traffic data from Streetlight Data is $66,395 plus HST per year. For the first year, this cost will be paid for from the Traffic Calming capital project (7069022). If the trial of this service is successful and the service remains cost-

effective, Administration will include a budget submission for this service in future budgets.

Consultations:

Candice Fader and Karrie Sobocan, 311 Call Centre

Shawna Boakes, Traffic Operations

Conclusion:

Several measures are proposed that will allow traffic calming requests to continue to be

responded to in a timely and effective manner despite the challenges presented by COVID-19. One of these measures – replacing in-person petitions with resident polls through 311 – requires a waiver of the Traffic Calming Policy for the duration of the

emergency.

Some of the measures proposed have the potential to improve service delivery even

after COVID-19 restrictions are lifted. Administration will evaluate these measures and bring forward recommendations for Council̀ s consideration as part of the upcoming Traffic Calming Policy update.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title



Shelby Askin-Hager City Solicitor

Joe Mancina City Treasurer



Page 6 of 6

Notifications:

Name Address Email

N/A

Appendices:

1 Flowchart - Traffic Calming Request Process


Request Received

Initial Review

Speed & Volume Check

Resident Petition

Warrant/Prioritization Review

Draft Traffic Calming Plan &

Public Meeting

Resident Approval

Council Approval

A detailed review over a wider area is carried out. Streets that meet warrant are brought forward in priority by score.

Outcome Study

Follow-up Report to Council

Either speeds or traffic volumes on the street must meet the minimum threshold for traffic calming.

Petition is circulated by the requestor to a one-block area.

Construction

For a traffic calming review, a street must:

Be a residential local or collector

Be at least 150 m long

Not have already had a traffic calming review in the last 5 years.

A draft traffic calming plan is presented at a public meeting. Feedback is solicited from residents and other stakeholders.

Neighbourhood support is determined by a survey through 311.

The traffic calming plan is presented to Council for approval and funding.

Traffic calming measures are installed.

Traffic data is collected to confirm that the traffic calming measures are functioning as intended. If they are not, additional measures to address the remaining issues are identified.

Findings of the outcome study are reported to Council. If the outcome study recommended changes to the traffic calming plan, these changes are brought forward for approval and funding.

Pro

jec

t In

itia

tio

n

Final Traffic Calming Plan The traffic calming plan is revised based on the feedback received.

Pro

jec

t

Ap

pro

va

l

Pro

jec

t

Deve

lop

me

nt

Pro

jec

t Im

ple

me

nta

tio

n &

Pe

rfo

rma

nce

Mo

nit

ori

ng



Subject: Riverside Drive at Ford Boulevard - Speed Review - Ward 6

Moved by: Councillor Francis Seconded by: Councillor McKenzie


THAT the report of the Transportation Planning Senior Engineer dated May 29, 2020 entitled “Riverside Drive at Ford Boulevard – Speed Review – Ward 6” BE RECEIVED

for information. Carried.


Clerk’s File: ST202


the same.

Item No. 8.17


Page 1 of 6


Subject: Riverside Drive at Ford Boulevard - Speed Review - Ward 6

Reference:


Author: Jeff Hagan Transportation Planning Senior Engineer

519-255-6267 ext 6003 [email protected] Planning & Building Services

Report Date: May 29, 2020 Clerk’s File #: ST2020


Recommendation:

THAT report S 78/2020, “Riverside Drive at Ford Boulevard - Speed Review,” BE RECEIVED for information.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

At its May 6, 2019 meeting, Council passed the following resolution regarding report S 69/2019, Riverside Drive / Ford Boulevard Pedestrians - Additional Signage:

CR226/2019

That the report of the Transportation Planning Engineer dated

March 20, 2019 entitled Riverside Drive / Ford Boulevard Pedestrians - Additional Signage BE RECEIVED for information;

and further,

That administration BE DIRECTED to proceed with the speed trailer and reviewing the addition of the 40 km/hr signs in the

subject area.

This report provides the requested additional information.


Page 2 of 6

Related Reports

This report arises from a number of past reports regarding pedestrian crossing issues

on Riverside Drive in the vicinity of Ford Boulevard. These reports address potential pedestrian crossovers at two locations, as shown in Figure 1:

1. Riverside Drive East at Ford Boulevard: a pedestrian crossover is not

recommended at this location due to sight distance limitations caused by the curve immediately west of the intersection.

2. Riverside Drive East, west of Ford Boulevard (near the Peace Fountain): a

pedestrian crossover in this area is feasible, but funding is not yet available to install it.

Figure 1: Locations Reviewed for Pedestrian Crossovers

Details on the past reports are as follows:

17762 CQ6-2015 - Installation of Pedestrian Crosswalk on Riverside Drive

responded to the placement of a pedestrian crossing on Riverside Drive East. The report noted that a pedestrian signal was possible on Riverside Drive East

west of Buckingham Boulevard at an estimated cost of $205,000 (as of the date of the report); these costs would be largely throwaway costs with the upcoming reconstruction of Riverside Drive East. Installation of the pedestrian signal was

referred to the 2016 budget process by Council (Council motion M243-2015). Ultimately, the pedestrian signal was not funded in the 2016 capital budget.

S 194/2016 Riverside Drive/Ford Boulevard Pedestrian Crossing responded

to a Council Question (CQ33-2016) regarding the potential to deter pedestrians from crossing Riverside Drive East at Ford Boulevard if a controlled crossing

could not be provided. The report recommended that signage or fencing to deter


Page 3 of 6

pedestrians from crossing at this location not be provided. The report was received for information.

S 157/2018 CQ17-2018 Riverside Drive East / Ford Boulevard Pedestrians

responded to a Council Question (CQ17-2018) requesting a review of Riverside Drive East at Ford Boulevard to determine if a pedestrian crossover was

warranted. The report identified that pedestrian crossover is not warranted at this location. Council Resolution CR598/2018 (provided above) was passed in

response.

S 90/2018 Pedestrian Crossovers provided a list of locations City-wide where

pedestrian crossovers had been requested and referred the list of warranted

locations to 2019 budget deliberations. This report noted that a pedestrian crossover is not recommended for Riverside Drive East at Ford Boulevard.

C 49/2019 Pedestrian Crossovers - Priority List and Education Campaign

provided criteria to rank warranted pedestrian crossover requests in priority

sequence. The report also noted that Riverside Drive East at the Peace Fountain is ranked #5 in the prioritization list at that time (note: this location is currently ranked #9, as a number of higher-ranking requests have been received since this

time).

S 69/2019 Riverside Drive / Ford Boulevard Pedestrians - Additional

Signage responded to a Council Resolution (CR598/2018) directing

Administration to consider potential additional pedestrian warning signage for Riverside Drive at or near Ford Boulevard. The report concluded that additional

pedestrian warning signage would not be in keeping with provincial guidelines.

Riverside Drive Vista Improvement Project

As part of the approved design for the Riverside Drive Vista Improvement Project, Riverside Drive will be realigned to the west of Ford Boulevard and an “N-2” pedestrian

node will be provided at the Riverside Drive East / Ford Boulevard intersection. The approved design for this section is shown in Figure 2. A typical N-2 node is shown in

Figure 3


Page 4 of 6

Figure 2: Riverside Drive Vista Improvement Project Approved Design (IPS: Intersection Pedestrian Signal)

Figure 3: Typical N-2 Node, Riverside Drive Vista Improvement Project

Detailed design for Phase 2A of the project (Ford Boulevard to St. Rose Avenue) is

currently underway with construction planned for 2022-2024.

Detailed design for Phase 3A (Strabane Avenue to Ford Boulevard) is planned to

commence in 2024 with construction planned for 2026-2028.


Page 5 of 6

Discussion:

As directed by the Council resolution, a speed survey was carried out on Riverside Drive East near Ford Boulevard on May 13 through 15, 2019. The results of this survey are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Radar Trailer Speed Survey Results, Riverside Drive East, West of Ford Boulevard, Eastbound

Item Value

Speed Limit 50 km/h

Average Speed 51.0 km/h

85th Percentile Speed 58.3 km/h

Percentage of Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit 61.3%

Percentage of Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit by More than 10 km/h 9.6%

These results are similar to speed data recently collected on other sections of Riverside Drive East, and are similar to speed data that informed the Riverside Vista Improvement Project (discussed further under “Speed Limit” below).

Curve Warning Signage

Warning signs for the curve on Riverside Drive in the vicinity of Ford Boulevard were

reviewed by Traffic Operations and confirmed to be appropriate.

Speed Limit

Speed limit reductions were considered as part of the Riverside Drive Vista

Improvement Environmental Assessment. This option was recommended against in the Vista study; the following conclusion was made regarding speed limit reductions

(Riverside Drive Vista Improvement ESR):

“Based on industry practice, 50 km/hr is a reasonable speed limit for Riverside Drive, assuming it is effectively enforced. A 40 km/hr

limit is more applicable to local residential streets. A 40 km/hr zone along all of Riverside Drive would increase driver frustration, while

adding zones of 40 km/hr speed limits would tend to confuse motorists.”


Page 6 of 6

Rather than using speed limit changes to attempt to control speeds on Riverside Drive, the approved design for the Riverside Drive Vista Improvement Project incorporates

traffic calming features. This continues to be Administration’s recommended approach for Riverside Drive.

Risk Analysis:

No risks are associated with this informational report.

Financial Matters:

No new expenditures are recommended.

Consultations:

Shawna Boakes, Traffic Operations

Anna Godo, Engineering

Conclusion:

As directed, Administration measured traffic speeds on Riverside Drive near Ford Drive. Speeds were found to be similar to other sections of Riverside Drive.

The Riverside Drive Vista Improvement Project will include traffic calming features;

Administration continues to recommend this approach to address speeding on this portion of Riverside Drive rather than reductions in the speed limit.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title


Shelby Askin-Hager City Solicitor



Notifications:

Name Address Email

Councillor Gignac

Appendices:

N/A



Subject: Revised 2021 Road Rehabilitation Program - City Wide

Moved by: Councillor Francis Seconded by: Councillor McKenzie

Decision Number: ETPS 770 That City Council APPROVE the following revised 2021 road rehabilitation program,

which will be completed in conjunction with the ENWIN-Water Division’s directive to address lead water connections:

PROPOSED REVISED 2021 ROAD REHABILITATION PROGRAM

ITEM

NO. STREET FROM TO

REHAB.

TYPE

1 CAMERON AVE RIVERSIDE DR CUL-DE-SAC M

2 KILDARE RD ASSUMPTION ST WYANDOTTE ST E R

3 LABELLE STREET ROCKWELL

AVENUE ALEXANDRA AVENUE R

4 GLADSTONE TECUMSEH YPRES R

5 MATCHETTE RD EC ROW CHAPPELL AVE FDR

6 TECUMSEH ROAD

EAST WALKER RD DROUILLARD RD R/M

Carried.


Clerk’s File: AFB/13698 & SW2020


the same.

Item No. 8.18


Page 1 of 5


Subject: Revised 2021 Road Rehabilitation Program – City Wide

Reference:


Author: Michael Cappucci Contracts Coordinator

519-255-6560 x4234 [email protected] Public Works - Operations

Report Date: June 5, 2020 Clerk’s File #: AFB/13698 SW2020


Recommendation:

That City Council APPROVE the following revised 2021 road rehabilitation program,

which will be completed in conjunction with the ENWIN-Water Division’s directive to

address lead water connections.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

The 2021 road rehabilitation program submitted during the 2020 capital budget deliberations was initially planned in 2016 and first included as part of the 2017 5-year

capital budget submission. Since then ENWIN-Water, in conjunction with Council directive (CR489/2017), has been focusing their infrastructure replacements to address lead connections. City administration, under Council by-law B7/2018, are to work

together with ENWIN-Water by completing lead water service projects in conjunction with City of Windsor infrastructure projects. The submitted 2021 road rehabilitation

program has not been updated since the change in directive, and as such the revised 2021 road rehabilitation program being proposed in this report addresses this lead focused directive.

It is important to note that the current 2021 road rehabilitation projects currently identified within the 2020 8 year capital budget for years 2021 through 2027 needs to be

revised in advance of the next capital budget cycle in order to make room for the proposed 2021 changes. Although projects will be moved to future years, there may be potential to move projects up should grant funding become available.


Page 2 of 5

Discussion:

The revised 2021 road rehabilitation program proposes upgrades to existing infrastructure that is in need of repair and that has a high amount of lead services, as per the above mentioned directive. The submitted 2021 road rehabilitation program to

date has many projects including areas with no lead services. This results in ENWIN-Water not completing water main work along these streets in 2021, but likely completing

rehabilitation work within these streets after they meet their lead directive (approximately within the next 5 to 7 years). As a result, continuing with the current road rehabilitation program would not be optimizing City resources, resulting in

completing infrastructure upgrades on the same street twice within a 5-10 year span.

The proposed revisions will allow the City of Windsor and ENWIN-Water to complete

the proposed projects in 2021 and the relocated 2021 road rehabilitation projects in future years, resulting in cost savings to both The City of Windsor and ENWIN-Water. City administration will continue to monitor future road rehabilitation projects to ensure

that they are properly aligned with ENWIN-Water’s lead initiative.

ENWIN-Water has reviewed the proposed 2021 road rehabilitation projects and are in

agreement with the revised locations as outlined below. The proposed optimized plan addresses 50 more lead services than the original 2021 road rehabilitation project plan.

One additional change has been made to the 2021 road rehabilitation project list

regarding Lauzon Parkway. Lauzon Parkway is now planned for full reconstruction under the road rehabilitation program in future years It should be noted the funding

allowing for this work is a direct result of the approved AMP funding increase. Matchette Road repairs have now been added for 2021 in place of originally planned Lauzon Parkway repairs which will now be a full reconstruction.

Risk Analysis:

This initiative seeks to mitigate known public health risks surrounding the presence of lead water connections.

There are no critical or significant risks associated with the recommendations in this report.

This report speaks specifically to the 2021 previously identified and approved in

principle, road rehabilitation projects which are being impacted by Enwin’s planned projects to address the lead connection directives. It is expected that all other

previously approved in principle annual road rehabilitation projects (2022 to 2027) will also need to be reviewed during the 2021 capital budget development and may be impacted in whole or in part in order to align with Enwin. To mitigate the potential impact

to other approved in principle road rehabilitation projects, the 2021 capital budget may exclude the identification of specific road rehabilitation work in future years as it may fall

outside Enwin’s planning horizon. Administration, at the City and Enwin, are also working towards leveraging existing software solutions owned by the City to develop better planning and project alignment strategies going forward, both for planning and

cost considerations.

