Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
December 5, 2022 - Special Council - Revised
Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Members of the public may observe the open, public portion of the meeting proceedings by accessing the livestream. A recording of the meeting will also be available on the City’s website following the meeting. An In Camera meeting of Council has been scheduled in accordance with the provisions of Section 239(2) of the Municipal Act and Procedural By-law 7926/22, in that the matters to be discussed relate to personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees. Parts of this Meeting will be closed to the public. (Items 3.1 and 3.2) Page 1. Roll Call 2. Disclosure of Interest 3. In Camera Matters - Main Committee Room 3.1 Citizen Appointments and Nominations to Boards, Committees, and Positions Confidential Attachment Provided Under Separate Cover a) Accessibility Advisory Committee b) Animal Services Appeal Committee c) Committee of Adjustment d) Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee e) Property Review Committee f) Pickering Public Library Board g) Livestock Valuer h) Cultural Advisory Committee i) Durham Land Division Committee 3.2 Verbal Update from the Director, Human Resources Re: Personal Matter 4. In Camera Session - Public Report 5. Statutory Public Meeting - 7:00 pm Statutory Public Meetings are held to receive input and feedback on certain types of planning applications. Members of the public looking to provide a verbal delegation to Members of Council may do so either in person or through a virtual audio telephone connection into the meeting. For more information, and to register as a delegate, visit Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca www.pickering.ca/delegation, and complete the on-line delegation form or email clerks@pickering.ca. The list of delegates who have registered to speak will be called upon one by one by the Chair in the order in which they have registered. A maximum of 10 minutes shall be allotted for each delegation. Please be advised that your name and address will appear in the public record and will be posted on the City’s website as part of the meeting minutes. 5.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 47-22 550 City Initiated Official Plan Amendment: Changes to development review procedures and fees in response to Bill 109, the More Homes For Everyone Act, 2022, and review of the City’s Planning Application Fees File: OPA 22-003/P Staff / Consultant Delegation Sean-Michael Stephen, Managing Partner, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Virtual) Recommendation: 1. That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 22-003/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to amend existing policies and introduce new policies related to the review of Planning Act applications, as set out in Exhibit ‘A’ to Appendix I to Report PLN 47-22 be approved; 2. That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan, to amend existing policies and introduce new policies to the Pickering Official Plan with regard to the review of Planning Act applications under Bill 109, the More Homes For Everyone Act, 2022, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 47-22, be enacted; 3. That the revised Draft Pre-consultation By-law, as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 47-22, be enacted; 4. That, in response to legislated changes arising from the enactment of Bill 109, the More Homes For Everyone Act, 2022, and to improve cost recovery of the processing of development applications, an increase to the Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca City Development Department – Planning Fees be approved, effective January 1, 2023; 5. That an amendment to Schedule “I” to By-law 6191/03, the General Municipal Fees and Charges By-law, as amended, by deleting the pages for City Development Department – Planning, and substituting the updated pages for City Development Department – Planning, as set out in Schedule “I” to the Draft By-law provided as Appendix III to Report PLN 47-22, be approved; and, 6. That the revised Draft By-law to amend Schedule “I” to the General Municipal Fees and Charges By-law 6191/03, as set out in Appendix III to Report PLN 47-22, be enacted. 6. Delegations Members of the public looking to provide a verbal delegation to Members of Council for items listed under Sections 7 - 9 of the agenda, may do so either in person, or through a virtual audio telephone connection into the meeting. For more information, and to register as a delegate, visit www.pickering.ca/delegation, and complete the on-line delegation form or email clerks@pickering.ca. The list of delegates who have registered to speak will be called upon one by one by the Chair in the order in which they have registered. A maximum of 10 minutes shall be allotted for each delegation. Please be advised that your name and address will appear in the public record and will be posted on the City’s website as part of the meeting minutes. 6.1 Barry Pettit, CEO, Pickering Harbour Company, Pettit Inc. (In Person) Re: Report OPS 18-22 Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds in Frenchman’s Bay - Review of Results of 2022 Pilot Project 6.2 Andrea Zeeb, Commodore, Frenchman's Bay Yacht Club (In Person) Re: Report OPS 18-22 Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds in Frenchman’s Bay - Review of Results of 2022 Pilot Project 7. Correspondence 7.1 Corr. 33-22 585 Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca The Honourable Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Re: Municipal Housing Targets and Municipal Housing Pledges City of Pickering: 13,000 Recommendation: That Corr. 33-22, from The Honourable Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, dated October 25, 2022, regarding Municipal Housing Targets and Municipal Housing Pledges City of Pickering: 13,000, be received for information. 7.2 Corr. 34-22 589 The Association of Municipalities of Ontario Re: Unpacking Bill 23 – More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 Recommendation: That Corr. 34-22, from The Association of Municipalities of Ontario, dated November 2, 2022, regarding Unpacking Bill 23 – More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, be received for information. 7.3 Corr. 35-22 592 Mary Medeiros, City Clerk, City of Oshawa Re: Amendments to Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022 Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 35-22, from Mary Medeiros, City Clerk, City of Oshawa, dated November 2, 2022, regarding Amendments to Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022, be received; 2. That Mayor Ashe send a letter to the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Secretary of the Cabinet, Head of the Ontario Public Service, Deputy Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General, MPP Parliamentary Assistant to the Attorney General advising that: i. Pickering City Council does not support the amendments to Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022; and, ii. Pickering City Council does not support the amendments applying to the City of Pickering; Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 3. That a copy of the Council resolution be provided to the Region of Durham, all Durham Region municipalities, Durham Region Members of Provincial Parliament, AMO, OMAA, and AMCTO. 7.4 Corr. 36-22 595 Susan Cassel, City Clerk, City of Pickering Re: Council Appointments to Boards, Committees, and Positions Recommendation: 1. That the following Members of Council be appointed to the following Committees, Board, and Position for a term ending November 14, 2026: Animal Services Appeal Committee ______________________________ Civic Awards Committee Mayor Ashe (Ex-Officio) ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Pickering Public Library Board ______________________________ ______________________________ Site Plan Advisory Committee ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Vehicle for Hire Advisory Committee ______________________________ Alternate Regional Councillor ______________________________ 2. In accordance with Policy ADM 045, that the following Regional Councillors be appointed Deputy Mayor for the following terms: Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Councillor Brenner – November 15, 2022 – March 14, 2024; Councillor Cook – March 15, 2024 – July 14, 2025; and, Councillor Pickles – July 15, 2025 – November 14, 2026. 7.5 Corr. 37-22 597 Susan Cassel, City Clerk, City of Pickering Re: Council Nominations to Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Recommendation: That the following Members of Council be nominated to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA): Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) ______________________________ Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) ______________________________ 8. Matters for Consideration 8.1 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report BYL 06-22 599 Deferral of Implementation of Accessible Service Supplement Fees - Vehicle for Hire By-law Recommendation: 1. That Report BYL 06-22 respecting a deferral of the implementation of the Accessible Service Supplement enacted in the Vehicle for Hire By-law 7739/20 be received; 2. That the implementation and collection of the Vehicle for Hire Accessible Service Supplement be deferred until January 1, 2024; and, 3. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. 8.2 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 17-22 602 Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Pre 2023 Current Budget Approvals Recommendation: 1. That Council approve the following two recommendations related to pre 2023 Current Budget approval: a) That pre 2023 Current Budget approval be provided for the hiring of five additional firefighters with a start date of February 1, 2023 and this cost of $402,700 be included in the Fire Services 2023 Budget for Accounts Salaries & Wages (10700.50100-$298,298) and Employee Benefits (10700.501020-$104,402); b) That pre 2023 Current Budget approval be provided for the hiring of one Senior Purchasing Analyst with a start date of February 1, 2023 and this cost of $99,290 be included in the Supply & Services 2023 Budget for Accounts Salaries & Wages (10605.50100-$76,377) and Employee Benefits (10605.501020- $22,913); and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. 8.3 Director, Community Services, Report CS 22-22 605 The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. - Lease Agreement Recommendation: 1. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized to execute the Lease Agreement with The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. set out in Attachment 1 to this report, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.4 Director, Community Services, Report CS 24-22 626 Community Safety and Well-Being Initiatives Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca - East Shore Community Centre - Use as Emergency Overnight Warming Centre - Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Arena Dressing Rooms – Outreach Shower Facilities Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 24-22 regarding the implementation of Community Safety and Well-Being Initiatives be received; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with Christian Faith Outreach Centre, set out in Attachment 1 to this report, for use of East Shore Community Centre as an Emergency Overnight Warming Centre, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with Christian Faith Outreach Centre, set out in Attachment 2 to this report, for use of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Arena Dressing Rooms for outreach shower facilities, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.5 Director, Community Services, Report CS 25-22 640 Recreation User Fee Study & Pricing Policy - Consulting Services Recommendation: 1. That Council approve the hiring of Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates to conduct a Recreation User Fee Study and develop a Pricing Policy for Recreation Services in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 10.03 (c), as the assignment is above $50,000.00; Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 2. That the fee proposal submitted by Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates to conduct a Recreation User Fee Study and develop a Pricing Policy for Recreation Service in the amount of $67,990.00 (HST excluded) or $76,828.70 (HST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $76,828.70 (HST included) and the total net project cost of $69,187.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $69,187.00 as approved in the 2022 Current Budget to be funded as follows: a) The sum of $63,790.00 to be funded from Property Taxes; b) The sum of $5,397.00 to be funded from the Community Benefit Charges Reserve Fund; and, 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.6 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 23-22 646 Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2 - Tender T2022-9 Recommendation: 1. That Tender No. T2022-9 for the Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2 as submitted by Orin Contractors Inc. in the total tendered amount of $2,141,350.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $3,083,771.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $2,777,031.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $2,777,031.00 as follows: Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca a) the sum of $1,000,000.00 available budget in capital project C10320.1912 as approved in the 2021 Parks Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from Development Charges – City’s Share Reserve; b) the sum of $1,000,000.00 available budget in capital project C10320.1912 as approved in the 2021 Parks Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the Development Charges Reserve Fund – Parks & Recreation Services be increased to $1,365,244.00; c) the sum of $46,543.00 available budget in capital project C10320.1912 to be funded by a transfer from Third Party Contributions (Swim Drink Fish); d) the sum of $365,244.00 to be funded by a transfer from the Rate Stabilization Reserve to cover the remaining over expenditure; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.7 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 24-22 656 Additional Cost for Project Management and Design Services for the Pickering Innovation Corridor - Seaton Community Recommendation: 1. That additional project management and design services fees requested by Sabourin Kimble & Associates Ltd. in the amount of $122,000.00 (plus HST) for the change in scope of work to undertake the necessary studies and design work associated with the provision of municipal services within the Pickering Innovation Corridor, be accepted, in accordance with Purchasing Policy 10.3 (c) as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 2. That the total net project cost $1,307,616.00 be revised to $1,431,763.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to fund the revised net project cost of $1,431,763.00 from Capital Budget Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca account C10600.1802.01 (formerly 5203.1802.6265) from the Sale of Land, and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. 8.8 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 25-22 661 Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction - Tender No. T2022-12 Recommendation: 1. That Tender No. T2022-12 for Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction as submitted by Mianco Group Inc. in the total tendered amount of $1,165,015.88 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the firm of Aquafor Beech Limited be retained to provide contract administration services during construction as approved in Resolution #280/20 in the amount of $92,886.00 (HST included) as per their proposal dated November 8, 2021; 3. That the total gross project cost of $1,547,576.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $1,393,640.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $1,393,640.00 as follows: a) the sum of $1,045,230.00 (net of HST rebate) available in capital project C10575.1903.01 Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction as approved in the 2019 and 2022 Capital Budgets to be funded by a transfer from Development Charges – City’s Share Reserve; b) the sum of $348,410.00 (net of HST rebate) available in capital project C10575.1903.01 Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction as approved in the 2019 and 2022 Capital Budgets to be funded by a transfer from Development Charges – Storm Water Management Reserve Fund; and, Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.9 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 15-22 671 2023 Interim Spending Authority Recommendation: 1. That the 2023 Interim Operating Expenditures be approved at 50 percent of the prior year’s budget, including adjustments, as contained in Attachment 1, pending approval of the formal 2023 Current Budget by Council; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.10 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 16-22 674 2023 Temporary Borrowing By-law Recommendation: 1. That the temporary borrowing limit of $63 million be established to meet 2023 current expenditures pending receipt of taxes and other revenues for the period of January 1 to September 30, 2023 inclusive, and $32 million thereafter until December 31, 2023; 2. That the temporary borrowing limit for capital purposes for 2023 be established at $160 million; 3. That the attached draft By-law providing for the temporary borrowing of monies be enacted; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.11 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 17-22 679 2021 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Recommendation: Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca It is recommended that Report FIN 17-22 from the Director, Finance & Treasurer regarding the 2021 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund be received for information. 8.12 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report LEG 14-22 682 Amendment to the Municipality Contribution Agreement between Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and The Corporation of the City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That the attached Amendment to Municipality Contribution Agreement between Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and The Corporation of the City of Pickering be approved; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the said Amendment to Municipality Contribution Agreement; and, 3. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. 8.13 Director, Operations, Report OPS 11-22 690 2023 Pre-Budget Approval Purchase Order for Supply & Delivery of One Gradall Hydroscopic Excavator Recommendation: 1. That the quotation submitted by Amaco Equipment, dated July 7, 2022, in the amount of $767,270.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $767,270.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost of $690,950.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) 2023 pre-budget funding approval in the amount of $770,000.00 from the 2023 Roads Capital Budget from the Major Equipment Reserve; Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca b) The Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions, or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 8.14 Director, Operations, Report OPS 18-22 695 Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds in Frenchman’s Bay - Review of Results of 2022 Pilot Project Recommendation: 1. That Report OPS 18-22 from the Director, Operations regarding the mechanical harvesting of Eurasian watermilfoil weeds in Frenchman’s Bay 2022 pilot project be received for information; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. 8.15 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 46-22 702 Collaboration on Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project - Memorandum of Understanding Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 46-22 of the Director, City Development & CBO, regarding a partnership opportunity for the Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project, be received; 2. That Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute a Memorandum of Understanding between the Town of Whitby, City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Mattamy Development Corporation, and Clean Air Partnership as set out in Attachment #1 of this report, subject to the terms and conditions satisfactory to Director, City Development, Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor and Director, Finance & Treasurer; Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 3. That the appropriate City staff be directed to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report; and, 4. That staff be directed to report back with a summary of the results at the conclusion of the project. 8.16 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 48-22 720 Community Garden Policy Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 48-22 of the Director, City Development & CBO, regarding community gardens, be received; 2. That Council adopt the Community Garden Policy as set out in Attachment #1; and, 3. That the appropriate City staff be directed take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. 8.17 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 49-22 742 Planning Reform - Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 - Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Plan - Proposed Integration of A Place to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement - Various Other Legislative and Regulatory Proposals - Comments to the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Recommendation: 1. That the comments in Report PLN 49-22, regarding Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, and various other Environmental Registry, Regulatory Registry, and Provincial Plans and Policy reforms, be endorsed; 2. That staff be authorized to submit (and resubmit where required) the comments in Report PLN 49-22 to the Province via the respective consultation portals; and, Special Council Meeting Agenda December 5, 2022 Hybrid Electronic Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 pm For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 3. That a copy of Report PLN 49-22 and Council’s resolution thereon, be forwarded to the Premier Douglas Ford, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, MPP Peter Bethlenfalvy, the Regional Municipality of Durham, and the other Durham area municipalities. 9. By-laws 9.1 By-law 7972/22 566 Being a by-law to adopt Amendment 46 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering (OPA 22-003/P). [Refer to Item 5.1 Report PLN 47-22] 9.2 By-law 7973/22 573 Being a by-law to require consultation with the City prior to submission of applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plans, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. [Refer to Item 5.1 Report PLN 47-22] 9.3 By-law 7974/22 576 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6191/03 to confirm General Municipal Fees. [Refer to Item 5.1 Report PLN 47-22] 9.4 By-law 7975/22 677 Being a by-law to authorize the temporary borrowing of monies to meet the current and capital expenditures of the City of Pickering for the year 2023. [Refer to Item 8.10 Report FIN 16-22] 9.5 By-law 7976/22 772 Being a by-law to exempt Block 1, Plan 40M-2697, Pickering, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. 