The current 2020 capital budget is based on the continuance of funding recently

approved with the AMP. Should this funding be reduced in whole or in part, there will


Page 3 of 5

be additional challenges in rescheduling the work postponed in this report, as well as other projects potentially impacted during the 2021 capital budget development.

Financial Matters:

The 2021 road rehabilitation program submitted to Council during the 2020 capital

budget deliberations is outlined in the following table.

Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are to be rescheduled within the upcoming 9-year capital

budget plan for 2021 to 2029.

EXISTING 2021 ROAD REHABILITATION PROGRAM

ITEM NO.

STREET FROM TO REHAB. TYPE

1 CAMERON AVE RIVERSIDE DR CUL-DE-SAC R/M

2 LONGFELLOW AVENUE

ALEXANDRA AVENUE

LABELLE STREET M

3 ALEXANDRA AVENUE EC ROW GRAND MARAIS ROAD

M

4 ACADEMY DRIVE EC ROW GRAND MARAIS

ROAD M

5 DANDURAND AVENUE

EC ROW GRAND MARAIS ROAD

M

6 VIRGINIA PARK AVE EC ROW GRAND MARAIS ROAD

LIP

7 LABELLE STREET ROCKWELL AVENUE ALEXANDRA AVENUE R

8 LABELLE STREET ALEXANDRA

AVENUE

DOMINION

BOULEVARD M

9 LAUZON PARKWAY FOREST GLADE

DRIVE TECUMSEH ROAD PN

10 TECUMSEH ROAD EAST

WALKER RD DROUILLARD RD R/M

TOTAL BUDGET $5,048,000.00


Page 4 of 5

The proposed revised 2021 locations are outlined in the following table.

Items 2, 4, and 5 are proposed additions to 2021 program.

PROPOSED REVISED 2021 ROAD REHABILITATION PROGRAM

ITEM NO.

STREET FROM TO REHAB. TYPE

1 CAMERON AVE RIVERSIDE DR CUL-DE-SAC M

2 KILDARE RD ASSUMPTION ST WYANDOTTE ST E R

3 LABELLE STREET ROCKWELL

AVENUE ALEXANDRA AVENUE R

4 GLADSTONE TECUMSEH YPRES R

5 MATCHETTE RD EC ROW CHAPPELL AVE FDR

6 TECUMSEH ROAD EAST

WALKER RD DROUILLARD RD R/M

TOTAL BUDGET $5,048,000.00

There will be no impact on the total 2021 budget required as a result of the proposed 2021 road rehabilitation revisions as outlined in this report.

Consultations:

Spencer Johnston Manager Water Construction & Design ENWIN Utilities Ltd,

Chris Manzon Director Engineering (Water) ENWIN Utilities Ltd.

Conclusion:

It is recommended that City Council approve the revised 2021 road rehabilitation

program to work in conjunction with the ENWIN-Water Division.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

Cindy Becker Financial Planning Administrator – Public

Works Operations


Page 5 of 5

Name Title

Phong Nguy Manager, Contracts, Field Services &

Maintenance

Dwayne Dawson Executive Director of Operations




Notifications:

Name Address Email

Spencer Johnston

Manager Water Construction

& Design

ENWIN Utilities Ltd.

4545 Rhodes Drive, P.O. Box 1625 Station A,

Windsor, ON N8W 5T1

[email protected]

Chris Manzon

Director Engineering (Water)

ENWIN Utilities Ltd.

4545 Rhodes Drive, P.O.

Box 1625 Station A, Windsor, ON N8W 5T1

[email protected]

Appendices:



Page 1 of 8


Subject: Response to CQ#11-2020 Regarding Open-Air Burning

Reference:


Author: Stephen Laforet Fire Chief

519-253-3016 ext 253 [email protected] Fire and Rescue Services

Report Date: June 25, 2020 Clerk’s File #: MH/13786


Recommendation:

That Council RECEIVE the report of the Fire Chief dated July 13, 2020 titled Response

to CQ#11-2020 Regarding Open-Air Burning; and

That Council PROVIDE direction to the Fire Chief and Administration regarding the

establishing of an Open-air Burning by-law within the City of Windsor.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

At the council meeting, held May 25, 2020, Council directed the following question to the Fire Chief:

In light of the current state of Emergency, along with orders asking for social distancing during this pandemic,

I ask that Administration prepare a report for Council outlining the allowing of City residents to be allowed to have contained backyard fires at their residences after obtaining a prescribed permit with a fee structure attached to

the permit from City Hall.

Item No. 11.1


Page 2 of 8

Of course proper safety measures are to be outlined to the residents along with types of wood to be burned and only prescribed hours of the day/night

allowed for the burn.

Many of our surrounding Municipalities are allowed to do this and I feel this would provide a revenue source to the City via permits as well as enhancing

residents quality of life when experiencing isolation and being told for the most part to stay home during this pandemic crisis.

Open burning or open-air burning means any fire or burning practice that is conducted outside of the building, and includes, but is not limited to, small confined fires, large confined fires, fires and burn barrels, outdoor recreational fireplaces, prescribed

burning, and construction and demolition site fires.

In Ontario, open-air burning is regulated through Section 7.1 of the Fire Protection and

Prevention Act (FPPA) and through Part IV of the Ontario Fire Code. Each are provided below:

Fire Protection and Prevention Act, R.S.O 1997 states:

7.1 (1) A Council off a Municipality may pass by-laws,

(b) Regulating the setting of open-air fires, including the times during which

open-air fires may be set.

Part IV of the FPPA, the Ontario Fire Code section 2.4.4.4 states:

2.4.4.4. (1) Open-air burning shall not take place unless

(a) it has been approved, or

(b) the open-air burning consists of a small, confined fire that is

(i) used to cook food on a grill, barbecue or spit,

(ii) commensurate with the type and quantity of food being cooked, and

(iii) supervised at all times.

(2) Sentence (1) does not apply to the use of an appliance that

(a) meets the requirements of the Technical Standards and Safety Act,

2000,

(b) is for outdoor use,

(c) if assembled, has been assembled in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, and

(d) if installed, has been installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s

instructions.


Page 3 of 8

Some municipalities such as the City of Toronto chose to regulate open-air burning through the Ontario Fire Code and generally prohibit burning. Other municipalities

implement a by-law that establishes, in great detail, where and when open-air fires are allowed along with other directives, including but not limited to, the type of fuel being burned, weather or atmospheric conditions which are suitable for air burning and permit

fees and penalties for non-compliance.

Moving forward with the direction/question posed by Council and open burning requires

the establishing of a by-law. The Chief Fire Official of a municipality can approve open burning; however, he/she does not have the authority to charge a fee for permits or implement a fee structure without Council approval. This must be done by council

through a by-law.

Open-air burning within the City of Windsor has been regulated through section 2.4.4.4

of the Fire Code under the authority of the Fire Chief. For at least the last 30 years, open-air burning has not been allowed within the City, save and except for extreme and special circumstances.

Generally, the prohibition on burning within the City has been the result of a combination of concerns that include safety and health, air quality, equity and fairness,

and enforceability.

Despite not allowing open-air burning in the City, residents are still able to enjoy having a fire outdoors using alternative appliances that use natural gas or propane as fuel. The

appliances meet CSA and TSSA requirements and when used properly are safer and cleaner than burning wood or other Class A combustibles. These appliances may be used in a wider range of environmental conditions and do not create the negative

environmental or health effects typically seen with traditional open-air burning.

When regulating open-air burning, public education regarding safety and the

identification of alternative options is considered good practice. Windsor Fire & Rescue Services maintains a comprehensive information page at www.windsorfire.com that informs the public of the rules regarding open-air burning. Along with a written

explanation of the current position, the page provides photos of alternative appliances deemed acceptable for use within the City.

Discussion:

The range of conditions and regulations regarding open-air burning vary greatly across Ontario municipalities. Detailed below are a number of factors that municipal councils should consider when formulating their position on open-air burning.

Safety & Health and the Environment

Open-air burning may not be widely recognized as potentially harmful; however, the

pollution created by open-air burning has the potential to create or exacerbate health and environmental problems. Young children and the elderly, particularly those with underlying respiratory conditions (asthma, COPD) and cardiovascular diseases, are

more susceptible to the pollutants created by open-air burning.


http://www.windsorfire.com/

Page 4 of 8

Smoke contains a mixture of chemical by-products generated during combustion. The exact nature of the composition of smoke is dependent on the material(s) that are

burned. Smoke pollutes the air; pollutants of particular health and environmental concern from open burning include airborne particles that are 2 – 5 micro metres or less. Black carbon (soot) particles, polychlorinated dibenzo dioxins (PCDD) and

polychlorinated dibenzo furons (PCDF’s) and polyaromatic hydrocarbons. The material burning determines the chemical composition of smoke and there are a number of

regulatory and voluntary options that may be employed to substantially reduce emissions from open-air burning. While the only way to achieve zero emissions is through a prohibition on burning, banning the burning of some materials, such as

plastics, garbage, treated wood and green vegetation can reduce the amount of smoke and some of the harmful chemicals generated through combustion.

In addition to aggravated health conditions, nuisance problems from smoke can arise. Haze and odour problems migrate from the site of the fire, affecting neighbours and others in the community. These problems become more serious when there is little wind

to clear the air or physical barriers blocking the wind such as those in urban areas. These conditions can have real impacts on personal health and the general quality of

life in the community. When considering a by-law, it is important to include provisions that maintain the ability of neighbors to enjoy their property when someone else is burning.

Equity and Fairness

Establishing perimeters such as distance from structures (including fences) is an essential component of a burning by-law. Establishing these distances ultimately means

that some members of the community, due to the size of their property or proximity to structures, would not meet the prerequisites of a burn permit and; therefore, do not have

the opportunity that others may have.

Administration and Enforcement

The City will incur some administrative costs for establishing a permit system and or

approval mechanism. Additionally, regulations require a corresponding level of enforcement. Enforcement will require enforcement officers to investigate violations of

the by-law. Fees and fines should be implemented to offset, to the greatest degree possible, additional costs incurred by the City.

Setting Regulations

Within Ontario, some urban centres have prohibited open-air burning altogether, others have imposed significant regulations, while others allow it with minimal restrictions. (see

Figure 1). The array of existing conditions creates difficulty in determining an appropriate course of action. In some cases, municipalities adjacent to one another regulate open-air burning at opposite ends of the spectrum of possibilities.


Page 5 of 8

Figure 1

Municipality Open-air

Burning Allowed in Urban

Area

Open

Burning By-Law

Y- N

Fire Size Distance to

Structure/Road

Permit

Fee

Toronto N N N/A N/A N/A

Ottawa N Y N/A N/A Y

Windsor N N N/A N/A N/A

London Y Y 46 cm x 46 cm x 30

cm/1 m3

50 m Y

Oakville Y Y 2 ft3 (61 cm3) 3m (10 ft) N

Richmond Hill Y Y 1 m3 49.5 ft (15 m)

Markham N Y 1.5 m2 Y

Kitchener Y N 1 m3 16.4 ft (5 m) N

Vaughan Y Y N/A 198.6 ft (60 m) Y

Brampton Y Y 1 m3 16.4 ft (5 m) Y

Chatham/Kent y y N/A 25’ (7.5 m) y

Amherstburg Y Y 1 m3 15 m Y – one

time

LaSalle Y Y 1 m2 3 m N

Lakeshore Y Y 24” x 24” x 24”

10’ from hedges, fence,

building, etc.

15’ from property lines

N

Essex Y Y 24” x 24” x 24”

7 m N

Leamington Y Y Y – one time


Page 6 of 8

Municipality Open-air

Burning Allowed

in Urban Area

Open

Burning By-Law

Y- N

Fire Size Distance to

Structure/Road

Permit

Fee

Kingsville Y Y 1 m in height and diameter

3 m from flammable

material, 4.75 m from structures

or property line

N

Tecumseh Y Y 1 m2 N

Regulating Open-air Burning

In the absence of prohibition of open-air burning (recommended), it is imperative that a comprehensive plan for managing open burning be established. A burning by-law can establish a plan and can reduce, but not eliminate, the health and nuisances related to

smoke concerns. It is also important to note that once open-air burning is allowed, it becomes extremely difficult to reverse course and establish a complete prohibition.

A by-law should include detailed requirements aimed at providing good governance, to protect air quality from the impacts of smoke and to provide for safety of people, buildings and structures. The following should be included in a burning bylaw:

Administration:

Fire Permits are an important part of open-air burning administration. They provide

opportunities for public education of fire safety, smoke and environmental issues.

A by-law should establish regulations regarding the use of residential and recreational outdoor fires including the use of outdoor fireplaces (Chimineas or similar). In an urban

setting, such as Windsor, larger fires should only be considered under special circumstances and managed on a case by case basis under the authority of the Fire

Chief.

The by-law should establish a permit fee schedule and fines for non-compliance. The by-law should be enforced through WFRS and allow the enforcement officer to enter on

land at any reasonable time for the purpose of carrying out an inspection and have the authority to order the owner to extinguish any open-air burn at anytime or take the

necessary steps to do so.

Environment:

Open-air burning should be restricted or suspended during periods of poor air quality.

Local air quality programs and complaints in urban areas suggest the need to carefully consider, if allowed, restrictions for the setting of open-air fires. Poor air quality

forecasts, high humidex days and heat events should trigger a ban on burning.


Page 7 of 8

Regulations:

The burning of Open-air fires should be limited to specific times.

Burning should be limited to private residential property

A by-law should prohibit open-air burning that interferes with a neighbor’s ability to enjoy their own property.

Open-air fires should be limited to small confined fires no more than 1 meter in diameter and require set backs from any building or structure no less than 15 meters.

Only clean, dry wood should be allowed. Burning of treated, painted, stained lumber, construction or demolition debris, grass clippings, leaves, brush, or garbage must be prohibited. These materials create an increased health risk to the public and generate

more smoke in comparison to clean, dry wood thus limiting the ability of others to enjoy their own property and the outdoors.

Other Considerations:

Prescribed burns and burning for agricultural purposes should be regulated/allowed through consultation with Windsor Fire & Rescue Services. These events would be

considered separate from the by-law and require approval of the Fire Chief.