10. Confirmation By-law 11. Adjournment Report to Council Report Number: PLN 47-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: City Initiated Official Plan Amendment: Changes to development review procedures and fees in response to Bill 109, the More Homes For Everyone Act, 2022, and review of the City’s Planning Application Fees File: OPA 22-003/P Recommendations: 1. That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 22-003/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to amend existing policies and introduce new policies related to the review of Planning Act applications, as set out in Exhibit ‘A’ to Appendix I to Report PLN 47-22 be approved; 2.That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan, to amend existing policies and introduce new policies to the Pickering Official Plan with regard to the review of Planning Act applications under Bill 109, the More Homes For Everyone Act, 2022, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 47-22, be enacted; 3.That the revised Draft Pre-consultation By-law, as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 47-22, be enacted; 4.That, in response to legislated changes arising from the enactment of Bill 109, the More Homes For Everyone Act, 2022, and to improve cost recovery of the processing of development applications, an increase to the City Development Department – Planning Fees be approved, effective January 1, 2023; 5.That an amendment to Schedule “I” to By-law 6191/03, the General Municipal Fees and Charges By-law, as amended, by deleting the pages for City Development Department –Planning, and substituting the updated pages for City Development Department – Planning, as set out in Schedule “I” to the Draft By-law provided as Appendix III to Report PLN 47-22, be approved; and 6.That the revised Draft By-law to amend Schedule “I” to the General Municipal Fees and Charges By-law 6191/03, as set out in Appendix III to Report PLN 47-22, be enacted. Executive Summary: On April 14, 2022, Bill 109, the More Homes For Everyone Act, 2022, received Royal Assent. Among other matters, Bill 109 amended the Planning Act to require municipalities to refund Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval application fees if no decision is made or no approval is issued within the legislative timelines. Zoning By-law Amendment Applications are required to have a decision made within 90 days (or 120 days if concurrent with an official plan amendment) and site plan approval is required within 60 days or refunds of application fees are mandated. These changes will come into effect on January 1, 2023 for new applications submitted after that date. - 550 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 2 To meet the legislated review timelines and avoid having to pay refunds (that may put the corporation at financial risk), staff are proposing several changes to the development review process: •no longer permit development applications to be submitted concurrently; •introduce a new “pre-submission” review stage; •revise the “complete application” requirements for development applications; •make public engagement, during the “pre-submission” review stage, a requirement for submitting a complete application; •prepare a recommendation report for consideration by the Planning & Development Committee on the same day as the statutory public meeting; •to address minor issues that may arise during the formal Zoning By-law Amendment application stage, which cannot be resolved within the legislated timeframes, staff will recommend Council “refuse the application without prejudice”; and •permit reconsideration of Zoning By-law Amendment applications that are refused without prejudice in select circumstances. An amendment to the policies in the Pickering Official Plan is proposed to revise the City’s current pre-consultation requirements and introduce the new “pre-submission” review stage (see Appendices I and II to Report PLN 47-22). The proposed changes will require early collaboration between applicants, staff and other stakeholders (including the public) to review key concerns and issues of the proposal, before the submission of a formal application. The proposed amendment to the General Municipal Fees and Charges By-law reflects two different reviews of the fees. The first is a result of Bill 109. It will identify new charges for the “pre-submission” stage and shift when fees are paid to more accurately reflect where in the process the corresponding amount of work is completed. The second, unrelated to Bill 109, is an increase in fees to ensure that development application fees better reflect the amount of effort required from City staff (see Appendix III to Report PLN 47-22). The recommended changes to development review procedures and fees reflect a response to Bill 109, and an update of the City’s application fees. Recently announced draft changes to the Planning Act (Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022) may require further modifications in the future. As required, staff may bring additional changes for Council’s consideration if/when this new legislation is enacted. Financial Implications: If no changes are made to the City’s development review process, as outlined in Section 2 of this report, the City is at risk of forfeiting most, or all, of the application fees collected for Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval applications. The precise amount associated with these applications will vary each year, based on the number of applications received. Using a three-year range, the average amount of fees that could be at risk is approximately $1,000,000 per year. The addition of new charges for the “pre-submission” application stage, and proposed increase in development review fees, will bring many (but not all) of these fees to full cost recovery. This will provide the City with the ability to continue to perform the required function of development review and approval, while minimizing reliance on increased tax revenue to meet demand. - 551 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 3 1. Background The Planning Act of Ontario is the provincial legislation that sets out the ground rules for land use planning in Ontario. Guided by the Planning Act, the City of Pickering receives, reviews, and approves development applications leading to the construction of new homes and businesses. On March 30, 2022, the Province introduced Bill 109, the More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022. Bill 109 amends various statutes, including the Planning Act, for items related to housing and development. City staff brought forward a report (PLN 22-22) to the April 25, 2022, Council meeting, summarizing Bill 109 and its potential implications for the City (see Attachment #1). During the consultation period, the Province gave Bill 109 Royal Assent on April 14, 2022. Among other matters, Bill 109 amended the Planning Act to require municipalities to refund Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan application fees, if a decision or approval is not made or issued respectively, within the legislative timelines. These changes come into effect on January 1, 2023. A summary of the fee refunds is provided in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Figure 1: Zoning By-law Amendment refund schedule Figure 2: Zoning By-law Amendment refund schedule if submitted with an Official Plan Amendment Figure 3: Site Plan refund schedule - 552 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 4 Prior to the release of Bill 109, staff were in the midst of a review and update of the City’s development application fees. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. was retained to assist staff in the review of these fees (see Planning Application Fee Review – Update Study, Watson & Associates, Attachment #2,). A discussion of the findings from Watson & Associates is summarized in Section 2.3.5 of this report. 2. Discussion 2.1 Challenges created by Bill 109 The Province has stated that the intent of the changes made by Bill 109 is to accelerate development approvals, leading to the faster construction of new homes. The goal of fast and efficient development approvals is shared by City staff. In practice, the development review process is designed to be an iterative and collaborative exchange between the City, developers, and stakeholders. The Planning Act requires municipalities to be transparent, and to actively engage the public in the review process. Unfortunately, the changes brought forward by Bill 109 do not take into account the following items in the development review process: 2.1.1 There is no ability to “stop-the-clock” when an application is circulated to commenting agencies for review There are a number of external agencies (Ministry of Transportation, Region of Durham, Conservation Authorities, etc.) and internal departments involved in the review of applications. The external agencies that assist with application review rarely provide their comments within the requested one-month period. Municipalities do not have the ability to “stop-the-clock” while awaiting comments from external agencies. This review may include an analysis of complex studies and reports such as comprehensive traffic impact assessments, functional servicing reports, noise studies, planning justification reports, heritage impact assessments, and geotechnical reports, to list a few. Delays in receiving comments from these agencies significantly affect approval timelines. These delays are beyond the control of the City. 2.1.2 There is no ability to “stop-the-clock” after comments have been provided to the Applicant, and the City is waiting for the proposal to be revised Once the review of an application has been completed, there are usually several modifications that need to be made by the Owner and/or Applicant in order for the application to align with City policies, guidelines, and regulations. While Applicants are often highly motivated to provide timely revisions, the City has no control over how long it takes before the revised submission is received from the Applicant. Depending on the complexity of the project, the key issues to be resolved, and the availability of consulting resources, it can take an applicant several months to resubmit application materials. It is also common for Applicants to provide more than one revision of their application before City staff are prepared to issue Site Plan Approval or recommend approval of a Zoning By-law Amendment to Council. - 553 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 5 2.1.3 Statutory public engagement becomes perfunctory rather than collaborative For Zoning By-law Amendment applications, municipalities are required to include public consultation by holding a Statutory Public Meeting. Following the Statutory Public Meeting, the comments from the public are expected to inform staff’s review and Council’s decision. Effectively reviewing and addressing public comments can also contribute to applications exceeding the Planning Act timelines. The requirements imposed by Bill 109 will now require Council to expedite its decision. If no changes were made to the City’s practices and procedures for reviewing and making decisions on planning applications, staff would be required to prepare a report with a recommendation on the application before the Statutory Public Meeting is held, and likely without time to receive all City, agency, and public comments. This would reduce the transparency of the review process, reduce the opportunity to undertake meaningful engagement with stakeholders and members of the public, and reduce the ability to provide a comprehensive planning recommendation to Council. The Bill 109 timelines require the rapid review and consideration of development applications. These timelines do not consider the fact that Committee and Council meetings are not typically held in the months of July and August or during election periods. As required, it may become necessary for special meetings of Council to be called during the summer to consider applications. Taking into account the review requirements of all City departments and external agencies, along with the quality of submissions and the response time from Applicants, it is staff’s opinion that the prescribed timelines in the Planning Act are not achievable. Therefore, without any change to our current practices and procedures, the City is at risk of refunding a significant amount of the application fees that are collected for Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval applications. The City’s average processing timelines over the last few years are as follows: All Zoning By-law Amendments: • Required decision timeline: 90 days • Average decision timeline: 400 days Residential Site Plans: • Required decision timeline: 60 days • Average decision timeline: 500 days Staff notes that there are various factors that contribute to these long decision timelines. In many instances, delays are caused by untimely responses from Applicants and external agencies. There are also procedural matters that artificially inflate decision timelines. For example, in the past when Site Plan applications were submitted concurrently with Zoning By-law Amendments, approval of the Site Plan could not occur before the Zoning had been approved by Council. This has implications on how project timelines are reported but does not directly impact how project review occurs. - 554 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 6 City staff remain committed to the prompt and efficient review of development applications to spur economic development and support the creation of more housing. Unfortunately, the punitive measures created by Bill 109 unfairly penalize municipalities for delays that are often outside of their control. To best support the continued review of development applications, and to avoid the financial penalties imposed by Bill 109, staff are proposing several changes to the development review process. 2.2 Proposed Changes to the Development Review Process The changes staff are proposing should allow the City to meet the legislated timelines and avoid the loss of development application revenue, while still ensuring a robust and thorough evaluation of the application. The goal of these proposed changes is for the City to: •continue to diligently review development applications in a timely manner; •continue to provide appropriate analysis leading to high-quality urban design and orderly development; •ensure that development application fees more accurately reflect the City’s cost for reviewing those applications and are collected at the appropriate time; and •continue to seek meaningful public participation despite a condensed timeline. 2.2.1 Development Review Process The development review process currently consists of three general stages: pre-consultation, application review, and decision (see Figure 4 below). Under the current process, the majority of time spent reviewing the proposal is during the application review stage. Figure 4: Current Development Review Process Due to the strict timeframes and refund penalties assigned to the application review stage, staff are proposing to shift the review portion of development proposals from the application stage to a new “pre-submission” stage (see Figure 5 below). Staff will continue to provide a prompt and thorough review, but will avoid “starting the clock” and avoid being at risk for application refunds. - 555 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 7 Figure 5: Proposed Development Review Process The City’s development review process will need to change to be more front-ended, requiring additional review and effort by all stakeholders prior to the formal submission of an application. This way, when an application is received, it will only be deemed complete after the review of the proposal has been completed by City staff and external agencies and the Proponent has made all necessary revisions. The following sections will provide a more detailed account of the proposed changes to each stage of the development review process. An illustrated summary of the development review stages is provided in Attachments #3 and #4 to this report. 2.2.2 Stage 1A – Pre-Consultation Stage The purpose of the pre-consultation stage is to review a development concept, confirm the appropriate planning and agency approvals that are needed, and provide a list of required materials that must be submitted as part of a complete application. Pre- consultation meetings are permitted by the Planning Act, but are not part of the legislated application review process, and therefore are not subject to the timeline refunds prescribed by Bill 109. 2.2.3 Stage 1B – The Pre-Submission Stage Following a pre-consultation meeting, Proponents will submit all required materials for review by staff and external agencies. The technical review of the proposal will occur during the pre-submission stage. During the pre-submission stage, “the clock” is not running. At the pre-submission stage, staff will circulate the development reports and drawings to all agencies and departments for technical review. A full review of all reports and studies will be completed to confirm accuracy and conformity with all requirements and standards. More detailed information, such as peer reviews, may also be required at this stage. The pre-submission stage will be an integrative process, allowing City Departments and external agencies the appropriate time to review complex studies and drawings, and allow the Proponent to address key technical issues prior to the submission of an application. This stage also requires consultation and engagement with the public. It is important to note that the prescribed timelines imposed by Bill 109 do not apply during the pre-submission review. - 556 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 8 2.2.3.1 Public Information Centre (Open House) The Planning Act requires that a Statutory Public Meeting be held before Council makes a decision on a variety of development applications, including Zoning By-law Amendments, but is not required for Site Plan Approvals. This allows the public to provide comments for Council to consider as part of their decision. In addition to the Statutory Public Meeting, it is not uncommon for a voluntary Public Information Centre (open house) to be held earlier in the process. These events are less formal and provide the public with the opportunity to directly engage with the Applicant, their consultants, and City staff. To meet the Planning Act timelines, all Applicants for Zoning By-law Amendment will now be required to host an open house prior to the submission of a formal application. One benefit to this early engagement is the identification of community concerns at the beginning of the process possibly leading to modifications of a proposal before it is formally submitted. For example, the Planning Rationale Report, traffic reports, and other supporting documents prepared by the Proponent will now be informed by public comments rather than exclusively relying on technical analysis that may not fully take into account the local context. Staff will be developing a set of procedures for Proponents to follow that outlines the requirements for open house events, which will include matters such as the type of venue/forum, how to give notice, how to record feedback, etc. In addition to requiring the applicant to host an open house meeting, City staff will ensure the information and materials submitted at the pre-submission stage are uploaded to the City’s website, allowing the public to review and offer comments on the proposal. 2.2.4 Stage 2 – Complete Application Submission Under the Planning Act, certain information or material is required to be provided as part of a complete application. The purpose of complete application requirements is to ensure that all the relevant and required information is available, at the time of formal submission, for staff to either issue an approval or provide a recommendation to Council. The complete application requirements are intended to make the review of an application faster and more efficient. To improve the review process, and manage the new legislated review timelines, staff propose to strengthen and expand the complete application requirements for planning applications. The Planning Act allows municipalities to request information or material if their Official Plan contains provisions relating to those requirements. In order to update the list of items that the City may request during a pre-consultation meeting, an amendment to the City’s Official Plan is required. The proposed amendments to the relevant policies in the Official Plan are contained in Appendix I. - 557 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 9 2.2.4.1 The Statutory Public Meeting The Planning Act outlines the required steps involved in reviewing an application. Certain applications, such as Zoning By-law Amendments, require that municipalities consult with the public at a Statutory Public Meeting (see Attachment #4). Once an application is received and deemed complete, a municipality will schedule a Statutory Public Meeting to be held at a Planning & Development Committee (Committee) meeting. Currently, an information report is provided to the Committee outlining the major elements of the development application, summarizing relevant land use policies and identifying key concerns to be addressed. After the first Committee meeting, staff continue to review the application and incorporate comments received from Council, the public, and external agencies. Once all information has been received and reviewed, a recommendation report is presented at a subsequent Committee meeting. It is at this meeting that Committee is requested to make a decision on the application, that is ratified at a subsequent Council meeting. As part of the revised strategy to meet the Planning Act timeline, City Development staff will no longer prepare an information report and host a Statutory Public Meeting on a separate evening, in advance of the Planning & Development Committee considering a recommendation report. The Committee will now have to make a decision on planning applications on the same night the Statutory Public Meeting is held. This reduces the ability for public comments, received in advance of the Statutory Public Meeting, to be incorporated into Committee’s decision. The public engagement, that is currently received at the Statutory Public Meeting stage, will now be captured earlier in the process, and in a different form, through the newly required Public Information Centre described in Section 2.2.3.1 of this report. The Public Information Centre will occur prior to the submission of the application. Bringing forward a recommendation report at the Statutory Public Meeting may require certain procedural changes to the format of that event that will be formulated in consultation with the City Clerk. 2.2.5 Proposed Transitional Provisions To assist the Proponents with implementing the revised development review process, the following transitional provisions are being proposed: 2.2.5.1 New Pre-consultation All applicants of future development proposals will be informed of the new development review process, and be provided with directions on how to proceed to a complete application. 2.2.5.2 Completed Pre-consultation, but no Application Where complete application requirements have already been determined through a formal pre-consultation meeting prior to January 1, 2023, City staff will either: - 558 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 10 a.amend the formal pre-consultation requirements; or b.require a new pre-consultation meeting. 2.2.5.3 Existing Application, but no Statutory Public Meeting These applications will follow the new development review process. An Open House will be held to provide information and gather public input. A subsequent Statutory Public Meeting will be held at the same time that a recommendation report is presented to Committee. 2.2.5.4 Existing Application and Statutory Public Meeting already held Since the statutory requirements of the Planning Act have already been met, a recommendation report will be presented to the Committee at the first opportunity. 2.2.6 Concurrent vs. Sequential Application Review Often development projects require more than one development approval (i.e., Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and/or Site Plan applications). Currently, the City permits multiple applications to be submitted at the same time to benefit from the efficiency of circulating all materials once to external agencies and holding one joint Statutory Public Meeting. To respond to the strict requirements of Bill 109, certain applications will no longer be considered concurrently. Instead, Applicants will need to submit each application sequentially. For example, a Proponent requiring both a Zoning By-law Amendment and a Site Plan Approval will have to submit a Zoning By-law Amendment application first. Once the Zoning By-law Amendment has been approved and is in full force and effect, the Proponent may then submit a Site Plan Approval application. Staff regret that this will likely result in a lengthening of overall approval timelines for some projects. However, this is one of the unintended consequences of the changes brought forward by Bill 109. Reviewing applications sequentially will ensure that the City is not penalized with any refunds to site plan applications, while still finalizing prerequisite applications. 