The Fire Chief shall have the authority to impose a ban on open-air burning during times

where burning may create an increased risk such as, but not limited to, periods of drought and high temperature days.

Risk Analysis:

A prohibition of burning presents the lowest risk to the City; however, establishing an open-air burning by-law is allowable in the FPPA. The risk associated with allowing open-air burning in the City is low to moderate. It is likely the City will receive complaints

from residents that are both for and against open-air burning thus; a risk to the reputation of the City exists.

Financial Matters:

If direction to establish a burning by-law is given by Council, the subsequent report will

identify the financial matters associated with a permit structure and enforcement.

Consultations:

Office of the Ontario Fire Marshal

Andrea DeJong, Deputy Fire Chief, WFRS

John Lee, Chief Fire Prevention Officer, WFRS


Page 8 of 8

Conclusion:

All fires generate smoke and have the potential to affect health and the environment. In the absence of a prohibition on open-air burning a by-law regulating the setting of open-

air fires can aid in reducing the effects of burning.

In order to be effective, an open-air burning by-law must establish criteria that regulates

the type of fuel allowed to be burned and the times and conditions to be adhered with respect to open-air fires.

It is recommended that Council prohibit open-air fires in the City, however; should

Council be in favour of allowing such, a robust by-law must be established that minimizes the health risks and environmental effects of open burning.

Approvals:

Name Title

Stephen Laforet Fire Chief




Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices:


Page 1 of 4


Subject: Declaration of Vacant Lands Municipally Known as 0 Grand Marais Road East and Part of Closed Grand Marais Road East Surplus and Authority to Offer for Sale-Ward 10

Reference:

Date to Council: July 13, 2020 Author: Chris Carpenter

Coordinator of Real Estate Services [email protected] 519-255-6100 x6420

Report Date: June 12, 2020

Clerk’s File #: APM/2020


Recommendation:

I. THAT the following City of Windsor (the “City”) vacant parcels of land BE

DECLARED surplus:

PARCEL #1:

Municipal address: 0 Grand Marais Road East – vacant parcel of land

situate on the north side of Grand Marais Road East, west of AtkinsonStreet

Legal Description: Park Lot on Registered Plan 1106 Sandwich East,

designated as Parts 1 and 2 on 12R-28235 Approximate Lot size: Irregular

Approximate Lot area: 4,425 sq ft (411.1 m2)

PARCEL #2:

Municipal address: 0 Grand Marais Road East – part of closed Grand

Marais Road East, west of Atkinson Street Legal Description: Part of Closed Grand Marais Road Widening on

Registered Plan 1106 closed by By-Law 90-2008, designated at Parts 3-6

on 12R-28235 Approximate Lot size: 84.5 feet x 68.3 feet (25.75 m x 20.81 m)

Approximate Lot area: 5,737 sq ft (533 m2)(herein the “Subject Parcels”); and

Item No. 11.2


Page 2 of 4

II. THAT the Manager of Real Estate Services BE AUTHORIZED to offer the vacant

parcels of land identified in Recommendation I for sale on the MLS at a price to

be determined by the Manager of Real Estate Services commensurate with an independent appraisal.

Executive Summary:

N/A

Background:

The City owns two abutting vacant parcels of land with a combined approximate area of 10,162 sq ft (944.1 m2). The Subject Parcels are located on the north side of Grand

Marais Road East, west of Atkinson Street, designated as Parts 1 to 6 on 12R-28235 as shown on the aerial diagram attached as Appendix A.

Parcel #1 is a vacant parcel of land and was vested by the Township of Sandwich East in the 1930’s . Parcel #2 was closed by By-Law 90-2008 which did not establish the method of conveyance or disposal of the parcel. Council Resolution CR90/2004

authorized the closure and the resulting by-law. CR90/2004 states:

“That the application by Corporate Services (F. Scarfone, Property Consultant)

for the closing of part of Grand Marais Road East, west of Atkinson BE APPROVED subject to the following:

a) easements to be retained in favour of Bell Canada

and further the General Manager of Infrastructure Services BE AUTHORIZED to publish the required legal notices and supply the appropriate legal description in

accordance with attached Drawing No. CC-1451 and the City Solicitor BE REQUESTED to prepare the grant of easement, the By-law to assume and the By-law to close”

According to Council Report 9982 SAA/7671:

“Corporate Services (Frank Scarfone, representative) has applied for the closing

of part of Grand Marais Road East, west of Atkinson as shown on the attached copy of drawing number CC-1451 for consolidation to sell as a building lot”

“The Property Consultant advises that lands are a consolidation of part of a

right-of-way Part 3, Plan 12R – 19175) with City owned abutting land”

Although By-Law 90-2008 does not state that the closed portion of Grand Marais

Road was being closed to sell as a building lot the above reference demonstrates the intent of the closure.

By-Law 52-2014 establishes a policy for the disposal of Land. Section 5.1.2 of Schedule

“A” attached to By-Law 52-2014 requires that City-owned lands be declared surplus and that Administration seek authority to sell the lands:


Page 3 of 4

5.1.2 Notification of the intention to declare Land surplus and the authority to offer the Surplus Land for sale will be printed in the “Civic Corner” of the Windsor Star.

Discussion:

The Subject Parcels were circulated to determine whether there is a municipal use for

same. A municipal use has not been identified.

Should the recommendations above be approved, the Real Estate staff will reconfigure

the Subject Parcels into two lots fronting onto Grand Marais Road East with frontages of a minimum of 40 foot (12 m) each as to meet the zoning requirements for a duplex dwelling. The two parcels of land would then be listed for sale on the MLS at a price to

be determined by the Manager of Real Estate Services commensurate with an independent appraisal, as appropriate.

If Administration successfully negotiates acceptable offers, a report will be brought to Council or under Delegation of Authority, as appropriate, seeking authority to approve the sale of the Subject Parcels.

Risk Analysis:

There are potential liability issues should someone be injured on the lands. Additionally, maintenance of the lands drains scarce municipal resources. Selling the land will

remove any associated liability issues and maintenance costs for the City.

Financial Matters:

N/A

Consultations:

Fire Department: John Lee

Windsor Police Services: Barry Horrobin Public Works: responses consolidated by Juan Paramo Parks: Mike Clement

Facilities: Tom Graziano Planning Department: Laura Diotte

Housing and Children Services: Tina Moore

Conclusion:

Declaring the vacant parcels of land identified in Recommendation I surplus, and authorizing the Manager of Real Estate Services to offer the land for sale on MLS will

allow for the orderly sale of these vacant parcels of land that are not required for any municipal purpose.


N/A

Approvals:


Page 4 of 4

Name Title

Chris Carpenter Coordinator of Real Estate Services

Frank Scarfone Manager of Real Estate Services

Shelby Askin Hager City Solicitor and Corporate Leader, Economic Development and Public Safety


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices:

1 Aerial image of subject lands


1 of 1

Appendix A

Parcel #1

Parcel #2


Page 1 of 7


Subject: Capital Variance Report – May 31, 2020 - City Wide

Reference:


Author: Melissa Osborne Senior Manager Asset Planning

[email protected] (519) 255-6100 x6111

Victor Ferranti Manager of Capital Budget & Corporate Reserves

(519) 255-6100 Ext. [email protected]

Asset Planning Report Date: May 8, 2020

Clerk’s File #: MH/13786


Recommendation:

THAT City Council RECEIVE for information the 2020 Life-to-Date Capital Variance

Report as at May 31, 2020 as presented by the Chief Financial Officer and City Treasurer; and,

THAT City Council APPROVE the transfers to and from capital projects/reserves as

identified within Appendix A – Summary of Capital Project Variances and,

THAT City Council SUPPORT Administration’s continuance to close capital projects in a

timely fashion ensuring any surpluses which may be required to offset unmitigated pandemic costs are identified and tracked for consideration as part of the 2020 yearend close and;

THAT in order to align planned Playground Replacements with the current project that City Council APPROVE a pre-commitment of funds from the Playground Replacement

Program (PFO-002-15) in the amount of $385,000 in 2021 and direct those funds to the Enhanced Flooding Mitigation Program (DMAF) project (ENG-005-19).

Executive Summary:

N/A

Item No. 11.3


Page 2 of 7

Background:

Administration monitors and tracks capital expenditures on a monthly basis and reports to City Council semi-annually on the status of all open/active capital projects based on

month end closes of March 31st and September 30th each year. City Council approved the last semi-annual Capital Variance Report for the September 30, 2019 month end, in December 2019, CR 622/2019. In addition to the semi-annual capital variance

reporting, any projects which meet the criteria established per the Capital Project

Reporting Policy (CR429/2010) will also be reported to Council in a separate report. CR429/2010

“Capital projects whose final financial position is a deficit greater than 10% of net budget

AND greater than $500,000, will BE SUBJECT to a separate report to Council outlining the reasons for the deficit. “

As a result of COVID-19, City Council approved a change from the regular March 31 month end close reporting to a May 31 month end close reporting requirement for 2020,

via CR 178/2020. This was done to allow for more time to consider the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on capital spending. City Council also approved on June 15, 2020 via CR 309/2020 a guiding framework associated with Capital Expenditures for the

balance of 2020, including guidelines for use of capital surpluses and deficits which have been applied to this May 31, 2020 semi-annual capital variance report.

Discussion:

Capital Project Variance Summary

Overall, there are currently 514 capital projects that are open/active. The City has 449 projects that are currently expected to be on budget, 38 to be completed with a surplus and 27 to be in a deficit position. A summary of the overall surpluses and deficits are

laid out in a table which can be found in the Financial Matters section of this report.

Projects identified with surpluses or deficits can be found in Appendix A – Summary of

Capital Project Variances. Appendix A provides a summary status of projects within each Program Category which are anticipating or have realized a surplus or deficit balance upon project completion. It is important to emphasize that most project

surpluses or deficits are merely projections based on the current status of the project and as such are identified as ‘anticipated’ surpluses or deficits. These projects continue

to be monitored and managed with final surpluses or deficits likely to change prior to the project being in a position to close. Those projects with surpluses or deficits, which are in a position to be closed, include recommendations regarding how their projected

surplus or deficit is to be used. There are also several projects which are completed however they have future pre-committed funding and as such are not able to be closed

until fully funded.


Page 3 of 7

There are 16 projects which have project surpluses totally $1,647,241 to be redirected. As per the recently approved capital project surplus and deficit guidelines $643,818 of

these project surpluses have been utilized to offset 11 projects with deficits.

As per the guidelines, the following surpluses will be returned to their original funding source and identified as a potential funding source which may assist to help offset any unmitigated pandemic costs the City may need to address; $866,197 in Pay As You Go (PAYG) and Service Sustainability funding and $94,703 in Sewer Surcharge

funding. Also noted is a project surplus of $42,523 which will be returned to the

Pollution Control Reserve. This funding is to ensure the continued operations of our pollution control plants and pump stations, and as such has limited flexibility to be

utilized for other purposes.

There are also 15 projects highlighted in grey in Appendix A, which are completed,

however are not able to be closed at this time as the funding source is pre-committed future funding which has not yet been transferred to the project. The anticipated net surplus of these 15 projects is estimated at $1,292,450 ($1,540,455 surplus and

$248,005 deficits). It is noted that this amount may vary given the financing costs are still being charged to these projects. Additionally there is a recommendation that the

estimated surplus of $389,555 for Mic Mac Park Capital Improvement (7171065), once realized, be reallocated to the Mic Mac Park Bleachers Project (7201020) as tender pricing is expected to be higher than anticipated for this project thereby creating a

project shortfall. These projects will continue to be monitored and appropriate recommendations regarding any resulting final surpluses and/or deficits will be included in future semi-annual capital variance reports.

There also remains additional anticipated project surpluses of approximately $1.36M which are not in a position to be confirmed as the projects are still active and therefore

there is no certainty to the surplus position. These projects will continue to be monitored and when they are in a position to be confirmed recommendations on their use will be reported in future semi-annual capital variance reports.

Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund (1) and Tranby Park

The replacement of assets in Tranby Park are planned based on approved 2020 capital

funding as well as approved “in principle future funding” in the 8 year capital budget. As a result of the first DMAF application being awarded, Tranby Park is also impacted by required sewer work. As the sewer work will disrupt the parkland and result in

relocation of the ball diamond and playground, Administration has deemed it appropriate, for synergies and cost management, to merge all the park and sewer works

under the DMAF – Tranby project. As such, approved funding identified in the Parks project budget has been consolidated to the DMAF- Tranby project in order to allow for proper tracking of the total budget for all work in this park. There is also future funding

identified for the playground replacement in Tranby Park, however it has not yet been pre-committed for immediate use. To ensure all funding necessary for these various

assets and activities is fully funded and in order to allow for the alignment of the project work within the Tranby DMAF project, Administration is requesting funding in the amount of $385,000 in 2021 from the Playground Replacement project (PFO-002-15),

and planned for Tranby Park be pre-committed and directed to the Enhanced Flooding Mitigation Program (DMAF) ENG-005-19, for the DMAF – Tranby portion of the project.


Page 4 of 7

Administrative Project Close Outs

Administration routinely closes projects as they are completed which may occur between semi-annual capital variance reporting. These close-outs need to continue in

order to ensure timing financial reporting for PSAB 3150 and to secure any remaining surpluses. In these situations, any surpluses returned to the original funding source

which could be leveraged for potential use to offset any unmitigated pandemic costs will be tracked and added to the project surpluses that have already been identified in this report.

Risk Analysis:

The Capital Project Variance Report continues to reflect a low risk to the organization as capital projects are generally managed within budget and any surpluses are able to

offset any deficits. Monthly monitoring by the Project Leads, Finance and Asset Planning ensures that any issues are addressed immediately and if necessary reported

to City Council.

There is approximately $800 million in expenditures to date of the $1.17B in active capital projects, leaving approximately $366M in planned expenditures. It should be

noted that several of the City’s capital projects require longer than a year to complete and as such these costs will not all be incurred at one time. Asset Planning and Project

Leads provide updated projections on expenditures for significant projects to ensure appropriate corporate cash flow projections are undertaken. The City continues to maintain a strong cash flow position thereby allowing for projects to be internally

financed as required without the need for external borrowing.

It should be noted that 181 of 514 projects (35%) of the total open projects have

incurred expenditures of only 25% or less of their approved budget. This is nearly double the amount of previous capital variance reports. While the challenges with the initial emergency orders relating to COVID 19 did contribute to the slow start on these

project expenditures, there are several other factors also contributing to the delayed slower pace of spending. Other factors include, but is not limited to, no spending on

projects awaiting notification of grant funding being awarded or multi-year projects which have lower spending requirements during engineering and or design phases.

Where there are anticipated surplus projections of capital projects, these are early

estimates which can fluctuate significantly throughout the remaining duration of the project. It is considered a very high risk to redeploy anticipated project surpluses given

the uncertainty surrounding the final costs of such projects. To allocate these anticipated surplus funds at this stage would create a significant risk to the project.


Page 5 of 7

Financial Matters:

As of May 31, 2020, there are 514 open/active capital projects with total budgeted expenditures of approximately $1.17 billion.

The following table summarizes as at May 31, 2020 how many projects are projected to be on budget, how many are trending or have come in under budget and how many are

trending or have come in over budget. It also includes a high-level summary of the recommendations for the surpluses and deficits to be actioned. Appendix A – Summary of Capital Project Variances highlights those projects which are projected or anticipate a

surplus or deficit position. Additionally, it should be noted that these amounts include all funding sources, as well as those which have limited or no flexibility for alternate uses,

such as Pollution Control, Federal Gas Tax and Development Charges. Therefore the surpluses once realized and utilized first to offset any project deficits may not be entirely available to help mitigate pandemic costs. Administration has identified in the table

below all current surplus funding which could be utilized to offset any remaining unmitigated pandemic costs that may arise during the 2020 yearend close.

NUMBER OF PROJECTS PROJECTED FINAL VARIANCE TREND

AMOUNT*

Surplus/(Deficit)

449 On Budget

(Note that this is based on currently known information. Unforeseen

circumstances may result in significant variances.)

-

38 Surplus $4,550,588

27 Deficit ($1,543,728)

514 Total $3,006,860

Surplus and Deficit Recommendations

Summary

16 Projects recommending to be closed with surplus

funding

$1,647,241

11 Projects with deficits to be offset by a portion of the

surplus

($643,818)


Page 6 of 7

Net remaining surpluses to

be returned to original funding sources and

potentially utilized to help offset unmitigated pandemic costs

$960,900

Remaining surpluses to be

returned to original funding source for future project

use due to limited flexibility of funding source for other needs

$42,523

Consultations:

All project leads and their respective Financial Planning Administrator provided capital project status updates to augment the analysis performed by the Manager of Capital

Budget and Corporate Reserves.

Conclusion:

A comprehensive report on all open/active capital projects indicates that overall, the 514 projects are currently trending towards an overall net surplus position. Given the

number of projects and the fact that construction of many will continue into the following year and beyond, significant fluctuation in the projections is likely. Regular reports will

keep Council apprised of the projects’ status as they proceed.


N/A

Approvals:

Name Title

Victor Ferranti Manager of Capital Budget & Corporate Reserves

Melissa Osborne Senior Manager, Asset Planning


Jan Wilson Corporate Leader – Parks, Corp. Facilities, Recreation & Culture

Joe Mancina Chief Financial Officer and City Treasurer



Page 7 of 7

Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices:

1 Appendix A - Summary of Capital Project Variances May 31, 2020


1

APPENDIX A – Summary of Capital Project Variances – May 31, 2020

Listed below is a summary by Department/Program as to the status of each capital project portfolio.

Projects with any projected final variance are detailed in a table within the respective

Department/Program summary.

Project explanations denoted with “Project surplus/deficit” are projects that are in a position to be

closed and the variance is likely to materialize. Those denoted with “Anticipated surplus/deficit”

are projects that are still ongoing and not completed, as such the preliminary variance is merely an

estimate which may fluctuate significantly before the project is complete. Only projects with

‘Project surplus/deficit” will have recommendations on how to address the deficit or surplus.

Office of the City Engineer

Street Lighting:

There is only one project active in this area that is being administered by the Engineering division.

The Local Improvement – Street Lighting project (7161015) is expected to come in on budget.

Roadways:

There are 33 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Engineering

department. There are two projects with a net projected negative variance totalling approximately

$525,000 as noted below:

Projects with Projected

Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

Tecumseh Rd. E. Road

Improvements - ISF

(7092017)

($225,000) Anticipated deficit is a result of a potential

business claim expected to be complete by

the end of 2020 and funded from PYG as

factored into the funding analysis for all

ISF/RInC project surpluses/deficits.

California/Pulford –

Norfolk/Daytona

(7184006)

($300,000) Anticipated deficit is a result of

unfavourable tender pricing from initial

budget estimates resulting in delays on

tender issuance pending ICIP grant

approval for the project taking 1 year for

confirmation. Administration recommends

a known surplus of $300,000 from project

7164006 – Gladstone -

Riverside/Wyandotte be directed to this

project to fund the deficit.

Sewer Rehabilitation:


department. In total, there are nine projects with a projected net surplus variance totalling

approximately $706,742. These projects are identified in the table below. These projects have all


2

been funded from Sewer Surcharge. Any anticipated deficits will be offset with project savings

found in other completed projects. Any balance will then be returned to that reserve.


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

South National Trunk

Sanitary Relining

(7134005)

$50,000 Anticipated surplus is a result of

favourable tender pricing from initial

budget estimates.

Queen St. – Prince to South

(7144001)



budget estimates.

Sewer System

Remediation Study

(7151027)

$60,559 Project is complete and can be closed.

Surplus is a result of favourable tender

pricing from initial budget estimates. As

per normal business practise,

Administration is recommending

transferring the surplus back to its original

funding source (i.e. Fund 153 – Sewer

Surcharge).

Peter St. – South/Prince

(7153001)






transferring a partial surplus to project

7195001 – MCIP – Integrated Site Energy

Master Plan to mitigate this negative

variance and transferring the surplus

balance back to its original funding source

(i.e. Fund 153 – Sewer Surcharge).

Olive Dr. – Seminole to

CNR (7153002)



budget estimates.

Fairview Ave. –

Edgar/Tranby (7153003)



budget estimates.

Marentette Ave. –

Ellis/Hanna (7153005)



pricing from initial budget estimates.


transferring partial surplus to project

7181032 - Flood Risk Study-Riverside/St.

Clair to mitigate negative variance of

approx. $21,076. Balance of surplus will


3

be transferred back to its original funding

source (i.e. Fund 153 – Sewer Surcharge).

Gladstone –

Riverside/Wyandotte

(7164006)

$300,000 There is a project surplus of $300,000 on

this project as well as a further anticipated

surplus of $50,000 a result of favourable

tender pricing from initial budget

estimates. Administration will

recommend transferring a surplus of

$300,000 to project 7184006 -

California/Pulford – Norfolk/Daytona to

mitigate project shortfall when the project

is ready to be closed. The remaining

$50,000 in anticipated surplus for this

project should remain in case there are any

unforeseen costs associated with the final

portion of this project.

Buckingham – Rose/Iris

(7181001)



budget estimates.

Storm Sewers:


department. There is only one project negative variance of approx. $21,076 as identified below:


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

Flood Risk Study –

Riverside/St. Clair

(7181032)

($21,076) Project is complete and can be closed.

Budget shortfall is a result of higher

tender proposals than initially estimated.


transferring a partial surplus from project

7153005 - Marentette Ave. – Ellis/Hanna

to mitigate this negative variance.

Sanitary Sewers:


department. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently expected to

come in on budget.

Corporate Projects:

There are 19 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Development,

Projects and ROW department. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are

currently expected to come in on budget.


4

Border Infrastructure Fund:

There are only 2 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Development,

Projects and ROW department. These projects are expected to be on budget as they are fully funded

by the Ministry of Transportation and expected to be complete by the end of 2020.

Development:

There are 6 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Development

Projects and ROW department. These projects are all expected to be on budget with no anticipated

variance.

Pollution Control:

There are 57 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Pollution Control

department. All of these projects are primarily funded from their dedicated Pollution Control

reserve. There are seven projects as identified in the table below that are anticipating a total net

surplus of approximately $443,338.


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

LRWRP Inlet

Refurbishment (7152002)







dedicated funding source (i.e. Fund 208 –

Pollution Control).

LRPCP Plant 1

Aeration/Cell 2 Anoxic

(7161020)



budget estimates.

Maple Wood Pump

Station CWWF (7161070)



budget estimates.

Flow Monitoring

Equipment (7121029)







dedicated funding source (i.e. Fund 208 –

Pollution Control).

Malden /McGivney

Landfill Gas (7161059)


competitive bidding process, tipping fee

savings and less amount than expected of

volume of garbage that had to be disposed

of at the regional landfill.


5

Malden Park Visitor

Centre (7181029)

$0 Project is complete and can be closed.

MCIP – Integrated Site

Energy Master Plan

(7195001)


Budget shortfall is a result of actuals costs

higher than what was originally estimated.


transferring a partial surplus from project

7153001 – Peter St. - South/Prince to

mitigate this negative variance.

Environmental Services:

There is only one project active in this area that is being administered by the Lab Environment

division. The Food and Organic Waste Study project (7184005) is expected to come in on budget.

Contracts & Field Services:

There are 4 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Public Works

Operations department. Only one project as identified in the table below with a surplus of

approximately $59,970.


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

Rail Crossing Safety

Assessments (7161030)





transferring this surplus to project

7179001 – At-Grade Railway

Improvements in order to mitigate

funding shortfalls anticipated as a result of

legislated rail crossing orders received on

June 22, 2020, which must be completed

by 2021.

Road Rehabilitation:


Operations department. There are nineteen projects as identified in the table below anticipating a

net total project surplus of $2,363,575.


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

2014 Road Rehabilitation

Enhancement (7145004)





6


transferring this surplus to the original

funding source and retain for potential

mitigation of pandemic costs.

2018 Bridge

Rehabilitation Program

(7181022)



budget estimates.

Milloy –

Chandler/Meldrum

(7182007)








Albert – Wyandotte/Edna

(7182008)








2019 Bridge

Rehabilitation Program

(7191021)



budget estimates.

Lillian – Grand

Marais/South Pacific

(7183007)








Ypres – Forest/Marentette

(7183011)








Northwood –

Cleary/Daytona

(7183013)









7

2017 Reginald –

Norman/Westminster

(7171080)

$313,000 Project is complete however due to future

precommitted funding in 2021 is not

currently able to be closed. Anticipated

surpluses may vary due to financing costs,

however majority of surplus should be

realized when the project is closed

2017 Reginald – Rossini

Francoise (7171069)






realized when the project is closed

2017 Rossini

Reconstruction

Tec./Griffin (7171068)






realized when the project is closed.

2017 Lake Trail Dr.

Mill/Pave (7171062)

($31,000) Project is complete however due to future



deficit may vary due to financing costs,

and will be recommended to be offset by

other projects.

2017 Tranby

Reconstruction (7171071)







Devon Dr. to South

Service Road to Sydney

Avenue (7161052)







2017 Alice St. –

Norman/Polonia Park

(7171081)







2017 Coronation/Jefferson

Mill and Pave (7171082)

(117,505) Project is complete however due to future





8


other projects.

2017

Northwood/Northway

Reconstruction (7171085)







Wyandotte St. –

Rose/Janisse (7183019)







Briarbank – Mill and Pave

(7184002)

($7,500) Project is complete however due to future





other projects.

PW Maintenance:


Operations department. All projects are projected to be on budget with no anticipated variance.

Traffic Operations and Parking Services:

There are 11 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Traffic

Operations and Parking Services department. Only one project is anticipated to come in over

budget with a deficit of $25,000.


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

2017 South National Street

Lights (7171079)



budget estimates and applicable financing

costs until funded in 2021.

Fleet Operations:


Operations department. There are four projects as identified in the table below anticipating a net

total surplus of approximately $50,128:


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation


9

2017 Fleet Replacement

Program (7171021)



budget estimates.

GPS Line Painting

Equipment (7171058)

($21,156) Project deficit is due to a result of

temporary financing and programming

costs over the original capital budget

funding. Administration is recommending

funding this negative variance with a

transfer of surplus funds in project

7181033 – Ditch Cutting Equipment once

that project receives the balance of it’s

funding in 2022

Fuel Site Improvements –

Ward 3 (7181030)

($20,000) Anticipated deficit is a result of unexpected

remediation work that was required at the

Fire Headquarters fuel site.

Ditch Cutting Equipment –

Vacant Properties

(7181033)

$41,284 Anticipated surplus is a result of a used

piece of equipment purchase which

reduced the total acquisition costs.

Administration is recommending that in

2022 when the funding for this project is

available $21,156 in anticipated surplus

funding be allocated to project 7171058 -

GPS Line Painting Equipment to mitigate

the negative variance.

Technical Support:

There is only one project active in this area that is being administered by the Technical Support

division. The Information Hansen Management System project (7209001) is expected to come in

on budget.

Transit Windsor:

There are 21 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by Transit Windsor.

There are nine projects as identified in the table below that are anticipated a net negative variance

of approximately $54,270:


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

2017 Fuel System

Improvements (7171035)

($2,500) Anticipated deficit is due to a temporary

financing cost variance as a result of

funding not available until future years.

TW Property Safety

Assessment (7171036)





10

TW Service Delivery &

Project Management

(7171039)


Project deficit is due to a temporary




transferring funding from the Pay-As-

You-Go F169 reserve fund, as this

project doesn’t qualify for Federal Public

Transit reserve fund F179 funding.

ITS Laptops On-Road

Support Vehicles

(7171040)

($11) Project is complete and can be closed.

Administration is recommending funding

this minor negative variance from the

dedicated Federal Public Transit reserve

fund F179.

TW Pedestrian Shelter

Restoration (7171043)




Hybrid Bus Refurbishing

Program (7171045)


Project deficit is due to a temporary




transferring funding from the dedicated

Federal Public Transit reserve fund F179

to mitigate the project budget shortfall.

TW Garage Rehabilitation

– Concrete Surface

(7171047)




TW Garage Rehabilitation

– High Speed Doors

(7171048)




TW Fleet Inspection

Equipment (7171055)


financing costs variance as a result of


Mayor’s Office

Mayor’s Office:

There are 4 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Mayor’s office.

No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently expected to come in on

budget.


11

Office of the City Solicitor

Fire and Rescue:

There are 6 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Fire and Rescue


come in on budget.

Legal Services:

There are 11 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Legal

Department. There are two projects with uncertainty as to whether the project will be on budget

or not as noted below: Projects with Projected

Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

Springarden ANSI

Expropriation

TBD There is much uncertainty on this

project’s variance as it is tied to legal

proceedings which have not yet been

finalized.