2.2.7 Application Denial and Re-Application Despite the benefits of a revised development review process, the City may still need to deny an application if all information is not provided within the prescribed timeline to avoid paying application fee refunds. In circumstances where denials are issued to “stop-the-clock”, Applicants may be able to submit their applications for reconsideration if the outstanding matters: •do not change the nature of the proposal; •are minor and technical in nature and are not expected to result in fundamental changes to the layout and design of the proposal; •do not involve re-engagement with the public; and •do not require recirculation of the application to external agencies. - 559 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 11 The decision on whether to accept an application for reconsideration will be at the discretion of the Director, City Development & CBO. A fee for the reconsideration of an application will be required. 2.2.8 Changes to the review of all development applications With minor differences, all development applications follow the same general pattern of development review. The recent changes to the Planning Act from Bill 109 only create potential refund scenarios for Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan applications. The changes to the development review process listed in this report are specifically needed for those two application types. However, there would be increased clarity for the public, the development industry, and Council if all development applications followed the same review and approval process. Therefore, staff propose to apply the new development review process to all applicable Planning applications. 2.3 Proposed Changes to the Development Review Fees In conjunction with the revised development review process that has been outlined in this report, staff are proposing to shift the development review fees to the appropriate stage of review where the corresponding amount of work is conducted. This will involve applying a fee at both the pre-submission stage, as well as a fee at the application stage. Prior to the introduction of Bill 109, the City retained Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Watson) to review the City’s current development application fees. The rationale for the proposed fee changes is contained in Attachment #2 and is further discussed in Section 2.3.5 of this report. 2.3.1 Stage 1A – Pre-consultation Currently, fees are collected by the City to review and comment on preliminary development concepts at the pre-consultation meeting. This fee represents only a small fraction of the staff time required to prepare and host this meeting. It is recommended that the current pre-consultation fee be maintained for the analysis of simple proposals (Pre-consultation Meeting Simple) and a new fee be created for the analysis of complex proposals (Pre-consultation Meeting Complex). It is intended that this new fee structure better reflect the amount of work completed by staff for this meeting. 2.3.2 Stage 1B – Pre-submission Under the new development review process, staff will spend a greater amount of time reviewing the development materials prior to the submission of the formal application. Therefore, review fees will be revised to reflect staff’s effort during each stage of review. A majority of the review fees will be collected at the new “pre-submission” stage, where staff will spend the largest portion of their time in the review and analysis of a proposal. The remaining part of the review fee will be collected at the submission of the complete application. Fees collected at the pre-submission stage are not subject to any refund requirements. - 560 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 12 The review of development proposals is a collaborative process that typically involves more than one submission by the Proponent to ensure that their proposal conforms with all policies, standards, and regulations of the City and the relevant commenting agencies. The pre-submission process presumes the original submission and two subsequent submissions by the Proponent. Each submission is thoroughly reviewed by staff and relevant agencies, and a list of missing or outstanding items is provided to the Proponent. The pre-submission fee is intended to cover the cost of the original submission and two resubmissions. In order to reflect the ongoing work required by staff, the fourth submission, and every submission thereafter, will be subject to a recirculation fee (see Table 1 below). Table 1: When Pre-submission and Recirculation Fees Apply Pre-submission Fee Recirculation Fee Original submission N/A Submission Two N/A N/A Submission Three N/A N/A Submission Four, or more N/A 2.3.4 Stage 2 – Application After the pre-submission review has been completed, Proponents may then submit their complete application. An application review fee is payable at the time of application submission. This is when the legislated timelines in the Planning Act begin. If Council or staff are unable to reach a decision or provide approval within the legislated timeline, this is the fee that would be subject to any possible refund. 2.3.5 Overall Increase in Application Fees There is a general principle in Municipal planning and finance that development application fees should recover the City’s cost for reviewing those applications. The intent is to avoid having the existing tax base (residents and business owners) subsidize the costs to the City incurred from new development. Excluding City-initiated applications, Minor Variance, and Land Division applications, which are not intended to achieve cost recovery, the City’s current application fees only recover 78 percent of the costs of staff’s review of development application files. Watson was retained by the City to complete a comprehensive update to the development approval application process (D.A.A.P) fee reviews. One of the objectives of Watson’s review was to determine the fee increases necessary to achieve full cost recovery. The recommended fee increases included in Appendix III of this report will move the City’s fees for reviewing Planning Act applications closer to full cost recovery. Excluding Minor Variance, Land Division, and City-initiated applications, cost recovery performance will increase from 78 percent to almost 95 percent. For Official Plan Amendments, the move to full cost recovery was considered too great to be implemented through a one-time increase. Therefore, a more moderate fee increase is - 561 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 13 recommended at this time. Similarly, staff recommend not recovering the full cost for Minister Zoning Order Amendments, as these fees may be overly burdensome on residents that live in areas under these regulations. Details of the proposed fee increases are contained in Watson’s Planning Application Fee Review – Update Study, contained in Attachment #2 to this report, and summarized in Table 2. Table 2: Current and Proposed Cost Recovery by Application Type Application Type Current Cost Recovery Proposed Cost Recovery Subdivision 53% 100% Condominium 82% 100% Official Plan 37% 69% Zoning By-Law Amendment 89% 100% Site Plan 98% 100% Minor Variance and Land Division 11% 15% City Initiated Applications 0% 0% These fee increases are necessary if the City wants to ensure that the application and review fees better reflect the City’s costs for reviewing development applications. The alternative will be to shift a greater portion of the cost for reviewing development applications onto Municipal tax assessment revenue. 3.Notice of Proposed Official Plan Amendment 46 In accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act, a notice of the Statutory Public Meeting for proposed Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan was provided in the Pickering News Advertiser. Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was also posted on the City’s website and a separate notice was forwarded to the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) and members of the local development industry. As of the date of this report, staff had received three public inquiries seeking clarity on the proposed amendment, or access to the background report, but no written or verbal comments have been received from the public. 4.Future Evaluation and Modification The proposed changes to the City’s development review process are intended to support the efficient review of development applications in light of recent changes to the Planning Act. Staff will track the result of the new processes and, as required, make necessary revisions to ensure that the intended outcomes are being achieved. Additional changes proposed by the Province under Bill 23 are still being evaluated and may also necessitate further modifications in the future. A summary of the changes from Bill 23 is contained in a separate report. It is recommended that a Council education session be held in the future to review all of the changes proposed to City processes as a consequence of current and forthcoming changes to the Planning Act.- 562 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 14 5.Conclusion Staff will continue to focus resources on effectively reviewing development proposals, while also meeting application timelines. A number of policy, procedure, and fee changes are needed in order for the City to avoid the refund requirements created by Bill 109: •no longer permit development applications to be submitted concurrently; •introduce a new “pre-submission” review stage; •revise the “complete application” requirements for development applications; •make public engagement a requirement for submitting a complete application; •provide recommendation reports for consideration by the Planning & Development Committee on the same day as the statutory public meeting; •recommend Council “refuse an application without prejudice”; to address minor issues that may arise during the formal Zoning By-law Amendment application stage, which cannot be resolved within the legislated timeframes; and •permit reconsideration of Zoning By-law Amendments in select circumstances. In addition to the procedural changes that will be instituted by staff, it is recommended that Council approve the corresponding changes. Staff recommends: (a)That Council approve Recommended Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan by passing the by-law to adopt Amendment 46, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 47-22; (b)That Council approve an amendment to By-law 6942/09, Pre-consultation By-law; and (c)That Council approve an amendment to By-law 7918/22, General Municipal Fee and Charges By-law. Appendices Appendix I Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan Appendix II Draft By-law to Amend By-law 6942/09, Pre-consultation By-law Appendix III Draft By-law to Amend By-law 7918/22, General Municipal Fees Attachments 1. Report PLN 22-22, Comments on proposed Bill 109, More Homes For Everyone 2.Planning Application Fee Review – Update Study, Watson & Associates 3.Current and Proposed Site Plan Approval process 4.Current and Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment process - 563 - PLN 47-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Changes to Development Review Procedures and Application Fees Page 15 Prepared By: Original Signed By Paul Wirch, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Policy Original Signed By Déan Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics Original Signed By Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO PW :ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 564 - Appendix I to Report No. PLN 47-22 Draft By-law to Adopt Amendment 46 to the City of Pickering Official Plan - 565 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 7972/22 Being a by-law to adopt Amendment 46 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering (OPA 22-003/P) Whereas pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p. 13, subsections 17(22) and 21(1), the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering may by by-law adopt amendments to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering; Whereas pursuant to Section 17(10) of the Planning Act, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has by order authorized Regional Council to pass a by-law to exempt proposed area municipal official plan amendments from its approval; Whereas on February 23, 2000, Regional Council passed By-law 11/2000 which allows the Region to exempt proposed area municipal official plan amendments from its approval; Whereas the Region has advised that Amendment 46 to the City of Pickering Official Plan is exempt from Regional approval; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.That Amendment 46 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, is hereby adopted; 2.That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward to the Regional Municipality of Durham the documentation required by Procedure: Area Municipal Official Plans and Amendments; 3.This By-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing hereof. By-law passed this 5th day of December, 2022. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 566 - Exhibit “A” to By-law 7972/22 Amendment 46 to the City of Pickering Official Plan - 567 - Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan Purpose: The purpose of this Amendment is to change existing policies for complete application requirements, pre-consultation, and peer review. The Amendment will also add new policies for pre-submission review. These new and revised policies will align the Pickering Official Plan with recent changes to the Planning Act (Bill 109) for the development review process. Location: This amendment applies to all lands within the City of Pickering. Basis: Through Bill 109, the Planning Act was amended to create graduated refunds for Zoning By-law Amendments decisions and Site Plan approvals that are not completed within the timelines prescribed by the Planning Act. In order to avoid paying refunds, revisions are needed to the manner in which the City of Pickering reviews and processes development applications. The proposed changes necessitate amendments to the Pickering Official Plan to create new review procedures and update the requirements of a complete application. Actual The City of Pickering Official Plan is hereby amended by: Amendment: (New text is shown as underlined text, deleted text is shown as strikeout text, and retained text is shown as unchanged text.) 1.Revising and renumbering, and updating all cross-references to City Policy 16.2, Pre-submission Consultation, in Chapter 16 – Development Review, so that it reads as follows: City Policy Pre-submissionconsultation 16.2A City Council shall require applicants to consult with the municipality Municipality prior to submitting an application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, draft plan of condominium or site plan approval. The A pre-submission consultation meeting will be held with the applicant, City staff and any other government agency or public authority that the City determines appropriate. At the pre-submission consultation meeting:… 2.Adding a new City Policy 16.2B, Pre-submission Review, in Chapter 16 – Development Review, as follows: “City Policy Pre-submission Review 16.2B City Council shall require that all materials and fees listed at the pre- consultation meeting be submitted to the City for review by City staff. Except for matters that are the subject of an amendment application, submission materials must conform with all policies, guidelines, and regulations stipulated by the City of Pickering, the Region of Durham, the Province of Ontario, and all relevant commenting agencies. The submission - 568 - Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 2 materials must also provide the rationale for all matters for which an amendment is being sought. This includes the completion and submission of any peer review of any materials that may be required. Once the City, and all commenting agencies, are satisfied that the submitted materials conform with the requirements listed at the pre- consultation meeting, the Proponent may submit the application.” 3.Revising City Policy 16.3, Complete Application, in Chapter 16 – Development Review, so that it reads as follows: 16.3 City Council shall not accept an application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, draft plan of condominium, or site plan approval until the following has been submitted to the City: (a)a complete application form, including an acknowledgement by the applicant of the obligation to pay required peer review costs, as referred to in Section 16.4; (b)any information or materials prescribed by statute and regulation; (c)a record of pre-submission consultation; (d)the prescribed application fee(s); (e)payment, or proof of payment of all application review fees and any other fees charged by commenting agencies; (f)confirmation from internal departments and external agencies that the submitted studies and reports meet approved terms of reference and have addressed all technical comments; (f) (g) all required studies set out in Section 16.5A for an official plan amendment, zoning by‑law amendment, draft plan of subdivision and draft plan of condominium application; and (h)all required studies set out in Section 16.5B for a site plan application. 4.Revising City Policy 16.4, Peer Review at Applicant’s Expense, in Chapter 16 – Development Review, so that it reads as follows: 16.4 City Council shall require all of the matters set out in Sections 16.3, 16.5A, and/or 16.5B to be completed to the satisfaction of the City respecting the scope and complexity appropriate to the application prior to the City deeming the application complete. Once an application is deemed complete, tThe City may retain a qualified consultant to conduct a peer review of any of the studies required in Sections 16.5A and/or 16.5B at the applicant’s expense as acknowledged on the application form and as provided for in Section 16.3 (a). All peer reviews must be completed before the study can be deemed to be in conformity with the requirements listed at the pre-consultation meeting. - 569 - Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 3 5.Revising City Policy 16.5A, Required Studies for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision, and Draft Plan of Condominium Approval, in Chapter 16 – Development Review, so that it reads as follows: City Policy Required StudiesRequirements for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision, and Draft Plan of Condominium Approval 16.5A City Council shall require the following materials and studies prepared by qualified experts, as scoped or expanded as a result of the pre-submission consultation required by Section 16.2A, to be submitted for review to ensure conformity with the requirements listed at the pre-consultation meeting at the time of application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, and draft plan of condominium approval: (i)a planning rationale report which considers the overall benefit to the community and evaluates the proposal against the relevant goals, objectives, policies and general purpose and intent of this Plan, the Regional Official Plan, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan and Provincial policy, where applicable; (ii)a transportation study; … (xxxvii)an Information and Communication Technologies Implementation Plan, as referred to in Section 7.12 (b); and (xxxviii)a salt management plan as referred to in Sections 10.13 (g), and 10.27 (c).; (xxxix)a public engagement report from a public engagement event that has been held within six months prior to the submission of the application. The public engagement report must demonstrate that the event followed the City’s notification and meeting format requirements; (xl)confirmation that Indigenous consultation has been held in accordance with the City’s requirements; (xli)confirmation of parkland requirements; (xlii)a record of site condition; and (xliii)an affordable housing brief. 6.Revising City Policy 16.5B, Required Studies for Site Plan Approval, in Chapter 16 – Development Review, so that it reads as follows: City Policy Required StudiesRequirements for Site Plan Approval - 570 - Amendment 46 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 4 16.5B City Council shall require the following materials and studies prepared by qualified experts, as scoped or expanded as a result of the pre-submission consultation provided for by Section 16.2A, to be submitted at the time of application for site plan approval: (i) a transportation study; … (xxviii) a water balance study, as referred to in Section 10.29 (e), 10.29 (f), 10.29 (g), 10.29 (h), and 10.29 (k); and (xxix) a salt management plan as referred to in Sections 10.13 (g), and 10.27 (c).; (xxx) confirmation of parkland requirements; (xxxi) a record of site condition; (xxxii) a zoning certificate; (xxxiii) approved cost estimates for all off-site and landscaping works; and (xxxiv) an affordable housing brief. 7. Revising City Policy 16.8, Environmental Reports Required, in Chapter 16 – Development Review, so that it reads as follows: 16.8 City Council: (a) as determined through a pre-submission consultation in Section 16.2A, require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report as part of the consideration of a development application or a public infrastructure project for major development within 120 metres of the Natural Heritage System or within the minimum area of influence prescribed in Table 18 of this Plan; and (b) despite Section 16.8(a), may, through the pre-submission consultation in Section 16.2A, require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report as part of its consideration of any other development application or public infrastructure project. - 571 - Appendix II to Report No. PLN 47-22 Draft By-law to Amend By-law 6942/09 Pre-consultation By-law - 572 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 7973/22 Being a by-law to require consultation with the City prior to submission of applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plans, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium Whereas the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P13 authorizes municipalities to pass by-laws to require land use planning applicants to consult with the municipality before submitting applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plans, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium; Whereas Council wishes to have applicants discuss planning proposals with City staff before the applications are submitted to the City, to ensure that the appropriate studies and other requirements are completed to the satisfaction of the City, prior to the submission of a complete application; And whereas Council wishes to have City staff complete a preliminary review of all proposals, at the pre-submission stage, to ensure that all materials conform with the requirements of the pre-consultation, have been revised in accordance with City and agency comments, and all major issues have been resolved to the City’s satisfaction, before the application is submitted; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Proponents shall attend a pre-consultation meeting with relevant City staff prior to submitting requests to amend the City's Official Plan or zoning by-laws, and prior to submitting applications for site plan, plan of subdivision or plan of condominium approval. 2.After the pre-consultation meeting, Proponents shall submit their development proposals to the City for review at the pre-submission stage. The pre-submission stage will be an integrative process allowing City departments and external agencies the appropriate time to review studies and drawings, and allow the Proponent to address key technical issues prior to the submission of an application. 