99 CP Railway Cut

(7995537)

TBD There is much uncertainty on this

project’s variance as it is tied to legal

proceedings which have not yet been

finalized.

Planning and Building Development:

There are 18 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Planning


come in on budget.

Transportation Planning:

There are 10 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Planning


come in on budget.

Office of the City Clerk

Windsor Public Library:

There are only 6 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Windsor

Public Library and the Development, Projects and ROW department. No project variance is

anticipated as all of these projects are currently expected to come in on budget.

Records and Elections:


12

There is only one active capital project in this area that is being administered by the Council

Services department. The Electronic Agendas capital project (7121005) is expected to come in on

budget.

Human Resources:

There are only 4 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Human

Resources department. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently

expected to come in on budget.

Council Services:

There is only one project active in this area being administered by the Council Services department.

The 311/211 Phone System Upgrades project (7191007) is expected to come in on budget.

Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Financial Planning:

There are 4 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Financial Planning

division. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently expected to come

in on budget.

Corporate Asset Planning:

There are 18 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Asset Planning

division. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently expected to come

in on budget.

Taxation and Financial Projects:

There are only 4 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Taxation and

Financial Projects division. No project variance is anticipated as both of these projects are


Financial Accounting:

There are 2 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Financial

Accounting division. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently


Information Technology:

There are 19 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Information

Technology department. Only one project as identified below is anticipating a surplus variance of

$4,000.


13


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

S.W.I.F.T Network

(7193001)

$4,000 Anticipated surplus is a result of actual

costs lower than initial budget estimates.

Office of Community Development and Health Services

Huron Lodge:

There are 9 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by Huron Lodge. No

project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently expected to come in on budget.

Office of Parks, Recreation, Culture and Facilities

Facility Operations:

There are 35 active capital projects in this area administered by the Facilities department. Only

one project as identified below is anticipating a surplus variance of $4,930.


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

The Bistro – Lease

Renegotiation (7101025)

$4,930 Anticipated surplus is a result of actual

costs lower than budget estimates.

Forestry:

There are only 2 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Forestry

division. No project variance is anticipated as both of these projects are currently expected to

come in on budget.

Parks Operations:

There are only 4 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Parks

Operations division. No project variance is anticipated as both of these projects are currently


Parks Design & Development:

There are 36 active capital projects in this area administered by the Parks Design & Development

department. There are eleven projects that are anticipating a net negative variance totalling

approximately $377 as noted below:


14


Deficit/Surplus

(Deficit)/Surplus

Amount

Brief Explanation

Regional Parks (7129002) $113,410 This project is able to be closed however

pending final funding of $5,000 precludes

the actual project closing until January

2021. The projected surplus is certain and

a result of favourable tender pricing from

initial budget estimates. Administration is

recommending transferring this known

surplus over to project 7181026 – Jackson

Park to finalize and cover the paving cost

of the parking lot.

Tecumseh/Brock Memorial

(7151020)





transferring $28,000 of the surplus to

project 7171066 – Dog Park-Malden Road

and the surplus balance of $44,043 to

project 7171076 – Forest Glade Basketball

Courts to mitigate project budget shortfalls

in those projects.

Realtor Park – Splash

Pad/Washrooms (7171056)





transferring $10,000 of the surplus to

project 7171073 – Realtor Park – Tennis

Courts, $9,957 of the surplus to project

7171076 – Forest Glade Basketball Courts

and the surplus balance of $23,016 to

project 7181041 – Bruce Ave. Park

Redevelopment to mitigate project budget

shortfalls in those projects.

Mic Mac Park Capital

Improvements (7171065)

$389,555 This project is complete with projected

surplus, however unable to be closed due

to pending future funding in 2021. Surplus

is a result of favourable tender pricing from

initial budget estimates. Administration is

recommending transferring the surplus to

project 7201020 – Mic Mac Park Bleachers

once the project is full funded and able to

be closed to mitigate project budget

shortfall in that project and to then close

the project.


15

2017 Dog Park – Malden

Road (7171066)

($28,000) This project is complete however unable to

be closed due to pending future funding in

2021. As this deficit is known leveraging

surplus funding from 7151020 –

Tecumseh/Brock Memorial will address

the deficit and position the project to be

able to be closed in January 2021.

2017 Realtor Park Tennis

Courts (7171073)




surplus funding from 7171056 – Realtor

Park Splash Pad/Washroom will address



2017 Forest Glade

Basketball Courts

(7171076)




surplus funding from 7171056 – Realtor

Park Splash Pad/Washrooms and 7151020

– Tecumseh/Brock Memorial will address



Little River/Radcliff PTIF

(7171093)

($377) Project is complete and can be closed.

Project deficit is a result of applicable

financing costs incurred until grant funds

were received. Administration is

recommending funding this minor project

variance from the Pay-As-You-Go F169

reserve fund.

Jackson Park Parking Lot

(7181026)

($113,410) This project will be completed summer

2020 however unable to be closed due to

pending future funding in 2021. As this

deficit is known leveraging surplus

funding from 7129002 – Regional Parks,

will address the deficit and position the

project to be able to be closed in January

2021.

Bruce Ave. Park

Redevelopment (7181041)

($23,016) This project will be complete summer 2020

however unable to be closed due to

pending future funding in 2021. As this

deficit is known leveraging surplus

funding from 7171056 – Realtor Park

Splash Pad/Washrooms, will address the

deficit and position the project to be able to

be closed in January 2021.


16

Mic Mac Park Bleachers

(7201020)

($389,555) This project is currently out for tender and

anticipated costs are expected to be higher

than estimated. Reallocation of surplus

funding from 7171065 Mic Mac Park

Capital Improvements, to this project will

allow the project to proceed should the

tender pricing come in over budget as

expected.

Recreation Facilities:

There are 13 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Recreation &

Culture department. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently


Cultural Affairs:

There are 5 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Recreation and

Culture department. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently


Agencies and Boards

Windsor Police Services (WPS):

There are 20 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by various WPS

divisions. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are currently expected to come

in on budget.

Roseland Golf and Curling Club:

There are 2 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the General Manager

at Roseland. No project variance is anticipated as both of these projects are currently expected to

come in on budget.

Windsor Airport:

There are 5 active capital projects in this area that are being administered by the Development,

Projects and ROW department. No project variance is anticipated as all of these projects are


Handi-Transit:

There is only one project active in this area being administered by Handi Transit/Transit Windsor.

The Handi-Transit Bus Acquisitions project (7191019) is expected to come in on budget.


Page 1 of 23


Subject: COVID-19 2020 Year-End Financial Projections - City Wide

Reference:

Date to Council: July 13, 2020 Author: Tony Ardovini

Deputy Treasurer, Financial Planning (519) 255-6100 ext. 6223

[email protected]

Financial Planning

Report Date: June 25, 2020 Clerk’s File #: MH/13786 AFB/13467


Recommendation:

That City Council RECEIVE the report titled “COVID-19 2020 Year-End Financial

Projections”; and,

That the City of Windsor continue TO ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE in all efforts along with

other municipalities and municipal associations to seek financial support from senior

levels of government to mitigate any remaining negative financial impacts to municipalities resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Executive Summary:

The projected financial implications of the City’s response to the COVID-19 Pandemic is

summarized in the following chart. The year-end projected variances from the impact of the COVID crisis to City operations are estimated to the end of 2020. It is projected that

the total net financial impact to the City for 2020 is approximately $29.7M.

Forgone revenues totalling $36.6M when combined with additional costs resulting from the COVID pandemic of $15.4M result in a total financial impact to the City of $52.0M.

This amount is offset by reduced expenditures resulting from mitigation measures taken to date of $16.7 M, and from grant funding of $5.6M, thereby resulting in a projected net

financial impact to the City of $29.7 M for 2020.

Item No. 11.4


Page 2 of 23

Summary of COVID 19 2020 Year-End Financial Projections

Foregone Revenue $36.6M

Additional Expenditures $15.4M

Total Estimated COVID 19 Financial Impacts $52.0M

Less Amounts Mitigated:

Reduced Corporate Expenditures $16.7M

Announced Federal and Provincial Grants $5.6M

Remaining COVID 19 Financial Impact to be Offset by

Federal and Provincial Grants

$29.7M

The Federal and Provincial governments have made several funding announcements

over the past few weeks in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The City has received confirmation of $5.6M in additional funding from the Federal & Provincial governments

for specific supports in the areas such as homelessness, long term care, and the 211 Call Centre. However, efforts continue across the country to highlight the financial crisis facing municipalities as a result of the pandemic and to urge senior levels of

government to provide necessary emergency financial supports to municipalities to address these fiscal challenges.

It is also very clear that due to the magnitude of the financial impacts being experienced, and provincial legislation that requires municipalities to balance their budgets, that all municipalities are counting on emergency financial assistance from the

federal and provincial governments to make up the bulk of their shortfall. While significant efforts are being made to mitigate the financial impacts, municipalities do not

have the financial ability to unilaterally address the significant financial challenges they face as a result of the COVID 19 pandemic.

Administration recommends that the City continue advocating for a Federal and

Provincial emergency assistance plan through efforts at Large Urban Mayor’s Caucus of Ontario, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Federation of Canadian

Municipalities, and the Municipal Financial Officers Association of Ontario.

Background:

Since January of this year, the COVID 19 pandemic has spread around the world causing significant uncertainty, and impacting human behaviour and the world’s

economy. Emergency declarations were declared in March as follows:

The World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared COVID 19 a global

pandemic on March 14, 2020.


Page 3 of 23

The Provincial Emergency Declaration was issued on March 17, 2020.

The City of Windsor Emergency declaration followed on March 20, 2020.

On March 21, 2020 the Federal Government closed the US Border to non-

essential traffic

It important to note that the Provincial emergency declaration was recently extended to

July 15, 2020 and the US Border restrictions have been extended to at least July 21, 2020. Furthermore, the province just announced that the City of Windsor could move to Phase 2 of the provincial re-opening plan on June 25, 2020.

As a result of this crisis, the City’s operations have been suspended, altered, continued with major restrictions, or increased to meet the demands resulting from the pandemic. An administrative report to Council on April 5, 2020 detailed how employee work

environments have been modified with many staff now working from home or having been redeployed to other city services or community agencies. In other cases, staff lay-

offs were issued for seasonal recreation, temporary staff, and some Transit Windsor employees.

Finance along with departmental staff have been monitoring and assessing the potential

financial impacts to the City since the onset of the pandemic. It was quickly evident that a variety of operating expenditures and revenues would be affected. A preliminary

report was provided to City Council on May 4, 2020 that provided a high level estimate of the COVID 19 financial impacts as at the end of April 2020. The projection in that report estimated the financial impacts at approximately $11 million on April 30, 2020. It

was noted that the estimates were as of a “point in time” and would very likely be subject to further changes depending on the extent and length of time of the pandemic

emergency measures.

Administration has now completed a further review of all areas of the Corporation while considering the current updated circumstances we face relative to the pandemic and is

providing updated estimates relative to the 2020 year-end financial impacts of COVID 19. While it is still too early to quantify with any degree of certainty all of the potential

financial impacts, some of the more significant projected variances are outlined below. A significant use of assumptions was made for each service area to arrive at a projection for the end of the year. As with any assumption, any major changes that

occur going forward could have a material impact to the projected impacts.

Discussion:

Each of the City services and Agencies, Boards & Commissions affected by the COVID

Pandemic have been reviewed to determine the financial impacts caused as a result of responding to this crisis. Staff then used significant assumptions to project the 2020 year-end financial position of the organization as compared to the approved budget.

A table summarizing the estimated financial impacts can be found in the Financial Matters section of the report.


Page 4 of 23

Recreation & Culture - $5.2M Deficit

The Recreation & Culture Department is projecting a year-end variance totalling approximately $5.2M. This is as a result of $8.9M in foregone programming and user fee revenue plus $1.2M in additional COVID 19 related costs largely due to supplies

and wages for the increased cleaning requirements and increased funding for the cultural grants to assist the arts community. These negative financial impacts are being

partially offset by $4.9M in avoided costs resulting from reduced part-time salary & wages, program supplies and other programming related costs.

Assumptions used to develop this forecast Assumptions include:

No summer programming and all recreation facilities remaining closed (it is acknowledged that this issue continues to be closely monitored and may change

for some services based on the circumstances)

No operational sport fields

Projected September 1st phased-in opening for all recreational facilities and Lakeview Marina.

Programming to start in September based at 30% of normal programs with a

30% estimated revenue for these offerings, resulting in approximately 10% of budgeted revenue for September to December.

Cleaning and disinfecting costs are estimated to be double the normal budgeted expenditures once recreation facilities are opened up in September

Open Streets will take place in September 2020.

Transit Services - $4.8M Deficit

Collection of bus fares was discontinued in March with the introduction of rear door passenger entrance to provide added protection to our transit drivers. This has resulted

in a significant loss in revenue of approximately $150,000 weekly. The year-end foregone revenue projection totaling $7.8M is based on the assumption of continuing

Sunday Service until June 20, 2020, moving to a Saturday level service starting on June 21, 2020 and regular transit service starting on September 1, 2020. It is noted that these assumptions are subject to change as circumstances may warrant however they

provide a basis to allow for estimating the financial impacts. Fares are not planned to be collected until September with ridership estimated at 60% of historical stats. The foregone revenue estimate also includes $150,000 in lost revenue from the summer

UPASS program and other minor lease and advertising revenue.

Offsetting the reduced revenues for Transit Windsor, are reduced labour costs,

decreased fuel consumption, parts & materials, and savings in tolls and commissions totalling approximately $3.8M. This savings amount is reduced by $0.8M, which is the estimated one time cost of the Bus Pass Rebate Program and the additional cleaning

and disinfection costs.

It is important to note that future impacts on the Gas Tax revenue will not be evident

until 2022/2023. Therefore, given the delayed timing and the uncertainty on the actual


Page 5 of 23

impact to our future revenue, an estimated $2M reduction in Gas Tax revenue has not

been factored into the 2020 year-end projection.

Therefore, the overall projected negative year-end variance for Transit Windsor is $4.8M ($7.8M in reduced revenues offset by a net amount of $3.0M in cost savings).