3.At the conclusion of the pre-submission stage, all planning applications submitted to the City must conform with the requirements of the pre-consultation meeting to be considered a complete application under the Planning Act. 4.Planning applications submitted to the City prior to a pre-consultation meeting or prior to the pre-submission stage will not be accepted as complete applications under the Planning Act. 5.If more than one application is required for planning approval in support of a single development proposal, a single pre-consultation meeting with City staff can satisfy the requirement to consult. Despite the joint pre-consultation meeting, and following the conclusion of the pre-submission stage, development applications must be submitted consecutively and not concurrently. - 573 - By-law No. 7973/22 Page 2 6.Following the required pre-consultation meeting, if the proposal which was the subject of the pre-consultation meeting has not been submitted for a pre-submission review within the time-frame determined by the Director of City Development, the Proponent may be required to attend a new pre-consultation meeting. 7.Transition By-law 6942/09 shall be repealed upon this By-law coming into effect. 8.Effective date This By-law shall come into full force and effect on the day of its passing. By-law passed this 5th day of December, 2022. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 574 - Appendix III to Report No. PLN 47-22 Draft By-law to Amend By-law 7918/22 General Municipal Fees - 575 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 7974/22 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6191/03 to confirm General Municipal Fees Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering enacted By-law 6191/03, as amended, on October 14, 2003 to confirm general municipal fees. Whereas Schedule “I” to By-law 6191/03 was updated and replaced under By-law, 6338/04, By-law 6519/05, By-law 6652/06, By-law 6677/06, By-law 6748/07 By-law 6857/08, By-law 6951/09, By-law 7032/10, By-law 7119/11, By-law 7194/12, By-law 7268/13, By-law 7339/14, By-law 7411/15, By-law 7478/16, By-law 7542/17, By-law 7605/18; By-law 7679/19; By-law 7740/20, By-law 7823/21 and 7918/22; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Schedule “I” to By-law Number 6191/03, as amended, is hereby deleted and Schedule “I” attached hereto is substituted therefore. By-law passed this 5th day of December, 2022. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 576 - City Development Department - Planning User Fee or Charge 2022 Current Fee (Excluding HST) 2023 Proposed Fee (Excluding HST) HST Applicable (Y/N) Proposed Fee Effective Date These fees are imposed under the authority of the Planning Act , R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 Planning Documents Pickering Official Plan $225.00 $225.00 Y No Increase Official Plan Compendium $50.00 $50.00 Y No Increase Seaton Sustainable Placemaking Guidelines 1 $50.00 $50.00 Y No Increase City Centre Urban Design Guidelines $50.00 $50.00 Y No Increase Kingston Mixed Corridor & Brock Mixed Node Design Guidelines N/A $50.00 Y January 1, 2023 Development Guidelines $5.00-$20.00 $5.00-$20.00 Y No Increase Special Studies $10.00-$20.00 $10.00-$20.00 Y No Increase Zoning By-laws 3036 - Set 13 Volume $100.00 $100.00 Y No Increase 3036 - By Volume $10.00 $10.00 Y No Increase 2511, 2520, 3037, 7364/14 (Seaton), 7553/17 (City Centre) $40.00 $40.00 Y No Increase 20 Year Household & Population $30.00 $30.00 Y No Increase Mapping $5.00-$25.00 $5.00-$25.00 Y No Increase Address Booklet $25.00-$50.00 $25.00-$50.00 Y No Increase Fiche Prints Price Varies Price Varies Y No Increase Special Mapping Requests $54.15/hr $54.15/hr Y No Increase Photocopies - 6 or more pages $0.50/ea $0.50/ea Y No Increase CD Copies of Documents $10.00/document $10.00/document Y No Increase Telecommunications Tower Approval $8,910.00 $9,355.00 N January 1, 2023 Minor Variance Applications to recognize an "as built condition" Double the regular fee Double the regular fee N No Increase Accessory buildings, structures, decks, platforms & driveway widening $685.00 $820.00 N January 1, 2023 Residential Minor (a lot for a detached dwelling unit, semi-detached dwelling unit and/or freehold townhouse dwelling unit) Single Variance $920.00 $1,100.00 N January 1, 2023 Multiple Variances $1,155.00 $1,390.00 N January 1, 2023 Residential Major (all other residential and mixed use buildings) Single Variance $2,000.00 $2,400.00 N January 1, 2023 Multiple Variances $2,255.00 $2,710.00 N January 1, 2023 Institutional, Commercial & Industrial Single Variance $2,530.00 $3,040.00 N January 1, 2023 Multiple Variances $2,960.00 $3,550.00 N January 1, 2023 Tabling Fee & Recirculation (applicant initiated) $630.00 $760.00 N January 1, 2023 Special Meeting $4,025.00 $4,830.00 N January 1, 2023 Authorization to Apply for Variance Under Section 45 (1.4) of the Planning Act $5,755.00 $6,906.00 N January 1, 2023 Application for Pre-Consultation $350.00 N/A N January 1, 2023 Simple2 $350.00 N January 1, 2023 Complex $1,200.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law Amendment - Pre-submission Review - 577 - City Development Department - Planning User Fee or Charge 2022 Current Fee (Excluding HST) 2023 Proposed Fee (Excluding HST) HST Applicable (Y/N) Proposed Fee Effective Date Zoning By-law Amendment -Major 3 - Base Fee $9,590.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Residential Unit First 25 units (1-25) $260.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $190.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $160.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $65.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Non-Residential Ha of Land Area 4 $910.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Development Block Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area 5 $330.00 N January 1, 2023 6Zoning By-law Amendment -Minor $6,690.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Recirculation 7 $2,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Additional fee if within Oak Ridges Moraine or Greenbelt $1,320.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Removal of Holding $1,980.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Removal of Holding (Complex/Block Plan Required) $9,590.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Extension of Temporary Use By-law $9,590.00 N January 1, 2023 Authorization to Apply for Variance Under Section 34 (10.0.0.2) of the Planning Act $6,906.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law Amendment - Application Zoning By-law Amendment -Major 3 - Base Fee $17,700.00 $10,100.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Residential Unit First 25 units (1-25) $450.00 $240.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $335.00 $180.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $275.00 $145.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $110.00 $60.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Non-Residential Ha of Land Area 4 $910.00 $485.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Development Block Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area) 5 $575.00 $305.00 N January 1, 2023 6Zoning By-law Amendment -Minor $12,650.00 $6,500.00 N January 1, 2023 Additional fee if within Oak Ridges Moraine or Greenbelt $2,300.00 $1,250.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Removal of Holding $3,450.00 $1,830.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Removal of Holding (Complex/Block Plan Required) $4,375.00 $10,100.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Extension of Temporary Use By-law $17,710.00 $10,100.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning By-law - Reconsideration 8 $5,230.00 N January 1, 2023 Minister Zoning Order Minister Zoning Order Amendment - Major 9 $2,875.00 $3,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Minister Zoning Order Amendment - Minor 10 $2,300.00 $2,500.00 N January 1, 2023 Official Plan Amendment - Pre-submission Review Pickering Official Plan Amendment - Major 11 $45,500.00 N January 1, 2023 Pickering Official Plan Amendment - Minor 12 $21,650.00 N January 1, 2023 - 578 - City Development Department - Planning User Fee or Charge 2022 Current Fee (Excluding HST) 2023 Proposed Fee (Excluding HST) HST Applicable (Y/N) Proposed Fee Effective Date Pickering Official Plan Amendment - Recirculation 7 $2,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Additional fee if within Oak Ridges Moraine or Greenbelt $3,300.00 N January 1, 2023 Official Plan Amendment - Application Pickering Official Plan Amendment - Major 11 $48,000.00 $43,500.00 N January 1, 2023 Pickering Official Plan Amendment - Minor 12 $23,000.00 $20,750.00 N January 1, 2023 Additional fee if within Oak Ridges Moraine or Greenbelt $2,300.00 $3,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Regional Official Plan - Amendment (not part of a Pickering OPA) $13,800.00 $37,100.00 N January 1, 2023 Neighbourhood Development Guideline Amendment 13 $1,600.00 $4,300.00 N January 1, 2023 Land Division Comments $1,725.00 $2,600.00 N January 1, 2023 Clearance of Conditions $865.00 $1,300.00 N January 1, 2023 Council authorization to proceed by land division instead of draft plan of subdivision 14 $5,750.00 $8,670.00 N January 1, 2023 Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Conveyance For the creation of up to 3 additional lots (price per lot created) $6,610.00 $6,940.00 N January 1, 2023 For the creation of more than 3 additional lots 5% of the value of the land See Parkland By-law N January 1, 2023 Draft Plan of Subdivision - Pre-submission Review Base Fee $32,800.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Residential Unit First 25 units (1-25) $470.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $380.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $300.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $190.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Non-Residential Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area 4 $150.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Development Block Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area 5 $95.00 N January 1, 2023 Recirculation 7 $2,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Additional fee if within Oak Ridges Moraine or Greenbelt $1,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Applicant-Initiated Major Revisions (prior to Draft Plan Approval) $22,200.00 N January 1, 2023 Revisions to Draft Approved Plan - (redline revisions) - Pre-submission Review Base Fee $13,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Additional Residential Units First 25 units (1-25) $470.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $380.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $300.00 N January 1, 2023 - 579 - City Development Department - Planning User Fee or Charge 2022 Current Fee (Excluding HST) 2023 Proposed Fee (Excluding HST) HST Applicable (Y/N) Proposed Fee Effective Date Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $190.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Non-Residential Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area $150.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Development Block Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area $95.00 N January 1, 2023 Draft Plan of Subdivision - Application Base Fee $34,650.00 $34,600.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Residential Unit First 25 units (1-25) $560.00 $575.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $450.00 $465.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $355.00 $365.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $225.00 $230.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Non-Residential Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area 4 $180.00 $185.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Development Block Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area 5 $110.00 $115.00 N January 1, 2023 Additional fee if within Oak Ridges Moraine or Greenbelt $2,300.00 $2,500.00 N January 1, 2023 Revisions to Draft Approved Plan - (redline revisions) - Application Base Fee $13,860.00 $13,600.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Additional Residential Units First 25 units (1-25) $560.00 $575.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $460.00 $465.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $335.00 $365.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $225.00 $230.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Non-Residential Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area $180.00 $185.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Development Block Ha (or part thereof) of Land Area $110.00 $115.00 N January 1, 2023 Release of Draft Plan of Subdivision/Clearance Fee $1,300.00 $2,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Plan of Condominium - Pre-submission Review Draft Plan of Condominium $5,400.00 N January 1, 2023 Common Element Condominium $7,900.00 N January 1, 2023 Recirculation 7 $2,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Condominium Conversion $7,900.00 N January 1, 2023 Revisions to a Draft Approved Plan - (redline revisions) $3,100.00 N January 1, 2023 Plan of Condominium - Application Draft Plan of Condominium $16,720.00 $13,600.00 N January 1, 2023 Common Element Condominium $23,000.00 $19,300.00 N January 1, 2023 Condominium Conversion $23,000.00 $19,300.00 N January 1, 2023 Release of Draft Plan of Condominium/Clearance Fee $1,300.00 $2,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Site Plan - Pre-submission Review Residential See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- Use) N January 1, 2023 - 580 - City Development Department - Planning User Fee or Charge 2022 Current Fee (Excluding HST) 2023 Proposed Fee (Excluding HST) HST Applicable (Y/N) Proposed Fee Effective Date Commercial See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- Use) N January 1, 2023 Industrial See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- Use) N January 1, 2023 All Uses (Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed-Use) - Base Fee $5,300.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Residential Unit First 25 units (1-25) $370.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $300.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $225.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $55.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per 2,000 m2 (or part thereof) of Non-Residential GFA $4,405.00 N January 1, 2023 Recirculation 7 $2,000.00 N January 1, 2023 Applicant Initiated Revision Base Fee N January 1, 2023 Site Plan - Application Review Residential See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- Use) N January 1, 2023 Commercial See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- Use) N January 1, 2023 Industrial See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- See "All Uses Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed- Use) N January 1, 2023 All Uses (Residential, Non-Residential, Mixed-Use) - Base Fee $9,975.00 $2,900.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per Residential Unit First 25 units (1-25) $560.00 $145.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 75 units (26-100) $450.00 $115.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 100 Units (101-200) $335.00 $85.00 N January 1, 2023 Next 800 Units (201-1,000) $85.00 $20.00 N January 1, 2023 Plus Fee per 2,000 m2 (or part thereof) of Non-Residential GFA $6,630.00 $1,695.00 N January 1, 2023 Site Plan Agreement and Clearance of Conditions N/A $7,300.00 N January 1, 2023 Compliance Inspections/LC Release Report (includes 2 inspections) $940.00 $960.00 N January 1, 2023 Additional Compliance Inspections $400.00 $410.00 N January 1, 2023 Other Fees Request for Zoning Information $50.00 $55.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning Certificate - Residential (single, semi, townhouse, accessory structure) initial review + 1 revision $150.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning Certificate - Development (within infill precincts, ORM, or requiring MDS calculation) initial review + 1 revision $580.00 N January 1, 2023 Zoning Certificate - Mixed-use/Multi Residential/Non-Residential (industrial, commercial, institutional) initial review + 1 revision $695.00 N January 1, 2023 Peer Reviews 15 Full recovery of City costs + 10% admin. fee Full recovery of City costs + 10% admin. fee Y January 1, 2023 - 581 - City Development Department - Planning User Fee or Charge 2022 Current Fee (Excluding HST) 2023 Proposed Fee (Excluding HST) HST Applicable (Y/N) Proposed Fee Effective Date Minor Revision to Approved Condo Site Plan (by unit owner) i.e., decks, sheds, fences $115.00 $115.00 N January 1, 2023 File Reactivation 16 $2,040.00 $5,230.00 N January 1, 2023 Opinion Letter for Complex Inquiries $560.00 $1,200.00 N January 1, 2023 Add Street Name to Approved List $1,020 $1,070 Y January 1, 2023 Request to Change Municipal Address $1,020 $1,070 Y January 1, 2023 Request for Exception to Council Adopted Policies on Municipal Addressing and Street Naming $5,230.00 $6,040.00 N January 1, 2023 Refund of Application Fees 17 10% Admin. Fee $0 Y January 1, 2023 Film Location Permit $250.00 $350.00 Y January 1, 2023 Film Location Permit and Road Closure $500.00 Y January 1, 2023 Any other matter requiring a Report to Committee or Council $6,040.00 N January 1, 2023 1. Fee applicable after Council adoption. 2. Oak Ridges Moraine applications, minor additions to existing bldgs (up to 20% of the current gross floor area), inclusion of related uses, 3. An application for an amendment that is more significant in scale and scope than a minor zoning amendment, and which may have greater impact beyond the subject lands, as determined by the Director, City Development or designate. Major applications must meet one or more of the following conditions: - an application relating to more than one property - a site specific application, if considered to represent a large scale redevelopment - any change in use and/or zone category, except as identified under a minor amendment - an application involving significant changes to the development standards or general provisions of the by-law - an application which requires major technical studies and extensive consultation 4. Applies to blocks intended to be developed for commercial, industrial, and institutional uses (including school blocks). 5. Excludes lands to be conveyed for roads, parkland, natural hazards, and stormwater or other public infrastructure. 6. An application for minor or small scale zoning amendment having no significant impact on adjoining lands, as determined by the Director, City Development or designate. Minor applications must be site specific and meet one or more of the following conditions: - request for additional permitted use, within an existing building with no significant impact on existing development standards - changes in development standards or zone to accommodate a residential severance to create one additional lot - application for Temporary Use 7. Pre-Submission Review Charges include two resubmissions before re-circulation fees apply. Recirculation fees will be charged for the fourth submission and every submission thereafter. 8. An Application may apply for reconsideration provided that the resolution of the issue of concern: -does not change the nature of the proposal; -is minor and technical in nature and I not expected to result in fundamental changes to the layout and design of the proposal; -does not involve re-engagement with the public; and -does not require recirculation of the application to external agencies. 9. A major Minister's Zoning Order application is where the proposed use or standards do not comply with the City's zoning by-law and a Report to Council is required. 10. A minor Minister's Zoning Order application is where the proposed use or standards comply with the City's zoning by-law. 11. An application that is more significant in scale and scope than a minor amendment and which may have greater impact or policy implications beyond the subject lands, as determined by the Director, City Development or designate. Major applications must meet one or more of the following conditions: - an application which requires major technical studies and extensive consultation - an application relating to more than one property - a site specific application if considered to represent large scale redevelopment or significant change to the designations and permitted uses - an application involving significant changes to the policies of the Official Plan 12. An application for a minor, site specific and small scale amendment or exception to Official Plan policies and designations, having limited impact or policy implications beyond the subject lands, as determined by the Director, City Development or designate. 13. An application to amend a Neighbourhood Development Guideline when the development proposal would necessitate an amendment to the Guideline or there is no other planning application being processed by Council. 14. Charged only if no other planning applications are being processed by Council. 15. The applicant is responsible for the City's full costs of undertaking the peer review of any studies or drawings submitted in support of the application. This requirement applies to matters such as, but not limited to, the peer review of traffic, marketing, environmental, noise, engineering drawings and reports, and architectural drawings. - 582 - City Development Department - Planning User Fee or Charge 2022 Current Fee (Excluding HST) 2023 Proposed Fee (Excluding HST) HST Applicable (Y/N) Proposed Fee Effective Date 16. Fee applies to planning applications that have been inactive over 1 year but less than 2 years. If the file has been inactive 2 or more years, the file will be closed without notice and a new application will be required with current application fees being applied. 17. Also subject to deduction of credit card fee if paid by credit card. - 583 - Schedule “I” to By-law 7974/22 Updated Application Fees for City Development – Planning - 584 - 234-2022-4625 October 25, 2022 Clerk City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering Ontario L1V 6K7 Subject: Municipal Housing Targets and Municipal Housing Pledges City of Pickering: 13,000 Dear Susan Cassel, Our government is taking bold and transformative action to get 1.5 million homes built over the next 10 years. To help fulfill this commitment, we have announced and are implementing More Homes Built Faster: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan 2022-23. This plan includes a suite of legislative and non-legislative changes across government that will help unlock more housing, streamline development approvals, remove barriers, accelerate planning, and further protect homebuyers and owners. To support the new action plan, we have introduced the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, which, if passed, would ensure that cities, towns, and rural communities grow with a mix of ownership and rental housing types that meet the needs of all Ontarians. To achieve the goal of building 1.5 million homes, large and fast-growing municipalities, including yours, are being assigned a Municipal Housing Target. While municipalities have taken significant steps in increasing their housing supply, Ontario needs an unprecedented amount of housing to meet current demand and that of generations to come. Our government requires a commitment from our municipal partners to do their part in providing housing for future population growth. To implement the 1.5 million homes target I am asking the City of Pickering to demonstrate its commitment to accelerating housing supply by developing a Municipal Housing Pledge and take the necessary steps to facilitate the construction of 13,000 new homes in your community by 2031. I ask that you bring this letter to the attention of your Head of Council so that your municipality is positioned to deliver its pledge to me, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, by the March 1, 2023, deadline. See the info sheet attached to this letter for information and considerations in developing a Municipal Housing Pledge. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Office of the Minister 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2J3 Tel.: 416 585-7000 Ministère des Affaires municipales et du Logement Bureau du ministre 777, rue Bay, 17e étage Toronto ON M7A 2J3 Tél. : 416 585-7000 Corr. 33-22 - 585 - Pledges will provide important information that showcase the strategies and actions that municipalities choose to adopt in order to prioritize and accelerate housing. Our government intends to use your pledges to monitor and track progress so we can continue to play a role in supporting municipalities and removing barriers to housing development. Our government recognizes the key role that municipalities will play in implementing Municipal Housing Targets through their Municipal Housing Pledges and know that you share the desire to bring more housing to the people of Ontario. We are committed to addressing the policy and implementation barriers you may encounter as you develop your pledges and I encourage you to reach out to Wendy Ren, Executive Lead, Municipal Policy/Program Collaboration, at Wendy.Ren@ontario.ca or 437-995-7094, if you have any questions, comments, or suggestions. I look forward to working together to increase housing supply for all Ontarians. Sincerely, Steve Clark Minister Encl. c: The Honourable Michael Parsa, Associate Minister of Housing Kate Manson-Smith, Deputy Minister Ryan Amato, Chief of Staff, Minister’s Office Joshua Paul, Assistant Deputy Minister, Housing Division - 586 - Info Sheet: Considerations in Developing Municipal Housing Pledge The pledge is not intended to be a land-use planning document, and its development should not require external technical expertise. The format and language used in the pledge should be accessible to the general public. The pledge is intended to be approved by municipal councils and should help codify Council’s commitment to meeting their municipal housing target. Municipalities can leverage new and existing policy tools as they develop housing pledges and work towards their housing targets. Below is a non-exhaustive list of potential strategies and actions that municipalities may include in developing their housing pledges. There may be additional opportunities based on local circumstances and the Province is interested in hearing about those ideas and creative solutions. Strategies to encourage and promote gentle intensification to enable and expedite additional residential units in existing residential areas Outline ways in which funding under provincial programs, such as the Streamline Development Approval Fund (SDAF) or Municipal Modernization Program (MMP), has been used to streamline existing municipal development approval processes Information on municipal development approval timelines and whether municipalities are being appealed for non-decisions Identify potential measures where current lack of infrastructure capacity (e.g., water/wastewater servicing) may limit future housing development Strategies to use municipal surplus lands Commitment to plan for, fund, and approve (where applicable) specific critical municipal infrastructure to support growth and new housing (e.g., water, wastewater, transit etc.), which may include expanded capacity as well as fully new facilities/assets Priorities for strategic and site-specific planning decisions to expedite housing in priority areas (e.g., around transit stations and in transit-serviced areas) Update zoning by-laws to permit a greater range of housing to be built without the need for costly and lengthy rezoning applications Municipalities may also consider existing tools such as the Community Infrastructure and Housing Accelerator, Community Planning Permit System, Major Transit Station Areas, and Protected Major Transit Station Areas. Below are some of the potential components of a municipal housing pledge. Municipalities are free to choose, alter, or add any new components that seem reasonable. Pledges can be represented in the form of plain text, tables, charts, maps, or a combination of them. Municipal Housing Target - 587 - Planned and proposed Municipal Initiatives Initiative Owner and Additional Stakeholders Context and Description of How Initiative Accelerates Housing Number of units per initiative and housing type Considerations (Barriers, Implementation, Risks, etc.) Potential Mitigation Strategies and Proposal to Accelerate Housing Potential Reporting and Monitoring Measures The deadline for municipalities to submit housing pledges to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing is March 1, 2023. Municipal housing pledges are intended to be public documents and it’s anticipated that municipalities will post them online. Municipalities can contact Ministry staff with any questions and for clarification. - 588 - November 2, 2022 Unpacking Bill 23 – More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 Earlier this week Bill 23 – More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 passed Second Reading and was referred to the Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy. AMO has requested to present at Committee and will submit written comments by the November 17 deadline. Bill 23 is proceeding quickly through the legislature, which means it is likely to pass before many municipal Councils have been sworn in, and before the AMO Board can prepare a response. Given these tight timelines, AMO’s responses to the legislation and regulatory and environmental registry postings associated with it will be informed by our AMO Housing Blueprint and other recent work. Bill 23 and the province’s new More Homes Built Faster Plan, as proposed, will have economic, social, and environmental implications that cannot be ignored. That is why AMO is releasing a preliminary analysis as it continues to work through the complex policy changes. It focuses on the following Schedules: Schedule 2 – Conservation Authorities Act Schedule 3 – Development Charges Act, 1997 Schedule 4 – Municipal Act, 2001 Schedule 6 – Ontario Heritage Act Schedule 7 – Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021 Schedule 9 – Planning Act. Examples below are intended to illustrate AMO’s early thoughts on how to approach an overarching response to Bill 23 and its related consultations. It is not intended to be exhaustive or inclusive of all proposed provisions. Bill 23 proposes numerous changes to the Development Charges Act and Planning Act that, if passed, will significantly impact how municipal governments recover the costs associated with growth. For example, Bill 23 proposes to exempt developers who build affordable, inclusionary zoning and select attainable housing units from paying development charges, parkland dedication fees, and community benefit charges. The bill also includes several additional changes, including reductions in costs associated with rental residential construction and changes to the method for determining development charges, amongst others. Corr. 34-22 - 589 - The cumulative impact of proposed changes to municipal fees and charges is significant and contrary to the widely accepted concept that growth should pay for growth. While AMO would like to support the province’s housing objectives, it cannot support changes that largely place the burden of carrying the costs associated with development onto municipalities. AMO believes that the proposed changes may contradict the goal of building more housing in the long-term as it merely shifts the financial burden of growth-related infrastructure onto existing taxpayers. Yesterday the AMO President sent a letter to the Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy, Minister of Finance, urging the province to address the funding shortfall associated with changes proposed under Bill 23. The province is expected to release its Fall Economic Statement on November 14. While some of the proposed amendments to the Planning Act, Heritage Act, Ontario Land Tribunal Act, and the Conservation Authorities Act have merit, it is unclear how these changes will improve a community’s livability (i.e., connected to core infrastructure in an integrated and coordinated way). AMO understands the desire to reduce barriers to planning and development approvals so that housing can be built faster. That is why many municipalities have made investments to streamline and digitize their processes and are working to improve processes in response to Bill 109. The proposed changes to increase transparency around the heritage designations and the process at the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) will require implementation by already under-resourced municipal staff. The OLT also needs to be properly resourced to eliminate the existing backlog. AMO will be looking for more clarity around what constitutes an “undue delay,” and the policy intent behind having a municipality use property tax dollars to pay the successful party’s cost if its case is unsuccessful at the OLT. A broader issue, however, is understanding what the implications are of the reduced role in land use planning proposed for some upper-tier municipalities and conservation authorities. The proposal that an upper-tier municipality could provide advice and assistance to lower-tier municipalities if there is mutual agreement is appreciated, however, the proposals (particularly in Schedule 9) could have the unintended consequence of having local planning disconnected from the servicing requirements that many upper-tier municipalities are responsible for managing and funding. Many of the proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act and the Planning Act in Bill 23 are concerning, as they signal a move away from environmental protection at a time when climate change impacts are being felt more at the local level. Bill 23 proposes sweeping changes to the regulatory responsibilities of Ontario’s 36 conservation authorities that, if passed, will undermine the collaborative and productive changes put forward by the Ministry led Conservation Authority Working Group over the past two years. The proposals under Schedule 2 have raised confusion around how these changes will impact the Conservation Authorities Act regulations that recently came into effect. AMO is seeking further clarification to understand how these amendments will impact municipal budgets and environmental outcomes. At first glance, they seem to result in- 590 - negative consequences (i.e., increased flooding, liability), at a time when the impacts of climate change are increasingly prevalent. Another emerging area of concern is the proposal to allow pits and quarries to request official plan amendments within two years of a new official plan or secondary plan coming into effect. Finally, there are numerous environmental implications associated with the use of more land and the proposed reduction in revenues to build parkland. Next Steps AMO continues to work with provincial ministries to understand the proposed changes under Bill 23. In the meantime, AMO is meeting with stakeholders and our Task Forces to inform our Standing Committee submission and our responses to the relevant consultation postings. A list of regulatory and environmental registry postings has been created to show what should be prioritized. We recognize that this is a challenging time for AMO members to provide feedback due to the recent municipal elections. If your municipality is providing comments and would like to share them with AMO, please contact policy@amo.on.ca. We will continue to provide further updates to members as the Bill and consultations progress. *Disclaimer: The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) is unable to provide any warranty regarding the accuracy or completeness of third-party submissions. Distribution of these items does not imply an endorsement of the views, information or services mentioned. Please consider the environment before printing this. Association of Municipalities of Ontario 200 University Ave. Suite 801,Toronto ON Canada M5H 3C6 To unsubscribe, please click here - 591 - Corporate Services Department City Clerk Services The Corporation of the City of Oshawa, 50 Centre Street South, Oshawa, Ontario L1H 3Z7 Phone 905∙436∙3311 1∙800∙667∙4292 Fax 905∙436∙5697 www.oshawa.ca File: 03-05 November 2, 2022 DELIVERED BY E-MAIL (clerks@durham.ca) Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Amendments to Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022 Oshawa City Council considered the above matter at its meeting of September 26, 2022 and adopted the following recommendation: “Whereas, on August 10, 2022, the Ontario government introduced Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022 (“Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act”), which amends the Municipal Act, 2001, the City of Toronto Act, 2006, and the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act to advance provincial priorities; and, Whereas, the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act provides the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa with new powers, which alters the governance and public administration of the cities of Ottawa and Toronto; and, Whereas, changes to the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act gives the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa, as head of council, broader scope of authority including, but not limited to, the following powers: Direct municipal employees to: •undertake research and provide advice to the head of council and the municipality on policies and programs of the municipality; •carry out duties related to the exercise of the power or performance of the duty, including implementing any decisions made by the head of council; Appoint a chief administrative officer: •the powers of a municipality under section 229 of the Municipal Act, 2001, with respect to the chief administrative officer, are assigned to the head of council; Powers regarding organizational structure: Corr. 35-22 - 592 - 2 • determine the organizational structure of the municipality are assigned to the head of council; Employment matters: • hire, dismiss or exercise any other prescribed employment powers with respect to the chief administrative officer, head of any division or the head of any other part of the organizational structure (excluding those positions appointed by statute or any other prescribed persons); Powers re local boards: • appoint, dismiss or revoke the appointment of chairs and vice-chairs of local boards; Powers re committees: • establish or dissolve committees; • appoint, dismiss or revoke chairs and vice-chairs of committees; • assign functions to committees; Powers re meetings: • despite any procedure by-law passed by the municipality, if a particular matter could potentially advance a prescribed provincial priority, the head of council may require the council to consider the matter at a meeting; Veto powers: • despite any procedure by-law passed by the municipality, if the head of council is of the opinion that all or part of a by-law could potentially interfere with a prescribed provincial priority, the head of council may provide written notice to the council of that municipality regarding intent to consider vetoing the by-law; Powers and duties re budget: • the powers and duties of a municipality with respect to proposing and adopting a budget are assigned to the head of council; • prepare a proposed budget for the municipality and provide the proposed budget to the council for the council’s consideration; and, Whereas, these additional powers could extend to other municipal mayors; and, Whereas, the amendments could have unintended consequences including reducing the role and responsibilities of municipal Councils on such matters, thereby detrimentally affecting local democracy; and, Whereas, at the August 2022 AMO Conference, the Premier of Ontario stated the importance of working with municipal partners and the power of collaboration in building Ontario together; and, - 593 - 3 Whereas, there was limited consultation with members of the public, Ontario municipalities including mayors, chief administrative officers / city managers as well as key stakeholders such as the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (“AMO:), Ontario Municipal Administrators’ Association (“OMAA”), Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (“AMCTO”); and, Whereas, the current municipal governance is democratic and is effective and efficient in achieving provincial priorities; and, Whereas, the changes to Bill 3 are intended to take effect on November 15, 2022,the start date of a new municipal council term; Therefore be it resolved: 1. That Mayor Dan Carter send a letter to the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Secretary of the Cabinet, Head of the Ontario Public Service, Deputy Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General, MPP Parliamentary Assistant to the Attorney General advising that: i. Oshawa City Council does not support the amendments to Bill 3, Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022; and, ii. Oshawa City Council does not support the amendments applying to the City of Oshawa; 2. That a copy of the Council resolution be provided to the Region of Durham, all Durham Region municipalities, Durham Region Members of Provincial Parliament, AMO, OMAA and AMCTO.” If you need further assistance concerning the above matter, please contact me at the address listed below or by telephone at 905-436-3311. Mary Medeiros City Clerk /fb c. Corporate Services Department Durham Region Municipalities Durham Region Members of Provincial Parliament Association of Municipalities of Ontario Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario Ontario Municipal Administrators’ Association - 594 - Memo To: Mayor Ashe and Members of Council December 5, 2022 From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Council Appointments to Boards, Committees, and Positions File: A-1410 In accordance with Policy ADM 045, Council Appointments to Committees, and Procedure By-law 7926/22, please find below the list of Boards, Committees, and Positions that require Council representation and the Councillor’s interested in those positions. Animal Services Appeal Committee – 1 Councillor required Councillor Butt Civic Awards Committee – 3 Councillors required (in addition to the Mayor) Mayor Ashe (Ex-Officio) Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Nagy Councillor Pickles Councillor Robinson Pickering Public Library Board – 2 Councillors required Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Cook Councillor Robinson Site Plan Advisory Committee – 3 Councillors Required Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Councillor Nagy Councillor Robinson Vehicle for Hire Advisory Committee – 1 Councillor required Councillor Brenner Councillor Butt Corr. 36-22 - 595 - December 5, 2022 Page 2 of 2 Council Appointments to Boards, Committees, and Positions Alternate Regional Councillor – 1 City Councillor required Councillor Butt Councillor Nagy Councillor Robinson Deputy Mayor – 3 Regional Councillors required Councillor Brenner – November 15, 2022 – March 14, 2024 Councillor Cook – March 15, 2024 – July 14, 2025 Councillor Pickles – July 15, 2025 – November 14, 2026 In order to give the appointments effect, Council must appoint Members to each Committee. In accordance with Policy ADM 045, votes must be taken for each Member of Council listed for each Committee, and the highest number of votes will determine the Member(s) appointed to each Board, Committee, or Position. SC - 596 - Memo To: Mayor Ashe and Members of Council December 5, 2022 From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Council Nominations to Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) File: A-1410 Further to the attached correspondence from The Regional Municipality of Durham, dated October 17, 2022, requesting that the City of Pickering nominate Regional Councillors to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), the following Members of Council have expressed interest to be nominated to these Bodies. In accordance with Policy ADM 045, Council Appointments to Committees, in order to make these nominations take effect, and provide notice of same to the Region, the following recommendation is presented to Council: That the following Members of Council be nominated to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA): Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) – 1 Regional Councillor Required Councillor Pickles Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) – 1 Regional Councillor Required Mayor Ashe SC Attachment Corr. 37-22 - 597 - The Regional Municipality of Durham Corporate Services Department Legislative Services 605 Rossland Rd. E. Level 1 PO Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Canada 905-668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Fax: 905-668-9963 durham.ca Don Beaton, BCom, M.P.A. Commissioner of Corporate Services October 17, 2022 Ms. S. Cassel Clerk City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Ms. Cassel: RE: Appointments to Conservation Authorities and Land Division Committee, Our File: C14 Appointments to the Conservation Authorities and to the Regional Land Division Committee will be made by Regional Council on December 21, 2022, and February 1, 2023, respectively. Would you please arrange for your Council to nominate persons for the following appointments: •1 member to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority •1 member to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority •1 Citizen member to the Land Division Committee Please note that on April 27, 2022, the following policy was adopted for Conservation Authority appointments: “That only elected officials be appointed to the Conservation Authorities and further, that only members of Regional Council be appointed unless the municipalities have insufficient Regional Council representation, they shall be permitted to appoint a local Councillor to the Conservation Authority.” I would appreciate receiving the names of your nominees for the Conservation Authorities on or before December 14, 2022, and your nominee for the Land Division Committee on or before January 25, 2023. Alexander Harras Alexander Harras, Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services AH/tf If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 extension 2097. Attachment #1 to Corr. 37-22 - 598 - Report to Council Report Number: BYL 06-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Subject: Deferral of Implementation of Accessible Service Supplement Fees - Vehicle for Hire By-law - File: L-2200-01-22 Recommendation: 1. That Report BYL 06-22 respecting a deferral of the implementation of the Accessible Service Supplement enacted in the Vehicle for Hire By-law 7739/20 be received; 2. That the implementation and collection of the Vehicle for Hire Accessible Service Supplement be deferred until January 1, 2024; and, 3. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. Executive Summary: The City’s Vehicle for Hire By-law was enacted on February 24, 2020. Included in the By-law is an Accessible Service Supplement to be paid by all vehicle for hire license holders that do not provide accessible service. The Accessible Service Supplement will be used to fund an Accessible Taxicab Incentive Program, outlined in Section 93 of the Vehicle for Hire By-law. Based on the current economic challenges faced by the Vehicle for Hire Industry caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic, staff recommend deferring collection of the Accessible Service Supplement until January 1, 2024. Financial Implications: The Accessible Service Supplement was not budgeted as revenue generated for the City. In the initial Report to Council regarding the Vehicle for Hire By-law, staff estimated approximately $28,000.00 would be generated annually through the Accessible Service Supplement. This was based on a seven cent per trip fee to be paid by Personal Transportation Companies, as well as Accessible Service Supplements applicable to Taxicab Brokerage fees of $2,500.00 and Taxicab Plates of $75.00 per plate. Deferring the collection of the Accessible Service Supplement will delay the implementation of the Accessible Taxicab Incentive Program. Notwithstanding that, the economic pressures currently facing the Vehicle for Hire industry call for some type of financial relief. -C~o/- p](KERJNG - 599 - BYL 06-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Deferral of Implementation of Accessible Service Supplement Fees Page 2 Discussion: The Vehicle for Hire Licensing By-law prescribes an Accessible Service Supplement fee to be applied to all vehicles for hire that do not provide accessible services. Fees charged in relation to the Accessible Service Supplement are as follows: 1. Personal Transportation Companies (PTCs) are subject to a seven cent per trip fee; 2. Taxicab Brokerages that do not have at least ten percent (10%) of their fleet as accessible vehicles must pay $2,500.00 per year; and 3. Individual Taxicab Plate Licensees that are not affixed to an accessible vehicle must pay $75.00 annually. The funds raised through the Accessible Service Supplement are to be used to fund an Accessible Taxicab Incentive Program. Section 93 of the Vehicle for Hire By-law indicates that the Accessible Taxicab Incentive Program may include, but is not limited to: i) requirements for grant or incentive eligibility; ii) criteria for receiving any incentive or grant; iii) the amount and frequency of the disbursement of any incentive or grant, including pro-rated or discretionary amounts; iv) sanctions, including reductions in the amount of any incentive or grant for non-compliance with the conditions of the program; and, v) reporting or auditing requirements for brokerages, PTCs, and Taxicab Plate Licensees. The Accessibility Advisory Committee, City staff and the Vehicle for Hire Advisory Committee will be tasked with determining how the fund may be best utilized to improve accessible services provided to Pickering residents. Both the Personal Transportation Companies and the Taxicab Industry have seen a severe reduction in their business since the COVID-19 pandemic. In an effort to provide some financial relief to the Vehicle for Hire Industry, deferring the implementation of the Accessible Service Supplement is a reasonable measure to assist in mitigating the financial hardship being experienced. Currently the taxicab industry is facing challenges due to competition from Personal Transportation Companies. There is a drastically lower number of Taxicab Plates attached to vehicles and providing service in the City. Out of a total of 78 Taxicab Plates, there were only 26 attached to a vehicle during the 2022 Annual Vehicle Inspections. Currently, it is anticipated that even fewer than 26 vehicles are being operated as Taxicabs. City staff will continue to monitor and review the industry conditions during 2023. The deferral of this supplement will allow the industry to continue to operate without any additional costs for 2023, and will allow staff to gain a better understanding of the position of the industry moving forward. - 600 - BYL 06-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Deferral of Implementation of Accessible Service Supplement Fees Page 3 Attachments: 1.Not applicable. Prepared By: Prepared By: Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Jason Litoborski, CPSO Kimberly Thompson Supervisor, Licensing & Enforcement Manager, Municipal Law Enforcement Services Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor JL:kt/ks Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 601 - Report to Council Report Number: CAO 17-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Pre 2023 Current Budget Approvals -File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That Council approve the following two recommendations related to pre 2023 Current Budget approval: a)That pre 2023 Current Budget approval be provided for the hiring of five additional firefighters with a start date of February 1, 2023 and this cost of $402,700 be included in the Fire Services 2023 Budget for Accounts Salaries & Wages (10700.50100-$298,298) and Employee Benefits (10700.501020-$104,402); b)That pre 2023 Current Budget approval be provided for the hiring of one Senior Purchasing Analyst with a start date of February 1, 2023 and this cost of $99,290 be included in the Supply & Services 2023 Budget for Accounts Salaries & Wages (10605.50100-$76,377) and Employee Benefits (10605.501020-$22,913); and 2.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: The pre-budget request for six new positions will assist the City and, either directly or indirectly, provide valuable services to our residents. Five new firefighter positions provide the full complement of suppression staff required for the new Seaton Fire Headquarters located on the corner of Zents Drive and Brock Road. The new facility is scheduled for completion by late December 2022 and occupancy by January 2023. Additionally, one new Senior Purchasing Analyst is required to provide the capacity to manage the City’s construction projects and mitigate exposure to project delays and/or cost escalations. Financial Implications: The total dollar “Ask” for these six positions is $501,990 and represents a preliminary increase of 0.66% for the 2023 budget. It should be noted that senior staff are still in the 2023 budget development phase and are currently focusing on 2023 User Fees, Capital Budget and four year forecast. Although not yet finalized, Members of Council should expect additional requests for levy increases to help fund the 2023 budget cost and service delivery pressures. - 602 - CAO 17-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Pre 2023 Current Budget Approvals Page 2 Discussion: The new Seaton Fire Headquarters, located on the corner of Zents Drive and Brock Road, is planned to be operational by January, 2023. This new “state of the art” fire hall represents a substantial investment by the City for the protection of its current and future residents located north of Concession 3. Over the past five years, Fire Services have been incrementally adding staff through the budget process to achieve adequate staffing levels for the new fire hall. The addition of five new firefighter positions will achieve the full staff compliment of 21 needed to meet the operational requirements of the new Seaton Fire Headquarters. The additional suppression staff will provide initial four minute response times to the Duffin Heights residents, as well as add depth to the departments overall response capability. Moreover, the location of the fire hall will enhance firefighting capacity and protection for the south area of Seaton. The new Senior Purchasing Analyst will be primarily focused on high dollar value Operations and Capital procurements and complex related projects. The investment in this position will provide the capacity to efficiently manage large procurement projects. The Supply & Services staff compliment has remained the same for the past 24 years and can no longer manage the work load to meet project volumes, and Council and resident expectations. In order to provide effective procurement services to City Departments, and limit the City’s exposure to rising project costs due to prolonged or delayed procurement timelines, an increase in staff compliment in Supply & Services Division is urgently required. Attachments: None. Prepared/Approved/Endorsed By: SK:mc Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer Original Signed By: Steve Boyd Fire Chief - 603 - CAO 17-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Pre 2023 Current Budget Approvals Page 3 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 604 - Report to Council Report Number: CS 22-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Sarah Douglas-Murray Director, Community Services Subject: The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. -Lease Agreement -File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized to execute the Lease Agreement with The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. set out in Attachment 1 to this report, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. has an existing Lease Agreement with the City of Pickering to operate the Wellness Spa for the period of January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2022. The Wellness Spa includes approximately 1,448 square feet of space on the 2nd floor of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. The Community Services Department recommends that a renewal agreement be initiated with The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. for a five year term ending December 31, 2027. Financial Implications: The revenue generated through rental payments made by The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. from January 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023 will be $32,262.48 (plus HST and CPI). Please note that each year, including 2023 of this renewal lease, the annual rent shall increase by an amount equal to any increase in the Consumer Price Index for Ontario as established by Statistics Canada for the period between October and November of the previous year of the renewal lease. Discussion: The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. provides spa services that include massage therapy, skin care, facials, body wraps, waxing, laser hair removal, pedicures, manicures and the sale of wellness-oriented products. Spa services, provided by The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. are supervised by a duly licensed health professional and registered to provide wellness services in the Province of Ontario. The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. offers services that are compatible with the City’s mandate to encourage the development of balanced and healthy lifestyles contributing to the well-being of - 605 - CS 22-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. Page 2 both mind and body. The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. has operated at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex for over 10 years in a professional manner that has satisfied the City. As such, the Community Services Department recommends that the Lease Agreement included as Attachment 1 be initiated for a five year term beginning January 1, 2023 and ending December 31, 2027. Attachment: 1. Draft Lease Agreement Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Jody Morris Sarah Douglas-Murray Manager, Community Services Administration Director, Community Services SDM:jm Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 606 - Attachment #1 to Report CS 22-22 This Lease made in duplicate this day of , 2022. Between: The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. (the “Tenant") -and- The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the “Landlord") Now therefore this agreement witnesseth that, in consideration of the rents, covenants and agreements hereinafter reserved and contained on the part of the Tenant to be paid, observed and performed, the Landlord hereby Leases to the Tenant during the term of this agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "Lease") one room containing approximately 1,448 square feet located in the central core area on the second floor of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex located at 1867 Valley Farm Road, Pickering, Ontario to operate a wellness health centre (hereinafter referred to as the "Premises"). Definitions In this Lease, (a)"Commencement Date" means January 1, 2023; (b)"Lease" means this lease as it may be amended from time to time; (c)"Premises" means the space containing approximately 1,448 square feet located in the central core area on the second floor of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex to operate a wellness spa located at 1867 Valley Farm Road, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham; (d)"Term" means the term of this Lease as set out in Section 1.0; and (e)“Rent" means the rent payable pursuant to Section 2.0. 1 - 607 - 1.0 Term 1.0 The Term of this Lease (hereinafter referred to as the "Term") shall commence on the 1st day of January, 2023 and shall end on the 31st day of December, 2027, provided that the Tenant shall have the option thereafter of one additional five year Term on the provision that at least two (2) months prior written notice of the renewal period is given by the Tenant to the Landlord of the Tenant's intent to renew the Lease and provided further that the Tenant shall have been a Tenant in good standing throughout the entire Term of the Lease determined solely by the Landlord and provided further there has been no breach of any provisions of the Lease at any time by the Tenant. Each successive renewal shall be based on the same Terms and Conditions as set out herein, save and except for the amount of rent payable. Rent payable for the renewal term shall be as mutually agreed upon by both the Landlord and the Tenant at least one month prior to the commencement of the renewal Term. Failing such mutual agreement, this Lease shall be at an end and the Tenant shall vacate the Premises upon expiration of the original Term. 1.1 Upon the expiration of the Term, or if the Landlord shall become entitled to Terminate and shall declare this Lease to be terminated pursuant to any provisions hereof, the Tenant shall surrender to the Landlord possession of the premises and all of the fixtures and improvements erected thereon (all of which the Tenant acknowledges to be the property of the Landlord without any claim by or compensation to the Tenant), all the lights of the Tenant under this Lease shall terminate (but the Tenant shall notwithstanding such termination, be liable to the Landlord for any loss or damage suffered by the Landlord by reason of any default of the Tenant). 1.2 No early termination of possession of the premises shall release the Tenant from its obligations under the Terms herein unless such termination is consented to by the Landlord in writing. 2.0 Base Rent 2.1 The Tenant shall pay base rent to the Landlord in the amount of $32,265.48 per annum ($2,688.54 per month) plus applicable H.S.T. and CPI for the first year of the Term of the Lease. 2.2 For each successive year of the Term, the annual rent shall increase by an amount equal to any increase in the Consumer Price Index for Ontario as established by Statistics Canada for the period between October and November of the previous year of the Term. 2 - 608 - 2.3 Rent shall be payable monthly. Prior to the commencement of each year of the Term, the Tenant shall provide to the Landlord, twelve (12) post-dated cheques, dated the first day of each and every month of the ensuing year, made payable to The Corporation of the City of Pickering. 3.0 Taxes 3.1 The Tenant covenants that it shall pay all taxes, if applicable, license fees and all other taxes or grants paid in lieu thereof or in addition thereto against or attributable to all leasehold improvements, equipment and facilities and the Premises and the operation of the Tenant's business thereon. In the event of the failure of the Tenant to make any such payments called for in this paragraph directly to the relevant authority, the Landlord may make any such payment and any amounts so paid by the Landlord shall be payable by the Tenant to the Landlord forthwith upon demand and shall be considered by the Landlord and the Tenant to be rent for the purposes of this Lease. Payment of Rent The Tenant covenants that at the times and in the manner provided in this Lease, it will pay in lawful money of Canada to the Landlord, at the address of the Landlord set out herein or at such other place as the Landlord may designate from time to time, the rent hereby reserved and all other amounts payable by the Tenant pursuant to the Terms of this Lease (all of which other amounts it is hereby agreed between the parties are payable as additional rent and recoverable by the Landlord from the Tenant as rent including H.S.T. and all applicable taxes and the facility usage fee), without any deduction or set-off whatsoever, or any abatement except as expressly provided under this Lease. If the Tenant fails to pay, when same is due and payable, any rent and all other amounts payable by the Tenant pursuant to the herein Lease, such unpaid amounts shall bear interest from the due date thereof to the date of payment at a rate per annum which is two (2) percentage points in excess of the minimum lending rate to prime commercial borrowers current at the due date charged by any Canadian chartered bank designated by the Landlord from time to time, subject to annual compounding. Use 5.1 The Tenant shall use the premises only for the purpose of a wellness spa, which scope of services will include massage therapy, skin care, facials, body wrap, manicures, pedicures, waxing, laser hair removal, eye-lash extensions and the sale of wellness-oriented products/reflexology. 3.2 4.0 4.1 4.2 5.0 3 - 609 - 5.2 The Tenant covenants that it will not provide any other services, other than those identified in 5.1 above, without first obtaining the prior written consent of the Landlord, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. 5.3 The Tenant covenants that it will provide, at its sole expense, visible signage in its reception area throughout the Term of this Lease that identifies to its clients the services it provides and stating that the services are independent of the Landlord. The signage shall be approved by the Landlord prior to being displayed. 5.4 The Tenant shall provide to the Landlord a copy of a standardized written waiver which shall state that the scope of services being provided by the Tenant are independent of The Corporation of the City of Pickering. Such waiver shall be provided to the Landlord for approval prior to the commencement of the Tenant's business being conducted on the premises. The Tenant shall further provide such waiver to the Tenant's clients and patients prior to providing or delivering any services. 5.5 Services provided by the Tenant shall be supervised by a duly licensed health professional and registered to provide wellness services in the Province of Ontario. Each employee and contracted service provider of the Tenant shall be duly licensed to carry out any service to be provided by such employee and contracted service provider as may be provided by any statute or regulation of any legislative authority. 6.0 Sale of Products 6.1 The Tenant covenants that it shall only sell product lines that are wellness- oriented. Such products include the following: • bottled water 16.5 oz. • skin care products 6.2. The Tenant covenants that it will not provide for resale any product other than those identified in 6.1 above, without first obtaining the prior written consent of the Landlord, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. 6.3 The Landlord reserves the right to restrict the sale of any items which the Landlord, in its sole discretion, considers distasteful and/or not in the best interest of the general public. 7.0 Hours of Operation 7.1 The Tenant covenants to operate its business only on those days when the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex is open to the public. The Tenant shall operate within the same operating hours as the Chestnut Hill Developments 4 - 610 - Recreation Complex's operating schedules, which operating schedules shall be determined solely by the Landlord from time to time. 7.2 The Tenant acknowledges that the Landlord reserves the right to alter the operating schedules and further acknowledges that the Landlord will not be responsible for any losses or damages including any lost revenues and/or additional expenses incurred by the Tenant due to operating schedule changes and/or Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex closures, for any reason whatsoever. 7.3 In addition to scheduled closings, the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex shall be closed or have reduced operating hours on the following holidays: New Year's Eve closed at 12:00 noon; New Year's Day; Family Day closed at 5:00 pm; Good Friday; Easter Sunday; Victoria Day; Canada Day; Civic Holiday; Labour Day; National Day for Truth and Reconciliation; Thanksgiving; Christmas Eve closed at 12:00 noon; Christmas Day; Boxing Day; and any other holiday declared by the Landlord. Utilities/Telephone Service The Landlord shall supply heat, hydro, water and air-conditioning to the premises at its sole expense. The Landlord reserves the right to prohibit the Tenant from installing or using any equipment that requires increased voltage, which may result in additional costs to the Landlord. The installation, removal and daily supply of telephone service shall be at the Tenant's sole expense. 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 9.0 Leasehold Improvements The Tenant is responsible for construction, painting, decorating, maintenance, replacement, repair and insurance of the Tenant's leasehold improvements, 5 - 611 - equipment, fixtures and facilities on the premises and shall abide by the Terms as provided for in paragraph no. 11 herein. 10.0 Entry to the Premises 10.1 The Landlord shall provide the Tenant with keys to the premises. The Tenant shall not, without prior written consent of the Landlord, change the lock on the premises or place additional locks upon the door of the premises and shall not permit any duplicate key to be made. 10.2 The Tenant acknowledges that the Landlord will keep in its possession keys that would provide access to the premises by the Landlord in the event it becomes necessary to enter the premises during a time when the Tenant's business is not operating. 10.3 The Tenant covenants and agrees that upon the Landlord becoming entitled to re- enter the premises under any of the provisions of this Lease, the Landlord in addition to all other rights shall have the right to enter the premises as the agent of the Tenant either by force or otherwise, without being liable for any prosecution therefore and to relet the premises as the agent of the Tenant, and to receive the rent therefore and, as the agent of the Tenant, to take possession of any furniture or other property on the premises and to sell same at public or private sale without notice and to apply the proceeds of such sale and any rent derived from reletting the premises upon account for the rent and additional rent and facility usage fees under this Lease and the Tenant shall be liable to the Landlord for the deficiency, if any. 11.0 Alterations & Improvements 11.1 The Tenant covenants not to make or erect in or to the premises any installations, alterations, additions or partitions without submitting drawings and specifications to the Landlord and without obtaining the Landlord's prior written consent in each instance, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The Tenant must further obtain the Landlord's prior written consent to any change or changes in such drawings and specifications submitted as aforesaid. Such work may be performed by contractors engaged directly by the Tenant provided a written contract is approved in writing by the Landlord and subject to all reasonable conditions which the Landlord may impose; without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any work performed by or for the Tenant shall be performed by competent workers whose labour union affiliations are not incompatible with those of any workers who may be employed by the Landlord, its contractors or subcontractors' the Tenant shall pay, when due, the costs of all such work and of all materials, labour and services involved therein provided that any such payments may be withheld pursuant to the provisions of Construction Lien Act (Ontario). The workmen performing works on the premises shall provide satisfactory evidence of insurance to the Landlord prior to commencing any works on the premises. 6 - 612 - 11.2 The contractor shall obey all federal, provincial and municipal laws, acts, ordinances, regulations, orders-in-council and by-laws which could in any way pertain to the work outlined in the contract or to the employees of the Tenant. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the contractor shall satisfy all applicable statutory requirements imposed by the Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations made thereunder. 11.3 The Tenant covenants that it will not suffer or permit any mechanics or other liens for work, labour, service or materials ordered by it or the cost of which it may be in any way obligated to pay to attach to the premises and that, whenever and so often as any such liens shall attach or claims therefore shall be filed, the Tenant shall, within twenty (20) days after the Tenant has notice of the claim for lien, procure the discharge thereof by payment or by giving security or in such other manner as may be required or permitted by law. 11.4 The Tenant acknowledges that all renovations and constructions to the premises become part of the premises and shall be deemed to be the property of the Landlord. Renovations and constructions are not to be dismantled or destroyed at either the end or termination of the Lease. 11.5 All alterations, renovations and new construction must be approved by the Landlord and must be completed under the authority of a building permit issued by the Landlord. All related permit fees and costs including the provision of any diagrams, architectural plans and architectural fees are at the expense of the Tenant. 