Parks & Facility Operations - $3.8M Deficit

Parks Operations - $89,000 Surplus

Foregone revenues of $422,000 are related largely to the Ojibway Centre nature programming and room rentals, along with picnic rentals in parks. Other revenue shortfalls are a result of lower recoveries from transitional properties due to staff being

redeployed and park development staff recoveries from capital projects being delayed as a result of provincial limitations on construction activity.

Additional expenditures were incurred for signage and materials related to playground and sport court closures. Additional costs for housekeeping supplies for park washrooms and yard buildings are also expected as a result of enhanced cleaning

requirements. Included in the projection is an estimate for additional auxiliary police services required due to the closure of park amenities and social distancing restrictions.

Total estimated incremental costs are expected to be approximately $53,000.

Avoided costs are expected to save the Parks Operations area approximately $564,000. The main savings is the delay in hiring summer students and the layoff of seasonal

staff. With the elimination of programming at the Ojibway Centre, the salary for guides and other temporary staffing was reduced. Budgeted overtime costs for sport

tournaments at Mic Mac Park were also avoided.

Assumptions

1. Programming revenues at Ojibway nature Centre will start up in September.

2. No User Fees for picnic rentals during the summer months

3. Cost recoveries from vacant and transitional properties reduced by 25%

4. Bulk cleaning supplies being purchased by Facility Operations and not included in Parks costs

5. Student and temporary staff PPE assumed to be $500 per person

6. Summer student hiring assumed to be at 75% staffing level

Facility Operations - $3.9M Deficit

While many municipal buildings are shutdown during the pandemic emergency, most of the buildings in the Facility portfolio are deemed essential and remained open to continue with the administrative support or provide essential services to the public. For

the most part, there was still a requirement for caretaking and facility maintenance at


Page 6 of 23

these buildings. Facility continues the recovery for the caretaking and facility

maintenance efforts from various internal and external customers. The only areas that may reduce Facility recoveries are due to the reduced services at Transit Windsor and the Windsor Public Library branch closures. Given these areas are part of the City

portfolio, the reduced revenues are being offset by the same avoided costs at the respective areas. Therefore, the net corporate impact is nil.

Facilities is projecting added costs of $3.9M for personal protective equipment (PPE) and disinfecting cleaning supplies, as well the additional labour required to carry out the Enhanced Cleaning Measures (ECM) due to COVID-19.

In order to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus and protect the employees who are currently working outside of their homes, bulk orders of necessary personal

protective equipment and disinfecting cleaning supplies for various areas of the corporation have been centralized and ordered through Facilities. The costs estimated at $3.2M are being charged to Facilities and not being allocated to other departments.

Currently the ECM are being carried out by existing Facilities employees and redeployed employees from other areas of the corporations. When the situation allows,

areas of the municipal facilities will resume operations and the redeployed employees will return to their positions. While the number of facilities that require ECM will increase, there will be less available staff to carry out ECM. Facilities will need to add

additional temporary caretaking staff in order to meet the increased demand. The cost for additional temporary staff is estimated to be $670,000.

For the purpose of estimating the costs for required PPE and disinfectants, as well as the additional labour costs for the increased ECM, the following assumptions were made:

1. Gradual increase of staff at 350 CHS to return to work starting on June 1st from current levels up by 25%, another 25% by August 1, a further 25% by October 1

and a final 25% by December 1.

2. The Recreation Facilities to re-open to the public and the resumption of programming on September 1st.

3. While it is preferred to utilize temporary part-time L82 Rink Attendants who are currently laid off to carry out the ECM, these staff will likely be needed for the re-

opening of the Recreation facilities. For this cost projection, it is assumed that temporary part time Caretakers are added to carry out the required ECM.

4. Facilities is projecting a need of approximately 38 TPT staff working a total of

26,180 hours, including weekends, afternoons and midnights where required. These estimated hours would cover September 1 to December 31 of enhanced

cleaning measures for buildings currently under the Facilities portfolio, including all of those where current ECMs are occurring, plus the WIATC, Museum/Gallery, 930 Mercer, and Capitol Theatre.


Page 7 of 23

Costs estimated to be avoided total $16,000. During the shutdown, the Aquatic Centre

is still required to keep the pools in the natatorium and Adventure Bay running to prevent damaging the pool lining and filtration equipment without water and to lower the risk of upsetting humidity control of the building leading to costly repairs. However,

without the constant impacts from the visitors using the pools, the need to constantly add chemicals in the pool has decreased substantially during the shutdown. As well, the

usage of hand soap and paper towels for regular facility use has also reduced while the facilities remain closed. The projected costs avoided is based on the same assumptions above to re-open the Recreation Facilities in September.

On/Off Street Parking Operating Reserve - $1.5M Deficit

The Parking Operations area is expecting a significant revenue shortfall in the Parking

Operations area of $1.5M due to reduced vehicular activity coupled with relaxed enforcement of payment at meters. Projections are based on 90% revenue losses for April thru May, 80% for June thru August, and 60% for the period September thru

December. It is important to note that given On/Off Street Parking Operations surpluses are transferred to a reserve, there is no direct impact to the Tax Levy. The shortfall in

revenue will result in the budgeted annual transfer not being made in 2020.

Parking Enforcement - $1.3M Deficit

Parking enforcement revenue is also projecting a significant shortfall of approximately

$1.3M in 2020 as a result of reduced vehicular activity. This projection estimates that 50% of the budgeted revenue from parking enforcement operations will be realized in

2020.

Huron Lodge - $860,000 Deficit

Due to the high risk to the residents and staff of contacting the COVID virus, Huron

Lodge management have significantly increased the screening and sanitation protocols for the facility. This has resulted in increased staffing requirements, costs for personal

protective equipment, and cleaning supplies. The estimated year-end net financial impact once known provincial funding is included results in a variance of approximately $860,000.

The Ministry of Long-Term Care has provided funding for homes to prevent and contain the spread of Covid-19. This funding assists with additional costs associated with

Covid-19. Huron Lodge has received Covid-19 funding of $188,600 from the Ministry of Long-Term Care and this assumes that no additional funding will be forwarded to the home after June 30, 2020. This is under the assumption that Huron Lodge does not go

into an outbreak status. Huron Lodge may receive additional funding if an outbreak occurs.

It is assumed that the current levels of expenditures related to Covid-19 will continue until Dec 31, 2020 should Huron Lodge not go into outbreak status.

Currently, Huron Lodge has 14 re-deployed staff, which will be required until December

31, 2020. These staff members were re-deployed at Huron Lodge for the additional


Page 8 of 23

tasks due to Provincial legislation changes imposed on long-term care home operators

to screen staff and essential visitors. There are 11 Screener positions and 3 Resident Services positions who work full time hours. It is assumed that these employees will be required to return to their regular positions September 1, 2020. The cost for 14 full time

employees is estimated at $100,000 per month. Commencing September 1, Huron Lodge will have to incur this cost.

Huron Lodge has experienced additional spending in nursing shifts, supplies and equipment. In order to maintain the preventative measures and legislated requirements that Huron Lodge currently has in place, it is assumed that additional spending in these

categories will continue until December 31, 2020 to support operations in a pandemic environment. Using the current spending trend, it is estimated monthly additional costs

in response to Covid-19 could be approximately $60,000 per month until the end of the year. Should an outbreak occur, additional costs are detailed below in the Outbreak section.

The Province has announced an increase to the wages of eligible long-term care workers. It is expected that the Province will fund any and all payments over and above

regular budgeted wages for the affected staff.

Outbreak status occurs when homes have one symptomatic positive case of covid-19 in the resident and/or staff population. Per Ministry of Long Term Care Directives, when

only asymptomatic residents and/or staff with positive results are found as part of enhanced surveillance testing of residents and/or staff, it may not be necessary to

declare an outbreak. Per Ministry guidelines, the local Public Health Unit would determine and declare a home in outbreak. Should Huron Lodge have an outbreak status additional staff will be required to work within all disciplines. Huron Lodge will be

at risk for increased staffing costs. Several additional shifts, overtime increases and backfilling staff on sick leave will occur.

Resident meals will have to be served individually in each resident room if an outbreak occurs at the home. This will require more use of paper products and additional serving tray equipment will have to be purchased to expedite meal service. Isolating residents

during mealtime will lead to additional staffing required to oversee residents who are at risk of choking and require assistance with feeding.

Infection control protocols will increase, contributing to more sanitizing agents used within the entire building. In addition, housekeeping staffing hours will increase more than the current levels.

Additional personal protective equipment costs will increase with more instances of N95 masks, gowns, goggles and gloves usage for droplet precautions.

Homes with COVID-19 infection are expected to incur more costs as more efforts are needed for further prevention and containment, and in recognition of this, these homes received an additional one-time allocation of $10,000 per home and $200 per bed. This

adjustment applied to all homes with infections reported or resolved as of April 30th, 2020. It is unknown if homes with infection after this date will receive the same one-time


Page 9 of 23

funding. Should Huron Lodge go into an outbreak status, and the same funding model

is used, the additional revenue for Huron Lodge could be $54,800.

Windsor Fire & Rescue (WFR) - $746,000 Deficit

As an essential service to the Windsor community, WFR staff are at the front lines of the

COVID crisis. This has resulted in significantly greater than budgeted overtime and PPE costs, in addition to inspection revenue shortfall, totalling approximately $746,000.

Overtime costs related to the COVID-19 pandemic are based on an assumption that 4 staff members will become infected between now and year end and will affect others in the fire service. When this occurs, the health unit conducts contact tracing and

determines if any of the exposed co-workers are required to self isolate. Due to the number of staff involved and length of time for quarantine, it becomes a costly event in

order to maintain service for emergency calls.

Screening and physical distancing protocols are established and PPE is provided to staff to be worn when a 2m distance cannot be maintained. This should reduce the

potential impacts associated with a positive case amongst the fire rescue division. No measures can eliminate the risk entirely and the resulting assumption is 4 additional

cases resulting in staff quarantines may occur this year.

User fee revenue is reduced due to the provincial shutdown of businesses and physical distancing requirements. The pandemic has interrupted business as usual and only

critical inspections are occurring. WFRS is assuming that most business closures will be in effect until June 30th and once re-opening does occur, significant limitations or

restrictions will remain thus affecting the volume of inspections. For the months of July through December, some inspections will be performed and WFRS will try to mitigate the revenue shortfall as much as possible.

It is also assumed that Special events revenue will be reduced to near zero for the remainder of the year. Spring and summer are the busiest seasons for public

gatherings and events.

Finally, medical, PPE and cleaning supply cost increases are expected to continue for the remainder of the year.

Housing & Children’s Services - $720,000 Deficit

The Housing & Children’s Service Department is projecting an overall year-end variance

of $720,000.

The homelessness programs are projecting a deficit of ($1,272,576). The types of activities and services currently being funded are primarily for enhanced staffing in the

Emergency shelters / Housing with Support Homes, implementation of a day program and an isolation & recovery centre for Covid-19 emergency shelter clients. In June, the

second isolation shelter closed as the actual need was found to be lower than originally projected. Other cost included are personal protective equipment, supplies, security for shelters and housing with support homes, food, and other eligible costs. If the need for


Page 10 of 23

additional supports due to the pandemic is extended until the end of the year, then the

Provincial (Social Services Relief Fund - SSRF) and Federal (Employment and Social Development Canada - ESDC) funding will not be sufficient to cover the expenditures if they remain at the same level as they currently are at now.

This deficit is expected to be offset by a surplus of $550,000 in the Pathway to Potential program as the Recreation and Transits Affordable pass programs are not being offered

during the Emergency Closure. Any P2P Recreation or APP saving realized in Housing & Children's Services, will be offset by corresponding revenue losses in Recreation and Transit departments.

Council Services - $715,000 Deficit

The Council Services department is anticipating an overall deficit of approximately

($715,800) at year-end. This includes an estimate of ($1,170,000) in forgone revenue, savings of approximately $362,700, grant funding of $284,500 related to the 211 Call Centre and approximately ($193,000) in increased costs.

Forgone revenue of approximately ($1,170,000) is based on the following assumptions:

Overall By-Law Enforcement revenue is projected at 60% as By-Law Enforcement

Officers have focussed much of their attention on enforcement of social distancing until June 1st, 2020, at which point regular By-Law Enforcement resumed.

Business license revenue is projected at 75% and gaming license revenue is projected at 50% of the approved budgeted amounts.

Marriage and civil ceremony revenue is estimated to come in at 60% as all civil

ceremony revenue will be lost until early July, with the expectation that normal levels will return as of September 1st. Beginning July 6th, 10 licenses are estimated be

sold in July and 20 in August. Starting September 1st, licenses will be available to purchase 5 days a week (by appointment only), which should result in a return to normal revenue levels.

Projected savings of approximately $362,700 are related primarily to salary gapping of existing vacant positions and employees that have opted to be on leave of absence

(LOA) until childcare resumes. In addition, savings related to the vacated Ward 7 Councillor position, along with a delay in the by-election until late summer will result in salary savings of approximately $30,700 (January through August).

The City of Windsor applied for and was successful in receiving $284,500 in grant funding related to the 211 Call Centre. As part of the Surge Capacity Funding, through

the United Way Centraide Canada, the City has received $224,500 in order to pay for additional temporary positions, to purchase equipment for Customer Contact Representatives to be able to work from home, and to offset a portion the Manager’s

and Supervisor’s salary, in response to increased demand for 211 services. In addition, $60,000 has been received through the Ministry of Children, Community and Social

Services (MCCSS) and Ontario 211 to support additional staffing and resources required to meet surge demands for service during COVID-19.


Page 11 of 23

These grants will contribute approximately $193,000 toward costs related to surge

demands including additional temporary positions, data work and regional partnership and outreach. An increase in service volume of approximately 40% has occurred since the pandemic began and is forecasted to continue through the remainder of 2020. In

addition, this funding will assist with costs related to the installation of increased safety measures within the office and the purchase of additional equipment necessary for work

from home business continuity.

Provincial Offences Act (POA) - $580,000 Deficit

POA foregone revenues for 2020 are currently projected to be approximately $1.53M.

This is a direct result of decreased ticket volume and the fact that the Provincial Offences Court has adjourned court attendance matters as the courts are currently

closed. Further lengthy extensions could result in the withdrawal or dismissal of charges given an accused's right to a trial within a reasonable time pursuant to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Current projections estimate that revenues will start

increasing back to average historical levels in August depending on when the courts are able to open.

The shortfall in revenue and minor additional cost is partially offset by reduced staffing costs, interpreter charges, and adjudication, prosecution and collection costs totalling approximately $1 M.

Reductions in net revenue will affect the overall POA financial position that is shared with the County based on weighted assessment as per the agreement. The City’s

share of the year-end variance is expected to be $580,000

Engineering & Corporate. Projects -$163,890 Levy Deficit

-$41,758 Surplus in Sewer Surcharge

Engineering is projecting a year-end deficit of approximately $163,890 in Levy Funding and a $41,758 surplus in the Sewer Surcharge funded areas.

A deficit of $193,400 in foregone revenues is expected as a result of less recovery from capital projects and a projected decrease in permit revenues.

Due to COVID-19, permits are expected to decrease as there are limitations on projects

that may proceed and it is speculated that spending and priority of projects will decrease. Therefore, it is management’s assumption that permit and user fees will be

reduced by 20% when compared to prior years. Included in this amount are also GIS User Fees, which are based on permits.

Engineering is projecting a deficit of $29,200 in additional expenses due to impacts from

COVID-19. Expenses are for additional cell phones needed for employees now working from home, additional cleaning and safety supplies out at the Pollution Control Plants,

shift premiums for split shifts due to social distancing guidelines and additional overtime expenses to cover the vacancy left by a high risk employee that elected to stay home


Page 12 of 23

and use sick time. Management's assumption is that all of these additional expenses,

with the exception of the overtime will continue until the end of the year.

There are also additional expenses for fleet vehicle rentals as 5 additional vehicles are needed to comply with social distancing guidelines. As the net cost to the Corporation is

zero, this amount has not been included in the analysis. The additional expense to Pollution Control is approximately $49,000 ($5,500 per month), assuming that these

vehicles are needed until the end of the year.

Engineering is projecting an overall surplus of $100,468 in avoided costs due to changes in staffing needs. First of all, there is an assumption that there will be no hiring

of summer students, which will cause the budgets allocated to these salaries to be in a surplus position. Typically, Pollution Control would hire 6 summer students and 1

master student, but due to COVID-19 none of these positions will be filled. Additionally, due to COVID-19 some staff have taken an unpaid LOA. Within Engineering there is one staff who is regular full time and one who is temporary full time who have elected to

go on an unpaid LOA. The assumption has been made that this will continue until the end of June 2020. This has caused some avoided costs for both the Tax Levy and

$50,707 in one time BSR funding needed. COVID-19 has also impacted hiring of new positions. Budget Issues 2020-0113 approved one time BSR Funding for a Temporary General Accounts Payable Clerk Position. This position had yet to be filled and is

assumed to not be filled until July 1, 2020. This will impact the amount of one time BSR funding that is needed for the position.

Building Property Standards Enforcement - $150,000 Deficit

There will likely be some reduced property standard enforcement during and after the COVID 19 pandemic to allow residents and the economy recover.

Therefore, the department is projecting foregone revenue related to property standards enforcement of approx. 60%, which equates to $150,000 in lost revenue for 2020.

Building Permits Operations (reserve)

Current year-end projections for Building Permit revenue is that it will remain on target with the budgeted $4.6M in revenue for 2020. There is some risk that a depressed

economy may result in some projects not proceeding, but current activity remains positive.

Windsor Public Library - $140,000 Surplus

The Windsor Public Library is expecting year-end savings of approximately $140,000.

A recovery plan report was prepared that details a 4-week plan to open all branches by

August 31, 2020. Phase 1, starting June, 8, 2020, will bring back all branch staff (including laid off Pages & Supply staff) to begin on backlogs, stocking shelves and

other duties, in preparation of the 4 week rollout period. The total savings in salary costs up to June 8, 2020 are estimated to be approximately $162,000. On July 2, 2020, curbside pick-up will be offered at all locations via a mobile application (application


Page 13 of 23

costs are unknown, however will be covered within the current operating budget).

Additional costs relating to signage for the purpose of directing the public to established pick-up areas are estimated to be approximately $2,000 across all locations. Beginning on July 27, 2020, WPL is looking to roll out appointment bookings by the public to use

computer terminals and eventually book browsing / sign-out on July 27, 2020. In preparation for this, WPL has ordered plexi-glass barriers consisting of 18 main desk

barriers and 72 computer desk dividers across all 9 branch locations, resulting in an estimated additional cost of $20,000 (this cost is based on an estimated unit cost used corporately and is not included in the overall estimates established by the Facilities

Division). The final phase of the plan includes opening up all WPL branches to the public on August 31, 2020 within Provincial / Municipal requirements. Costs relating to

additional cleaning supplies / tasks by appropriate staff are challenging to estimate at this time. There will be no impacts on WPL’s book budget as the mix between digital and physical content has been adjusted inline with anticipated trends.

Public Works Operations - $200,000 Surplus

PW Operations is projected foregone revenue of $63,000 as a result of reduced

containerized collections as a result of school closures.

Additional costs estimated at $455,000 are largely as a result of increased residential waste, additional pickups by GFL and the associated increase in tipping fees.

The forgone revenue and additional costs are completely offset by estimated savings projected to be $718,000. The majority of savings totalling $450,000 is due to fuel

savings from a combination of lower consumption and lower fuel prices. The remaining avoided costs are resulting from reduced student costs and employees that have elected to take unpaid leave of absences.

Employment & Social Services - $500,000 Surplus

Ontario Works Program Delivery received approval for additional $580,000 gross

expenditures funded 50/50 ($290,000 in additional subsidy). Due to COVID, only the provincially approved budget will be expended leaving @ $500,000 in net City savings.

Other Departmental Costs/Savings

CAO’s Office, Human Resources, Finance, & Information Technology - $110,000 Surplus

The following departments are projecting a slight surplus as a result of decreased activity due to the redeployment of resources to the COVID 19 crisis. These savings were partially offset by reduced revenues in several areas.


Page 14 of 23

Corporate Impacts

The COVID pandemic has impacted all aspects our society, including the following areas:

YQG and Windsor Detroit Border Link Dividends - $2M Deficit

Cross border and air travel has been severely restricted during this period resulting in significant revenue losses for tunnel toll revenues and airport operations. It is expected

that the $1M dividends received from each of these entities will not materialize for 2020. This would result in a $2M variance in the City’s operating budget.

OLGC Casino Revenue - $6.6M Deficit

Caesars Windsor, along with many other establishments in the city, has been closed during the pandemic. It is estimated that the City will lose approximately $6.6M in slot

revenue in 2020. The forecast of foregone revenue assumes that casino revenue will increase by 10% monthly starting at 25% of budgeted revenue in July and increasing to 75% in December. Depending on the opening date of the casino, revenue losses for the

balance of 2020 may be materially different depending on the impacts of social distancing on Caesar Windsor’s operations.

Interest & Penalty Revenue - $2.5M Deficit

The foregone revenue on waived interest and penalties for property taxes until the end of June 30, 2020 is estimated to costs $1.2M. In addition, the reduction of interest rates

as well as reduced cash flows for investment resulting from the COVID crisis could result in an additional revenue shortfall for our investment income of an estimated

$1.3M for the year.

Municipal Accommodation Tax (MAT) – $1.6M Impact to Reserve

The COVID crisis has had a severe impact on the hotel industry with many facilities

being partially or fully closed beginning on or around mid-March. Occupancy rates for the 1st quarter of 2020 are typically lower than in the spring and summer months where

travel is more prominent due to vacations and sports travel. Based upon the quarterly results from 2019, Administration has projected a decline in revenues of 15% during this 1st quarter and further reductions for both the 2nd and 3rd quarter. The revenue shortfall

estimated for the 1st quarter (Jan to March) is approximately $80,000. The actual shortfall will not be known until some time after June 30th as a result of the deferral of

the MAT tax remittance date from April 30th to June 30th which was approved by City Council to assist hotel operators with immediate cash flow impacts. Current projections, which are based upon prolonged periods of low occupancy for this industry, suggest

that the total shortfall could be in the range of $1.6M. Any shortfall may limit future investments in the tourism industry as the MAT tax revenues are shared equally

between TWEPI and the City’s Tourism Development Infrastructure and Program Reserve.


Page 15 of 23

Corporate Utilities - $835,000 Surplus

The following utilities analysis is based on very limited information, as the corporate utility data for most accounts is only available up to April, while for other accounts the data is limited to the months of March. It is also difficult to determine as to what level

facilities that are deemed nonessential are operating at. In addition, the Global Adjustment and other utility rate fluctuations going forward can have a significant impact

on projections. Total savings projected for the period from mid March to the end of December is estimated to be $835,000 ($410,000 Hydro, $80,000 Gas, $225,000 Water, and $120,000 District Energy). Recreational Facilities (indoor & outdoor pools

and ice, sporting facilities, indoor arenas, etc) account for 80% of the total savings, followed by 15% in District Energy and 5% in all other areas.

Fringe Benefit Savings - $3,000,000 Surplus

For the majority of the Corporation’s fringe benefits (Canada Pension Plan, Employment

Insurance, Group Life Insurance, Long-Term and Short-Term Disability and OMERS) it is business as usual and no savings are projected at this time. As it relates to medical

and dental benefits through Green Shield, savings of approximately $1 million per month (during periods of full shut-down) is estimated by the Corporation’s benefits consultant. This would result in savings of approximately $2.25 million to date which

includes the last week of March and all of April and May. It is however, difficult to make projections to year-end as the timelines for reopening these services by the Province is

still uncertain. Other factors to consider are; (1) the unlikelihood that these services will be permitted to immediately reopen to their full capacity, (2) plan member's comfort level to immediately return for services, (3) sufficient capacity to make up for lost

appointments and (4) that plan members will have enough time prior to the end of the year to reach their maximum level of claims. Taking these factors into consideration,

and not knowing at this time when these services will resume operations, the following assumptions are being made; (1) services will begin again in June at 50% capacity, (2) will increase to 75% capacity in July and (3) will increase to 100% capacity by August.

This would result in additional savings of approximately $750,000 ($500,000 in June and $250,000 in July).

Cash Flow Implications

The ability for municipalities to sustain prolonged periods of revenue shortfalls is dependant upon maintaining liquid cash reserves. As previously reported to City

Council, the City’s investment strategy has been very conservative and risk adverse maintaining most cash reserves in short-term liquid investments such as Guaranteed

Investment Certificates with Canadian financial institutions. While the reported annual investment yields have been lower than could otherwise be realized, the ability to access cash on relatively short notice with limited cost is available. The City is currently

in a very strong financial position with strong liquidity and as such, it is not expected at this time that we will need to access the line of credit in the near term. Finance staff are

however continuing to monitor corporate cash flows to ensure our liquidity remains strong.


Page 16 of 23

Should the impacts of the pandemic shut down be protracted for an extended period or

create more significant long term financial hardships that do not recover within a timely period, corporate cash flows could be further negatively impacted across our many lines of business or in the collection of taxes. The City currently maintains a placeholder with

the ability to draw upon a $100M line of credit available through Scotiabank. Interest on the line of credit is set at a rate, which is based off the Bank of Canada prime rate,

which is currently 2.45%. Administration will continue to closely monitor the cash flow situation to determine what if any actions may be required.

Capital Plan Implications

As per the recently approved capital budget guidelines (CR309/2020), Administration

continues to seek opportunities such as grant funding and or project surpluses, which may assist in offsetting any unmitigated pandemic costs. The semi-annual capital

variance report for the month ending May 31, 2020, which is also being presented to City Council on July 13th (C91/2020) has identified project surpluses for this purpose. Administration has identified and will track project surpluses in levy based and in Sewer

Surcharge funding for potential use to offset any unmitigated pandemic costs if necessary. In addition, Administration will continue to ensure any additional completed

projects which can be closed and which have a funding source, which could be used to offset unmitigated pandemic costs, and which are not required to offset other project deficits, will also be considered and tracked for this purpose as necessary.

Risk Analysis:

Administration has attempted to quantify the impact of the COVID pandemic to the

City’s finances for the remainder of the year with still many unknowns and the use of significant assumptions. It is still early in the process to provide any degree of certainty as to the full financial impacts to the Corporation as the situation continues to change

daily. There remain many variables, including:

1. The length of the crisis. It is still unknown when the restrictions will be lifted.

Although we have projected the financial impacts to the end of the year, there remain significant uncertainties as to the recovery from the COVID 19 crisis.

2. The length of the transition period for things to return to “normal”. In some cases,

entire seasons may be lost even if restrictions are lifted.

3. The residents’ hesitation to return to their normal activities once the restrictions

are lifted may further delay the financial recovery for the City

4. The additional requirements and regulations that the City and others must follow as we transition and eventually return to a normal state.

5. The amount of senior level of funding that will be made available to municipalities to offset the financial burden of the COVID Pandemic

6. Pollution Control – There is a risk of significant maintenance and/or replacement costs for pumps caused by the increased use of disinfecting wipes that are being


Page 17 of 23

disposed of in the City’s sewer system due to the COVID pandemic. Staff will

continue to monitor this area and report any significant variances.

Agency, Boards and Commission Impacts

Impacts from Enwin– The City budgets a $4M dividend from Enwin. Preliminary

indications are that payment of this dividend may be delayed to accommodate cash flow requirements at Enwin. While, it is still premature to determine when and if all of the

budgeted dividend will be received, overall water usage is trending similar last year. Any reduction in water consumption may result in decreased revenue to the City from the wastewater (sewer surcharge) fees collected by Enwin on the City’s behalf.

Administration will continue to monitor consumption trends.

Windsor Police Services (as provided by WPS) – As a first responder agency, the

service level requirements during the pandemic have remained consistent for the Windsor Police Service. When responding to calls for service, the safety of the community and our staff is paramount. The expedient procurement of proper personal

protective equipment and the deployment of enhanced cleaning measures has rendered the WPS in a position to effectively respond to the needs of the community without any

major staffing challenges during this crisis. The WPS has deployed innovative staffing adjustments to overcome all deployment deficiencies as they arose. Maintaining a healthy workforce has been critical to successfully mitigating the impacts of COVID-19.

In response to the financial pressures imposed by COVID-19, the WPS has deployed very stringent cost mitigation measures to reduce discretionary spending where

possible. Significant costs have been incurred due to the procurement of personal protective equipment and deployment of enhanced cleaning measures. To date, the cost mitigation measures deployed have proven to be successful. The net impact of

additional expenditures has been mitigated by cost savings in other areas such as training and community outreach programs. As of April 30th, 2020 WPS is trending on

target with a projected 0% budget variance for 2020 despite the impacts of COVID-19. WPS Administration is closely monitoring the situation, and new information will be brought forward as it arises.

EMS / Land Ambulance - Land Ambulance/EMS is currently projecting a year-end

deficit, related to COVID-19, to be approximately $1.4 million gross. If the Province

provides no additional funding and other mitigation measures are not reached, the cost would be split approximately 50/50 between City & County, resulting in a $700,000 deficit to the City of Windsor. The most significant factor is PPE cost which totals

$450,000 to date and estimated to be $750,000 for the full year. Wages account for approximately $170,000 to date and estimated to be $600,000 for the year, made up of

exceptional staffing and overtime (especially at the beginning of the event), additional training and a team of students who support the front line staff with PPE changes and sterilization of equipment between calls. This projection assumes that operations will

continue under current restrictions until the end of August and that some protocols will likely remain in place for the rest of the year.


Page 18 of 23

Windsor Essex County Health Unit - The Windsor-Essex County Health Unit

(WECHU) has completed a financial forecast for the year-ending December 31, 2020, however, as this public health emergency continues to unfold, there is a great deal of uncertainty surrounding programs and services which will continue and/or resume for

the remainder of the year. At this time, the WECHU forecasts being over spent at year-end by $892,965 with the City of Windsor’s share of this deficit totalling $486,126.

Tourism Windsor Essex Pelee Island (TWEPI) – as indicated above, the City

provides funding to TWEPI in accordance with the revenue cost sharing agreement developed in conjunction with the MAT program. Previous to this agreement, the City’s

annual contribution to TWEPI, as an agency, was set at $923,300. As part of the initial first few years of the MAT program and until the revenues could be more reasonably

estimated, City Council has maintained an expenditure within the budget of $923,300 which is transferred to the Tourism Infrastructure and Program Development Reserve Fund. TWEPI recently received news from the province that they will be receiving a

$629,788 grant to assist tourism with the impacts of the COVID 19 pandemic. This grant will help mitigate the expected loss of MAT revenue. Any remaining shortfall in funding

for TWEPI can be funded from the transfer to the reserve.

Financial Matters:

The expected financial implications of the City’s response to the COVID-19 Pandemic is summarized in the following table. The year-end projected variances from the impact of

the COVID crisis to City operations are estimated to the end of 2020. It is projected that the total net financial impact to the City for 2020 is approximately $29.7M.

Forgone revenues totalling $36.6M when combined with additional costs resulting from the COVID pandemic of $15.4M total $52.0M. This amount is offset by avoided costs of $16.7 M resulting from various mitigation measures undertaken to date, and grant

funding of $5.6M, thereby resulting in a projected remaining net financial impact to the City of $29.7 M for 2020.

City Council should note that these preliminary estimates are subject to significant variability as new cost and revenue pressures are identified going forward. The financial impacts detailed below will be in addition to normal operating variances that would

typically be expected in any normal year.

Staff have reviewed peer municipalities and their respective COVID update reports to

their City Councils. While each municipality has unique characteristics that may result in a different impact to their finances, it was apparent that most municipalities our size are dealing with very similar challenges as the City of Windsor. Similar challenges are

evident in municipal services such as public transit, parks and recreational programs, homelessness, long-term care facilities, first responders, and provincial offenses. Other

municipalities are also having to overcome unique COVID related situations like closed facilities, personal protective equipment, staff working from home, staff layoffs, foregone revenue and additional costs to operate in this environment. Finally, we are all now

planning on how to transition to re-open our facilities and bring back front line services to the residents in a safe and effective manner.


Page 19 of 23

Every municipality appears to be dealing with the COVID financial challenges in their

own unique way based on their specific financial situation. It is also very clear that due to the magnitude of the financial impacts being experienced that all municipalities are counting on emergency financial assistance from the federal and provincial

governments to make up the bulk of their shortfall. It remains very clear that municipalities in general do not have the financial ability to unilaterally address the

significant financial challenges they face as a result of the COVID 19 pandemic without substantial financial assistance from the senior levels of government.

Summary of 2020 Year-End COVID-19 Financial Impacts Projections

Department

Foregone

Revenues

Additional

Costs

Avoided

Costs

Grant

Funding

Y/E Projected

Variance

Recreation & Culture 8,910,000 1,203,000 4,866,000 0 (5,247,000)

Transit Windsor 7,791,366 798,233 3,755,858 0 (4,833,741)

Parks & Facilities 422,000 4,023,000 579,500 0 (3,865,500)

On-Off Street Parking (Reserve) 1,495,047 0 0 0 (1,495,047)

Parking Enforcement 1,304,651 0 16,639 0 (1,288,012)

Huron Lodge 0 1,050,000 0 188,600 (861,400)

Windsor Fire & Rescue 125,000 621,000 0 0 (746,000)

Housing & Children's Services 0 6,455,047 550,000 5,182,471 (722,576)

Council Services 1,170,000 193,000 362,700 284,500 (715,800)

Legal/Provincial Offences 1,530,000 50,000 1,002,400 0 (577,600)

Engineering & Corporate Projects 193,400 900 30,410 0 (163,890)

Building Property Standards Enforcement 150,000 0 0 0 (150,000)

Information Technology 24,000 0 0 0 (24,000)

Finance 62,000 0 100,000 0 38,000

Pollution Control (Sewer Surcharge) 0 28,300 70,058 0 41,758

Human Resources 0 11,000 56,000 0 45,000

CAO's Office 0 0 50,000 0 50,000

Windsor Public Library 0 22,000 162,000 0 140,000

PW Operations 63,000 456,991 717,433 0 197,442

Employment & Social Services 0 0 500,000 0 500,000

Corporate Impacts

OLGC Casino 6,600,000 0 0 0 (6,600,000)

Interest & Penalties 2,500,000 0 0 0 (2,500,000)

YQG & WDBL Dividends 2,000,000 0 0 0 (2,000,000)

Municipal Accomodation Tax (Reserve) 1,600,000 0 0 0 (1,600,000)

EMS/Land Ambulance 700,000 0 0 0 (700,000)

Health Unit 0 486,126 0 0 (486,126)

WPS 0 0 0 0 0

Utilities 0 0 835,000 0 835,000

Fringe Benefit Savings (i.e. Green Shield) 0 0 3,000,000 0 3,000,000

Total Overall Projected Financial Impact 36,640,464 15,398,597 16,653,998 5,655,571 (29,729,492)

Funding Source

Sewer Surcharge Impact 0 28,300 70,058 0 41,758

On/Off Street Parking Reserve Impact 1,495,047 0 0 0 (1,495,047)

Municipal Accomodation Tax Reserve Impact 1,600,000 0 0 0 (1,600,000)

Levy Impact 33,545,417 15,370,297 16,583,940 5,655,571 (26,676,203)

Total Overall Projected Financial Impact 36,640,464 15,398,597 16,653,998 5,655,571 (29,729,492)

Total Projected Year-End Variances

It is also important to note that the net financial impact is broken down into several funding sources with the Levy funded amount representing the largest component at

$26.7M. The three remaining amounts for Sewer Surcharge, On/Off Street Parking, and Municipal Accommodation Tax which all impact their respective reserves as those


Page 20 of 23

services are separately budgeted and funded with their annual surpluses and/or deficits

charged directly to the reserve.

Mitigating Measures

Section 290(4) of The Municipal Act, states that the municipality shall provide for any

deficit of the previous year in preparing their annual budget. Therefore, any amount remaining of the forecasted deficit that is not funded from grants made available from

senior levels of government will need to be reflected in the development of the 2021 operating budget unless other measures are adopted by Council to fund said deficit.

While Administration has already reduced COVID 19 related budgetary impacts by

$16.7M through expenditure reductions and avoided costs, (See high level summary of these savings which is provided in the table below), there still remains an estimated

shortfall of $26.7M projected at the end of 2020. Administration will continue to actively pursue Federal & Provincial Funding to offset any remaining COVID 19 financial variance.

Mitigating Measures Already Actioned by Administration

Cost Category Amount

Staffing & Overtime Costs $7,975,000

Employee Benefits $3,000,000

Fuel Savings from Lower Consumption & Price $1,550,000

POA Cost Savings $1,000,000

Utilities $835,000

Program Supplies $820,000

P2P Program $550,000

TW Maintenance, Tolls & Commissions $500,000

Other Miscellaneous $425,000

Total Avoided Costs $16,655,000

The variances in the Sewer Surcharge Operating Reserve can be transferred to the

sewer surcharge reserve, while the On/Off Street Parking and the Municipal Accommodation Tax Reserves may simply have less funds being transferred into their respective reserves in 2020.

Federal and Provincial Emergency Funding to Offset the Impacts of COVID 19

Municipalities continue to press for emergency funding from the federal and provincial governments to help offset the financial impacts of COVID-19. Federal and provincial

governments have indicated that their initial actions taken to date, including advancing planned Federal Gas Tax payments and funding for homelessness programs, are only

the first steps in providing support to municipalities. The City has been advocating for a federal/provincial emergency assistance plan through efforts at Large Urban Mayor’s Caucus of Ontario, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Federation of

Canadian Municipalities, and the Municipal Financial Officers of Ontario. Staff recommend that the City reiterate its request to the Provincial and Federal governments

for emergency financial assistance to municipalities to help offset the negative financial


Page 21 of 23

impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.The recommendation is to apply any emergency

funding received from senior levels of government to offset any remaining COVID related variances.

Debt Financing

City Council recently approved mortgage financing for the Windsor Essex County Housing Corporation (WECHC) for the Meadowbrook Housing Development with debt payments to be funded from incremental rental revenues. Additionally, City Council will

also be faced with the potential for further debt mortgage financing in the coming years for additional developments at the WECHC through the CMHC Repair & Renewal

Program and the Housing Regeneration Plan. All of these decisions will result in increasing debt levels on the City Consolidated Balance Sheet.

Some members of City Council have raised the issue of debt issuance as a possible funding strategy for future Capital Projects. As City Council is aware the City has

operated over a number years under a Pay as You Go model for funding of Capital Projects which has successfully reduced the City’s debt from its peak level of $230M in 2003 (and projected to grow to more than $500M) to its current level of $71M at

December 31, 2019. During this same time, capital budget investments have increased dramatically with many large projects being fully funded from Pay as You Go funds

without increasing debt levels. This has saved the City well over $100M in interest costs over the life of the debentures that would have otherwise been issued and which in turn has contributed significantly to the ability to increase capital spending while

maintaining fiscal responsibility.

Currently, no debt financing has been included in the levy-funded approved Capital Budget Program of the City. Any debt charges resulting from such debt would require annual fixed cost debt principle and interest payments to be funded from the annual

operating budget thereby restricting flexibility as such costs would not be considered discretionary and would need to be funded each year. It is important to note that one of

the key strengths of the City’s finances during these challenging times and which positions the City well to face the uncertainty and impacts of the COVID 19 pandemic is the fact that we have no tax supported debt obligations which must be serviced over a

longer period of time. Many municipalities face more difficult and daunting challenges as they must consider the budgetary pressures of meeting fixed long term debt obligations

in the face of great uncertainty relative to future revenue levels. It is recognized that interest rates are at historically low levels and given the significant

uncertainty surrounding the eventual final deficit the City will face in 2020 that it is reasonable to revisit debt financing in the future as one of many possible targeted

capital financing alternatives. However, any actual issuance of debt would need to be very carefully considered for specific and appropriate circumstances only. Ideally, it would be considered in cases of one-time large scale investments or investments

whereby the investments’ resulting future revenue streams would service the annual debt charges. Debt financing would not be recommended to be utilized as a regular and

recurring revolving funding source. Administration will continue to monitor the situation


Page 22 of 23

as we progress through 2020 and, if required, will present Council with appropriate

capital funding options.

Consultations:

City Departments and Agency, Boards & Commissions

Conclusion:

With the significant and unprecedented measures that the City has undertaken in

response to the COVID-19 crisis, staff has committed to provide Council with an assessment of the projected year-end financial implications related to the City’s

Operating Budgets for 2020. Given how early in the year this report is being prepared and the evolving situation with COVID-19, staff has had to make a significant number of service level assumptions regarding additional costs or lost revenues in producing this

report. Staff has also made efforts to capture costs that have been avoided due to reduced expenditures, along with expected changes in services being provided.

Administration will continue to monitor, update and report on these impacts and assumptions in the 3rd Quarter Operating Variance Report.

Based on current projections and assumptions to date, the anticipated net financial

impact of the City’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic for 2020 is estimated at $29.7M. This consists of $36.6M of foregone revenue and $9.8M of additional costs net

of confirmed funding from senior levels of government, which are partially offset by $16.7M of reduced spending as a result of many mitigating action measures already taken. Significant variables related to government grants, additional costs and foregone

revenues exist that may materially impact the year-end projections. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to project with certainty at this time the full financial impact to the City

of this unprecedented event.

The Federal and Provincial governments have made several funding announcements over the past few weeks in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The City has received

confirmation of $5.6M in additional funding, primarily for Housing, in addition to grants for Huron Lodge and the 211 Call Centre that have been included in this analysis. There have been several other funding programs announced, which principally are

focused on addressing impacts in the private and not-for-profit sectors. However, efforts continue across the country to highlight the financial crisis facing municipalities as well

as a result of the pandemic and to urge senior levels of government to provide necessary emergency financial supports to municipalities to address these fiscal challenges.

Administration will continue to amend the financial impact analysis for any potential subsidy offsets and bring forward recommendations to mitigate any deficit as part of the

3rd Quarter Variance report.


N/A


Page 23 of 23

Approvals:

Name Title

Tony Ardovini Deputy Treasurer, Financial Planning


Jan Wilson Corporate Leader of Parks, Recreation, Culture and Facilities

Shelby Askin Hager City Solicitor and Corporate Leader, Economic Development and Public Safety

Valerie Critchley Corporate Leader for Public Engagement and Human Services, City Clerk, Licence

Commissioner

Jelena Payne Commissioner of Social Development & Health

Joe Mancina City Treasurer & CFO


Notifications:

Name Address Email

Appendices: N/A


Documents

· CITY OF WINDSOR AGENDA 7/13/2020 City Council Meeting Date: Monday, July 13, 2020 Time: 10:00 o’clock a.m. Location: Council Chambers, 1 st Floor, Windsor City Hall Clerk’s