12.0 Maintenance 12.1 The Tenant covenants and agrees to keep and maintain during the Term and to deliver up at the end of the Term (or such earlier or later termination of this Lease as is provided for herein), the premises in a state of good maintenance, cleanliness and repair. The Tenant covenants to permit representatives of the Landlord on site at any time for the purpose of inspection and to determine compliance with this provision. 12.2 The Tenant will covenant that it will be responsible for maintenance of its own property and equipment. 12.3 The Landlord reserves the right to close sections of the premises, or the whole area of the premises, as required for maintenance from time to time. The Tenant shall have no right to claim for any losses or damages to the Tenant arising from such closures by the Landlord. 12.4 The Landlord reserves the right to enter and view the state of maintenance and repair of the premises. The Tenant agrees to repair according to notice in writing 7 - 613 - any deficiencies, and in the event the Tenant neglects to make said repairs and carry out the necessary maintenance with five (5) days of such notice by the Landlord, the Landlord may enter the premises and make such repairs and carry out such maintenance at its option and at the expense of the Tenant, which sum must be paid by the Tenant within ten (10) days after receiving notice in writing from the Landlord of the costs incurred by the Landlord. In the event the Tenant neglects to pay such costs as set out in writing, such expense may be set off against the security deposit held by the Landlord. 12.5 The Landlord shall give the Tenant 24 hours notice with respect to the inspection and maintenance of the premises (except in an emergency, in which case, the Landlord shall give such notice, if any, as is practicable). 13.0 Garbage Removal The Tenant shall be responsible, at its own expense, for the daily removal of its garbage from the premises to a location designated by the Landlord, with the exception of any medical wastes, in which case the Tenant shall be responsible for both the safe removal and disposal of such medical wastes from the premises. 14.0 Signs 14.1 The Tenant shall not display any sign, picture, advertisement, notice or lettering on the inside or outside of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex facility without the prior written consent of the Landlord, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. 14.2 The parties agree that the Landlord will provide an area in the main lobby of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex for the Tenant to display a sign at the Tenant's sole expense in accordance with section 14.1 above, advising the patrons of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex of the Tenant's operations and its location within the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex, noting thereon that the Tenant's operation is a service supplied independent of the Landlord. 14.3 The Landlord reserves the right to have the Tenant immediately remove, upon written notice, any sign, picture, advertisement, notice or lettering on the inside of the premises, which the Landlord at its sole discretion considers inappropriate or offensive, or in contravention of this Lease or any other Agreement to which the Landlord may be bound. 14.4 The Tenant covenants that any additional advertising within the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex shall be subject to the parties hereto entering into an advertising agreement, which agreement will be subject to additional costs to the Tenant for such a service. 8 - 614 - 15.0 Rules and Regulations 15.1 During the Term of this Lease, the Tenant agrees to comply with the various rules and regulations, policies and procedures, as amended from time to time, put in place by the Landlord, including but not limited to the Landlord's Harassment Policy. 15.2 The parties agree that the Landlord shall be entitled from time to time, to establish reasonable rules and regulations with respect to the use of the premises, hours of operation and common areas used by the Tenant, its employees and all persons visiting or doing business with it including rules relating to the parking of vehicles in connection with the Tenant's business. The Tenant, its employees and all persons visiting or doing business with it agree to comply with all such rules and regulations and to fully co-operate in avoiding obstruction and/or conflict with the operation and services of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex and third parties. The Tenant, its employees and all persons visiting or doing business with it agree to alter or modify their use of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex and common areas when so requested by the Landlord from time to time. 16.0 Indemnity of Tenant The Tenant covenants to indemnify the Landlord against any and all claims, actions, damages and liability (including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, all claims for personal injury, death and/or property damage) and also damages arising from any breach of this Lease by the Tenant or from any act or omission of the Tenant or those for whom the Tenant is at law responsible in or around the premises and against all costs incurred in connection with any such claim, except as provided in section 17 below. 17.0 Indemnity of Landlord The Landlord shall not be liable for any loss or damage to any property belonging to the Tenant or to any other persons or for any injury to any person while such person or property is on the premises unless such loss, damage or injury is caused directly by the negligence of the Landlord, or those for whom the Landlord is at law responsible. 18.0 Insurance 18.1 Prior to occupying the premises, the Tenant, at its own expense, shall provide: (a) Commercial General Liability insurance, identifying The Corporation of the City of Pickering as an additional insured, including coverage for bodily injury including death, personal injury, property damage, contractual liability, Tenant's legal liability, non-owned automobile liability, on an occurrence 9 - 615 - basis with respect to the business carried on at the premises and the Tenant's use and occupancy of the premises, with coverage for any one occurrence of not less than $5,000,000, and shall contain a cross liability, severability of insured clause to protect the Landlord in respect of claims by the Tenant as if the Landlord was separately insured; (b) All risk property insurance covering the leasehold improvements, trade fixtures, furniture and equipment in the premises for not less than the full replacement cost thereof. The policy shall contain a waiver of subrogation clause in favour of the Landlord; (c) Professional malpractice insurance in the amount of not less than $2,000,000 per claim. Such insurance shall provide coverage for all services in the rendering of, or failure to render, professional services in connection with the Lease. Upon termination of the Lease the policy shall remain in force for twelve (12) months; (d) A certificate of insurance coverage in a form satisfactory to the Landlord, prior to the Tenant taking possession of the premises, which insurance coverage shall be kept in full force and effect throughout the Term of the Lease and any renewal(s) thereof. The Tenant covenants with the Landlord that the Tenant, in its use and occupation of the premises, will not do or omit or permit to be done or omitted anything which shall cause any insurance premium of the Landlord to be increased, and if any insurance premium shall be so increased, the Tenant shall pay to the Landlord forthwith upon demand the amount of such increase. If notice of cancellation or lapse shall be given respecting any insurance policy of the Landlord or if any insurance policy shall be cancelled or refused to be renewed by an insurer by reason of the use or occupation of the premises or any part thereof, the Tenant shall forthwith remedy or rectify such use or occupation upon being requested to do so in writing by the Landlord and if the Tenant shall fail to do so the Landlord may, at its option, terminate this Lease forthwith by notice in writing and the Tenant shall immediately surrender possession of the premises to the Landlord and thereupon rent and all other amounts for which the Tenant is liable under this Lease shall be apportioned and paid in full to the date of surrender; provided that the Tenant shall have the right to replace such cancelled insurance at any time prior to the Landlord's notice of termination. If the premises are at any time destroyed or damaged as a result of fire, the elements, accident or other casualty, not caused by the Tenant, rendering the premises untenantable and, if in the opinion of the Landlord the premises cannot be rebuilt or repaired within sixty (60) days of the damage, the Landlord and the Tenant may mutually agree to terminate this Agreement and thereupon the Tenant will pay all applicable rent due and additional fees owing to the Landlord, which rent and fees will be apportioned and paid to the date of the damage. 10 - 616 - If the premises are at any time destroyed or damaged as a result of fire, the elements, accident or other casualty, not caused by the Tenant, rendering the premises untenantable and, if the opinion of the Landlord, the premises can be rebuilt or repaired within sixty (60) days of the damage, the Landlord shall commence to repair or rebuild the premises to the extent only as the premises existed prior to the date of this Lease (not including the Tenant's improvements) and only to the extent of the insurance proceeds actually received by the Landlord. 19.0 Deliveries The Landlord has the right to restrict the hours of deliveries to the Tenant at its sole discretion. 20.0 Disclaimer The Tenant agrees to provide each client with a written notice that the Tenant's services are being provided independent of The Corporation of the City of Pickering and to obtain a written acknowledgment from the patient/client releasing The Corporation of the City of Pickering from any claims arising from the Tenant's services. 21.0 Complex Fitness Room/Cardio Annex and Pool The Landlord agrees to sell to the Tenant and its employees Recreation Complex Memberships at the City of Pickering Wellness Membership rate throughout the Term. Purchase of said membership(s) should be coordinated through the Manager, Community Services Administration. Only staff employed by the Tenant are eligible for the discounted membership rate. Proof of employment will be required each membership year. 22.0 Notice 22.1 The Landlord has the right, notwithstanding section 1 herein, to cancel this Lease without cause or for any reason by giving the Tenant six (6) months written notice of its intention to cancel. The Landlord shall not be liable for costs or damages of any kind caused to the Tenant by such cancellation. 22.2 Wherever notice is permitted or required to be given hereunder by either party hereto, it must be given in writing and is sufficiently given if served personally on an officer of the party to whom notice is being given, delivered by facsimile to the telephone number below with confirmation of receipt or if mailed by registered mail postage prepaid addressed to the Tenant at: 11 - 617 - Grace Brito-Rochford (Cellphone: 905.999.1854) 1007 Coldstream Drive Oshawa, ON L1K 0J8 Email: gracegalvao71@hotmail.com Sonia Fernandes (Cellphone: 905.244.9381) 1583 Rockaway Street Oshawa, ON L1K 0C9 and to the Landlord at: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Attention: City Clerk Fax: 905.420.9685 received on the date of service. and received on the third day following the date on which it is mailed as aforesaid provided that if there is a disruption or threatened disruption in the postal service in the postal area through which such notice must be sent, notice must be given personally or by means of printed electronic or printed telephonic communications. 23.0 Default or to such other address as either party may designate by notice given from time to time in accordance with this paragraph. 22.3 Any notice given personally shall be conclusively deemed to have been given and 22.4 Any notice mailed as aforesaid shall be conclusively deemed to have been given It is hereby expressly agreed that if and whenever the rent or any additional rent or fees hereby reserved or any part thereof shall not be paid on the day appointed for payment thereof, whether lawfully demanded or not, or in case of breach or non- observance or non-performance of any of the covenants, agreements, provisos, conditions or rules and regulations on the part of the Tenant to be kept, observed or performed after two (2) business days after written notice of default has been given by the Landlord to the Tenant, or in case the premises shall be vacated or remain unoccupied for five (5) days or in case the Term shall be taken in execution or attachment for any cause whatever, then and in every such case, it shall be lawful for the Landlord thereafter to enter into and upon the premises or any part thereof in the name of the whole and the same to have again, repossess and enjoy as of its former estate, anything in this Lease contained to the contrary notwithstanding. 12 - 618 - 24.0 Bankruptcy In the event that the premises shall be used by any person other than the Tenant or for any other purpose than that for which the same were let without the prior written consent of the Landlord or in the case the Term or any of the goods and chattels of the Tenant shall be at any time seized in execution or attachment by any creditor of the Tenant or the Tenant shall make any assignment for the benefit of creditors or any bulk sale or become bankrupt or insolvent or take the benefit of any act now or hereafter in force for bankrupt or insolvent debtors, or, if the Tenant is a corporation and any order shall be made for the winding-up of the Tenant, or other termination of the corporate existence of the Tenant, then in any such case this Lease shall, at the option of the Landlord, cease and desist and the Term shall immediately become forfeited and void and the Landlord may re-enter and take possession of the premises as though the Tenant or other occupant or occupants of the premises was or were holding over after the expiration of the Term without any right whatever. 25.0 Distress The Tenant waives and renounces the benefit of any present or future statute taking away or limiting the Landlord's right of distress, and covenants and agrees that notwithstanding any such statute none of the goods and chattels of the Tenant on the premises at any time during the Term or any renewal thereof shall be exempt from levy by distress for rent in arrears. 26.0 No Waiver No condoning, excusing or overlooking by the Landlord or the Tenant of any default, breach or non-observance by the other at any time or times in respect of any covenant, proviso or condition herein contained shall operate as a waive of the Landlord's or the Tenant's rights hereunder in respect of any continuing or subsequent default, breach or non-observance, or so as to defeat or affect in any way the rights of the Landlord or the Tenant herein in respect of any such continuing or subsequent default or breach and no waiver shall be inferred from or implied by anything done or omitted by the Landlord or the Tenant save only express waiver in writing. All rights and remedies of the Landlord and the Tenant in this Lease contained shall be cumulative and not alternative. 27.0 Compliance with Laws 27.1 The Tenant covenants to comply, at its own expense, with all present and future provisions of law concerning the premises including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing all laws, ordinances, requirements, order, directives, permits, rules and regulations of all governmental authorities. 13 - 619 - 27.2 The Tenant acknowledges that it has taken all reasonable steps to satisfy itself that the proposed use of the premises complies with applicable laws and regulations. The Tenant shall not hold the Landlord responsible for any losses or damages incurred by the Tenant should it be determined that the proposed use is not permitted under the applicable laws and regulations. 28.0 Assignment This Lease and possession of the premises shall not be assigned, sublet or otherwise transferred in whole or in part by the Tenant to any other party without first obtaining written consent of the Landlord which consent may be unreasonably withheld. 29.0 Governing Law This Lease shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario. 30.0 No Registration of Notice The Tenant covenants that it will not register this Lease or any notice thereof against the title to the premises. 31.0 Guarantee The parties agree that this Lease Agreement shall be conditional upon the Landlord receiving an executive personal guarantee by Sonia Fernandez and Grace Brio-Rochford prepared in the form attached hereto as Schedule “A” 32.0 Entire Agreement The parties acknowledge that this Lease sets forth the entire Agreement between them with respect to the premises and that there are no promises, representations or undertakings other than as set out herein. Any offer to Lease or Agreement to Lease entered into by the Landlord and Tenant prior to the execution of this Lease shall be deemed to have been merged and extinguished in this Lease. This Lease shall not be amended or cancelled except by agreement in writing executed by all parties hereto. 33.0 Inspection The Landlord or any employee or agent of the Landlord shall have the right during business hours of the Tenant or at any time during an emergency as determined by the Landlord, to enter the premises for any of the following purposes: 14 - 620 - (a) to examine the state of maintenance, repair and decoration of the premises and the equipment and fixtures therein; and (b) to show the premises to prospective Tenants during the last three (3) months of the Term. 34.0 Year End Statements The Tenants shall within sixty (60) days after the end of each year Term of the herein Lease Agreement, provide the City with a financial statement for that previous Term of the total Operating Expenses and Gross Revenue of their business operation. 35.0 Severability Should any provision or provisions of this Lease be illegal or not enforceable, it or they shall be considered separate and severable from the Lease and its remaining provisions shall remain in force and be binding upon the parties hereto as though the said provision or provisions had never been included. 36.0 Enurement This Lease shall enure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the parties hereto and their respective representatives, successors or assigns except as herein otherwise expressly provided. 15 - 621 - 37.0 Guarantees The Landlord has entered into this lease in reliance upon the Guarantees attached hereto as Schedule “A””. In witness whereof the parties have hereunto affixed their respective seals under the hands of their proper officers duly authorized in that behalf. Witness: The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. Per: ___________________________________ Sonia Fernandes Authorized Signing Officer Per: _________________________________ Grace Brito-Rochford Authorized Signing Officer The Corporation of the City of Pickering Per: ___________________________________ Kevin Ashe Mayor, City of Pickering Authorized Signing Officer Per: ___________________________________ Susan Cassel City Clerk, City of Pickering Authorized Signing Officer 16 - 622 - Schedule “A” Guarantee Landlord: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Tenant: The Wellness Health Centre Ltd. Leased Premises: Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Lease Dated: as of January 1, 2023 Guarantors: Sonia Fernandes and Grace Brito-Rochford Address of Guarantors: Grace Brito-Rochford 1007 Coldstream Drive Oshawa, ON L1K 0J8 Email: gracegalvao71@hotmail.com Sonia Fernandes 1583 Rockaway Street Oshawa, ON L1K 0C9 In consideration of the sum of one dollar ($1.00) now paid by the Landlord to the guarantors and other valuable consideration (the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged), the guarantors covenant with the Landlord that the Tenant shall duly perform and observe each and every covenant, proviso, condition and agreement in the Lease on the part of the Tenant to be performed and observed, including the payment of rent and all other amounts agreed to be paid or payable under the Lease on the days and at the times and in the manner therein specified and that if any default be made by the Tenant, whether in payment of rent or other amounts from time to time falling due thereunder as and when they become due and payable or in the performance or observance of any of the covenants, provisos, conditions or agreements which under the terms of the Lease are to be performed or observed by the Tenant, the guarantors shall forthwith pay to the Landlord on demand such rent and other amounts in respect of which such default shall have occurred and all damages resulting from the non-observance or non- performance of any such covenants, provisos, conditions or agreements. The guarantors each covenant with the Landlord that the guarantors are jointly and severally bound with the Tenant for the fulfillment of all obligations of the Tenant under the Lease. In the enforcement of its rights thereunder, the Landlord may proceed against the guarantors or either of them, as if they were each named as a Tenant in the Lease. 1. 2. 3. The guarantors hereby waive any right to require the Landlord to proceed against the Tenant or to proceed against or to exhaust any security held from the Tenant 17 - 623 - or to pursue any other remedy whatsoever which may be available to the Landlord, before proceeding against the guarantors or either of them. 4. None of the following, or any combination thereof, shall release, discharge or in any way change or reduce the obligations of either guarantor under this Guarantee: (a) neglect or forbearance of the Landlord in endeavoring to obtain payment of the rent or the amounts required to be paid under the Lease, as and when due; (b) delay by Landlord in enforcing performance or observance of the covenants, provisos, conditions or agreements to be performed or observed by the Tenant under the Lease; (c) any extension of time given by the Landlord to the Tenant, or any other act or failure to act of or by the Landlord; (d) the Landlord permitting or consenting to any assignment or encumbering of the Lease by the Tenant or any subletting by the Tenant; (e) the bankruptcy or insolvency of the Tenant; (f) the dissolution of the Tenant; (g) the disclaimer of the Lease pursuant to the provisions of any statute. 5. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed thereto in the Lease. 6. Each guarantor is jointly and severally liable for the performance of all obligations imposed upon the guarantors hereunder. Signed, Sealed and Delivered ) In the presence of: ) ) ) ) Sonia Fernandes ) ) ) ________________________ Grace Brito-Rochford 18 - 624 - - 625 - Report to Council Report Number: CS 24-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Sarah Douglas-Murray Director, Community Services Subject: Community Safety and Well-Being Initiatives -East Shore Community Centre -Use as Emergency Overnight Warming Centre -Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Arena Dressing Rooms – Outreach Shower Facilities -File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 24-22 regarding the implementation of Community Safety and Well- Being Initiatives be received; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with Christian Faith Outreach Centre, set out in Attachment 1 to this report, for use of East Shore Community Centre as an Emergency Overnight Warming Centre, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with Christian Faith Outreach Centre, set out in Attachment 2 to this report, for use of the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Arena Dressing Rooms for outreach shower facilities, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: Consistent with the principles of the Durham Region Community Safety and Wellbeing Plan (CSW B Plan) and the City’s efforts to support those objectives locally, City staff are seeking Council’s approval to authorize the execution of two agreements that would enable much needed services to be delivered to those that are experiencing homelessness in our community. The Region of Durham has indicated that there is a need to, once again, provide an Emergency Overnight Warming Centre in Pickering during extreme cold weather alerts for this 2022/2023 winter season. This program was piloted last year at East Shore Community Centre. Region of Durham deploys the appropriate agencies to provide site supervision of the overnight warming centre. - 626 - CS 24-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Community Safety and Well-Being Initiatives Page 2 Additionally, the Region of Durham Street Team and DARS have identified the need for shower facilities in Pickering for those that are experiencing homelessness. City staff have identified that shower facilities can be made available at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex (CHDRC) in the Arena Dressing Rooms of the O’Brien Rink on Wednesday afternoons between 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm. Staff will be provided through Christian Faith Outreach Centre (CFOC) who will be in attendance to assist with towel and hygiene packages and will oversee the use of the facilities. They will also be able to assist with providing additional information on services available in the community and ensuring that participants are on the by name list. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s authority for the Mayor and City Clerk to execute two agreements with Christian Faith Outreach Centre that would enable the delivery of these services for the most vulnerable for the period of December 6, 2022 to April 30, 2023. Financial Implications: Durham Region will provide the financial support to the CFOC, who will provide supervision, security and all supplies required for the use of the facilities. Use of ESCC will begin at 10:00 pm Monday – Friday and 7:00 pm Saturday – Sunday, and no City of Pickering or private program rentals will be affected. Use of CHDRC Arena dressing rooms will be on daytime weekdays when the facility is not being utilized for rentals or programs. Discussion: The Region of Durham’s Community Safety and Well-Being Plan (CSW B Plan) describes a place where everyone feels safe, has a sense of belonging, where individuals and families can meet their needs for education, health care, food, housing, income, as well as social and cultural expression. The Region of Durham has now released its final CSWB Plan, which includes the three main components required by provincial legislation – identifying priority risk factors, identifying strategies to reduce risk factors, and setting measureable outcomes. The goal of the CSWB Plan is to get the right services to the right people at the right time at the lowest cost, meaning the most efficient way. Since the adoption of the Durham Region CSWB Plan in 2021, the City of Pickering has been involved in a number of initiatives in order to support the Regional Plan, as well as working on individual goals. An ongoing concern within the community is the growing number of individuals without permanent housing. The City of Pickering’s Community Services Department staff continue to work with DARS, Region of Durham street team, Ajax Hub, CAREA and CFOC on issues related to the CSW B Plan. At this time, Region of Durham has indicated that there is a need in the community to, once again, provide an Emergency Overnight Warming Centre during extreme cold weather conditions. Durham Region has an existing service agreement with CFOC to deliver similar services at other facilities within the Region and has identified them to provide this service in Pickering. In consultation with staff, ESCC has been identified as the most preferable location. This is a continuation of the Emergency Overnight Warming Centre at ESCC that was implemented in winter 2021. Upon declaration by the Region of an extreme cold weather alert, ESCC will be staffed by CFOC, Monday to Friday, 10:00 pm – 7:00 am, and Saturday to Sunday 7:00 pm – 7:00 am for the purposes of safe overnight refuge for the homeless. As is - 627 - CS 24-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Community Safety and Well-Being Initiatives Page 3 available every winter season, the warming centre will be offered at the CHDRC or the Central Library during extreme cold weather alerts during their regular operating hours. Should the Region of Durham advise of a cold weather alert, information will be immediately provided to Corporate Communications. As well, the homeless will be provided with advance notice (starting in December), that should there be a cold weather alert, ESCC will be open overnight. Information regarding this service will also be shared through the Ajax Hub, CAREA, DARS, as well as all City of Pickering facilities and front line staff services. Additionally, DARS and the Region of Durham Street Team have identified the need for shower facilities in Pickering for those that are experiencing homelessness. In coordination with the Region of Durham and CFOC, the City has identified that shower facilities can be made available at CHDRC in the Arena Dressing Rooms of the O’Brien Rink on Wednesday afternoons between 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm. Staff will be provided through CFOC and will be in attendance to assist with towel and hygiene packages and will oversee the use of the facilities. They will also be able to assist with providing additional information on services available in the community and ensuring that participants are on the by name list. Ongoing evaluation of the program will continue, with regular discussions between CFOC, Region of Durham staff and City staff. The two agreements to enable these services to the homeless will be in place December 6, 2022 to April 30, 2023. Attachments: 1.Memorandum of Understanding – Christian Faith Outreach Centre and the City of Pickering -East Shore Community Centre for use as an Emergency Overnight Warming Centre 2.Memorandum of Understanding – Christian Faith Outreach Centre and the City of Pickering -Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Centre Arena Dressing Rooms for Outreach Shower Facilities Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Sharon Milton Manager, Recreational Services Sarah Douglas-Murray Director, Community Services SDM:sm - 628 - CS 24-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Community Safety and Well-Being Initiatives Page 4 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 629 - Memorandum of Understanding Between: Christian Faith Outreach Centre (“CFOC”) -and – The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the “City”) WHEREAS the Region of Durham (the “Region”) wishes to provide access to an Emergency Overnight Warming Centre, during extreme cold weather alerts, to assist homeless residents in the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS the City has space available at the East Shore Community Centre (ESCC) Gymnasium at 910 Liverpool Road, Pickering, ON L1W 1S6 (the “Facility”) that suits that purpose; AND WHEREAS the City has agreed to allow CFOC to use portions of the Facility as set out in Schedule “A” attached hereto (the “Useable Space”) subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and on the basis that there be no financial risk incurred by the City by proceeding in this manner and that all costs, including, but not limited to, staffing and security of the Useable Space is at the sole expense of CFOC; NOW THEREFORE the Parties agree as follows: TERM: 1.The term of the Agreement shall be for five (5) months commencing December 6, 2022, and expiring April 30, 2023. 2.The City of Pickering and CFOC will continue to evaluate use monthly, commencing January 6, 2023. Ongoing use will be determined following monthly evaluation of numbers using the Usable Space. 3.Notwithstanding the foregoing, either party may terminate this Agreement, for any reason, on fifteen (15) days written notice. USE OF SPACE: 4.The Useable Space will be used as an Emergency Overnight Warming Centre, during extreme cold weather alerts, for homeless residents in the City of Pickering who may otherwise not have access to facilities. The Usable Space includes Room #4 and non-exclusive access to washrooms at ESCC. The Usable Space does not include access to showers or kitchen facilities (which are not available at this location). The Usable Space shall not be used for storage of personal items. Any items belonging to attendees of the CFOC must be removed when the attendee leaves the Usable Space. Attachment #1 to Report CS 24-22 - 630 - 5.CFOC will supply, at its sole expense, all materials and equipment required to facilitate the overnight warming centre. Such materials and equipment may be stored in the Useable Space. 6.CFOC will contract, at its sole expense, third parties to perform supervision and to ensure the Facility and the Useable Space are maintained and that all attendees are supported. 7.CFOC’s third party supervisors will be responsible for vacating the Facility by 7:00 am each day. 8.The City of Pickering will perform cleaning (including appropriate sanitization due to COVID-19), at its sole expense, each day beginning at 7 am. 9.CFOC will contract, at its sole expense, third party security services to the satisfaction of the City. Security will be on site at all times during operating hours. 10.The Useable Space will be made available for use by CFOC, during extreme cold weather alerts up to 7 days per week, Monday – Friday from 10:00 pm to 7:00 am and Saturday – Sunday from 7:00 pm to 7:00 am. 11.CFOC shall use the Useable Space in accordance with this Agreement and all applicable laws, by- laws, regulations and public health orders. CFOC may only use the Usable Space for the overnight safety of the homeless. No other programs or services may be offered at or from the Useable Space or the Facility. DAMAGES, REPAIRS, AND ALTERATIONS: 12.CFOC shall be responsible for any and all losses, costs, liabilities and damages to the Facility and the Useable Space resulting from CFOC’s use. 15.CFOC shall make no temporary or permanent modifications of any kind to the Facility or the Useable Space. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY: 16.CFOC shall secure at its own expense and keep in effect during the term of this Agreement: (a)commercial general liability that includes Tenants Legal Liability with a minimum limit of $5,000,000 per occurrence; and (b)bodily injury and property damage insurance with a minimum limit of $5,000,000 per occurrence; and - 631 - ____________________________________________ (c)the City shall be included as an additional insured in said insurance policy. CFOC shall furnish to the City certificates of insurance as evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Agreement. The certificates of insurance shall provide that the insurance company will give a thirty (30) day notice to the City if the insurance is cancelled or materially changed. 17.CFOC shall indemnify and save harmless the City from and against all losses, claims, actions, damages, liability and expenses (including any legal expenses incurred by the City) arising from or in connection with the use of, or presence in, the Facility and the Useable Space by CFOC, any person invited or allowed into the Facility and the Useable Space by CFOC, or any person for whom CFOC is responsible. 18.CFOC waives any and all claims against, releases from liability and agrees not to sue the City, its members of Council, officers, employees, agents and representatives, for any personal injury, death, property damage or any other loss sustained by CFOC or for which CFOC may be responsible arising out of, or in connection with CFOC’s use of, or presence in, the Facility and the Useable Space. 19.Neither party accepts any responsibility for losses nor damages to personal property of any person invited or allowed access to the Facility and the Useable Space by CFOC. NO WARRANTY: 20.The City makes no express or implied warranty with regard to the safety of the Facility and the Useable Space or its fitness for CFOC’s purpose. 21.CFOC acknowledges and agrees that it accepts the Facility and the Useable Space in “as is where is” condition and at its own risk and expense. GENERAL: 22.This Agreement is non-transferable. 23.The recitals to this Agreement are true in substance and fact and are incorporated herein. Signed this ______________ day of _______________, 2022. Christian Faith Outreach Centre (CFOC) Name: Position: I have the authority to bind Christian Faith Outreach Centre (CFOC) - 632 - _____________________________________________ The Corporation of the City of Pickering Name: Position: I have the authority to bind The Corporation of the City of Pickering. Schedule “A” List of Useable Space [to be inserted] - 633 - 4DIFEVMF"-JTUPG6TBCMF4QBDF - 634 - Memorandum of Understanding Between: The Christian Faith Outreach Centre (the “CFOC”) -and – The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the “City”) WHEREAS the CFOC wishes to provide access to washroom and shower facilities to assist the homeless population within the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS the City has space available at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex (CHDRC) Arena, facility located at 1867 Valleyfarm Road, Pickering, ON L1V 6K7, (the “Facility”) that suits the purpose; AND WHEREAS the City has agreed to allow the CFOC to use portions of the Facility as set out in Schedule “A” attached hereto (the “Useable Space”) subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and on the basis that there be no financial risk incurred by the City by proceeding in this manner and that all costs, including, but not limited to, security and supplies, for the Useable Space is at the sole expense of the CFOC; NOW THEREFORE the Parties agree as follows: TERM: 1.The term of the Agreement shall be for six (6) months commencing November 9, 2022, and expiring April 30, 2023. 2.The Agreement will automatically renew for subsequent one-month terms, until the CFOC gives notice of termination. 3.Notwithstanding the foregoing, either party may terminate the Agreement, for any reason, on fifteen (15) days written notice. 4.Following the expiry or earlier termination of this Agreement, the CFOC shall restore the Facility and the Useable Space to the condition they were in at the commencement of the term. USE OF SPACE: 5.The Useable Space will be used as washroom and shower access for homeless residents in the City of Pickering who may otherwise not have access to washroom and shower facilities. Attachment #2 to Report CS 24-22 - 635 - 6. The CFOC will contract, at its sole expense, staff from the Ajax Hub to perform supervisory services to ensure the Facility and the Useable Space are maintained to the satisfaction of the City. 7. The City will provide maintenance and cleaning of the Facility prior to (1:00 pm), and immediately after, (3:00 pm), following the shower/washroom use. 8. The Useable Space will be accessible 1 day per week, Wednesdays, with hours 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm - 2 hours each week. Supervision will be on site at all times during operating hours. 9. The CFOC shall use the Useable Space in accordance with all applicable municipal, provincial, and federal laws. DAMAGES, REPAIRS, AND ALTERATIONS: 9. The CFOC shall be responsible for all damages to the Facility and the Useable Space in support of or as a result of the use. 10. The CFOC shall make no temporary or permanent modifications to the Facility or the Useable Space without the prior written consent of the City, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY: 11. The CFOC shall secure at its own expense and keep in effect during the term of this Agreement: (a) commercial general liability that includes Tenants Legal Liability with a minimum limit of $5,000,000 per occurrence; (b) bodily injury and property damage insurance with a minimum limit of $5,000,000 per occurrence; and (c) the City shall be included as an additional insured in said insurance policy. The CFOC shall furnish to the City certificates of insurance as evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Agreement. The certificates of insurance shall provide that the insurance company will give a thirty (30) day notice to the City if the insurance is canceled or materially changed. 12. The CFOC shall indemnify and save harmless the City from and against all losses, claims, actions, damages, liability and expenses (including any legal expenses incurred by the City) arising from or in connection with the use of, or presence in, the Facility and the Useable Space by the CFOC, any person invited or allowed into the Facility and the Useable Space by the CFOC, or any person for whom the CFOC is responsible. - 636 - ____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ 13. The CFOC waives any and all claims against, releases from liability and agrees not to sue the City, its members of Council, officers, employees, agents and representatives, for any personal injury, death, property damage or any other loss sustained by the CFOC or for which the CFOC may be responsible arising out of, or in connection with the CFOC’s use of, or presence in, the Facility and the Useable Space. 14. Neither party accepts any responsibility for losses or damages to personal property of any person invited or allowed access to the Facility and the Useable Space by the CFOC. NO WARRANTY: 15. The City makes no warranty expressed or implied with regard to the safety of the Facility and the Useable Space or its fitness for the CFOC’s purpose. 16. The CFOC acknowledges and agrees that it accepts the Facility and the Useable Space “as is where is” at its own risk and expense. GENERAL: 17. This Agreement is non-transferable. 18. The recitals to this Agreement are true in substance and fact and are incorporated herein. Signed this ______________ day of _______________, 2022. The Christian Faith Outreach Centre Name: Position: I have the authority to bind The Christian Faith Outreach Centre The Corporation of the City of Pickering Name: Position: I have the authority to bind The Corporation of the City of Pickering. Schedule “A” - 637 - List of Useable Space City of Pickering – Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex – Arena – Delaney Rink Dressing Rooms – 4, 5, 6 and Referee Dressing Room (Accessible) - 638 - Schedule A - List of Usable Space - 639 - Report to Council Report Number: CS 25-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Sarah Douglas-Murray Director, Community Services Subject: Recreation User Fee Study & Pricing Policy -Consulting Services -File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1.That Council approve the hiring of Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker- Reid & Associates to conduct a Recreation User Fee Study and develop a Pricing Policy for Recreation Services in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 10.03 (c), as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 2.That the fee proposal submitted by Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates to conduct a Recreation User Fee Study and develop a Pricing Policy for Recreation Service in the amount of $67,990.00 (HST excluded) or $76,828.70 (HST included) be accepted; 3.That the total gross project cost of $76,828.70 (HST included) and the total net project cost of $69,187.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4.That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $69,187.00 as approved in the 2022 Current Budget to be funded as follows: a)The sum of $63,790.00 to be funded from Property Taxes; b)The sum of $5,397.00 to be funded from the Community Benefit Charges Reserve Fund; and, 5.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The City of Pickering Recreation & Parks Master Plan was approved by Pickering Council in January 2018 (as per Council Resolution #389/18). The Master Plan included the recommendation for the City to undertake a study to articulate the costs to provide individual units of service (cost for set of swim lessons, maintain a sports field, etc.) in order to develop an equitable and fair-minded Pricing Policy. As such, funds in the amount of $70,400.00 were included in the 2022 Current Budget to undertake a Fair Minded Pricing Policy. At this time, staff are seeking Council’s approval to retain Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates at a total gross project cost of $76,828.70 - 640 - CS 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Recreation User Fee Study & Pricing Policy Page 2 (HST included) to conduct a Recreation User Fee Study and develop a Pricing Policy for Recreation Services. Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. completed the Recreation and Parks Master Plan for the City of Pickering and have completed several similar studies for other municipalities within the province. The Recreation User Fee Study is required in order for the Community Services Department to demonstrate the development of fair and transparent rates, and equitable access to all services. The Recreation User Fee Study will review and assess current fees, costs, demographics, socioeconomics, participation and municipal benchmarks to develop a thorough understanding of the current state. The Recreation User Fee Study will also develop a scalable cost recovery model for recreational facilities, programs, services and user fees while taking into consideration age groups, residents and non-residents, community and private groups, subsidy levels, industry standards competition and indirect costs. The Recreation User Fee Study will then inform the development of a Pricing Policy that will provide the framework for fees as well as process for monitoring and fee updates. The development of the Pricing Policy will serve to offer a defensible rate and fee schedule for programs and services and as well to ensure the overarching principles are supported by the community. This is a significant undertaking given that there are hundreds of programs and services offered by the Department. This project addresses the need for the City to ensure that recreation, museum, and special event fees reflect the cost to provide the services, and that lower cost recovery levels reflect the social values of the community. Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates are leaders in community engagement. Their consultation programs are designed to achieve maximum input from all facets of the community, and utilize a variety of tools and exercises to solicit meaningful feedback from community partners, staff, Council and residents. While both Consulting Teams are well known for its parks and recreation master plan work throughout the Province, they are also experts in the delivery of parks and recreation services which has encompassed the review and development of a variety of policies. Some of their recent work and relevant work to the City’s project includes: • Town of Aurora Pricing Policy and Access to Recreation Policy, 2020 • City of Windsor Pricing and User Fee Policy, 2019 • Municipality of Middlesex Centre Rates & Fees Study, 2019 Financial Implications: The 2022 Current Budget (10200-502230) includes $70,400.00 for consulting for a Fair Minded Price Policy. The quotation from Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates is $67,990.00 plus HST. 1. Proposal Amount Quotation $67,990.00 HST (13%) 8,838.70 Total $76,828.70 - 641 - CS 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Recreation User Fee Study & Pricing Policy Page 3 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary Quotation $67,990.00 HST (13%) 8,839.00 Total Gross Project Cost $76,829.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (7,642.00) Total Net Project Cost $69,187.00 3. Approved Source of Funds Approved Code Source of Funds 2022 Budget Required 502230.10200 Development Charges $70,400.00 $0.00 – Growth Studies RF 502230.10200 Property Taxes 0.00 63,790.00 502230.10200 Community Benefit Charges -RF 0.00 5,397.00 Total Funds $70,400.00 $69,187.00 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $1,213.00 The project was included in the 2022 Current Budget to be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund. However, upon conclusion of the Development Charges (DC) and Community Benefit Charges (CBC) Background Studies this summer, funding for the Fair Minded Price Policy study was changed from DCs to CBCs. This change was due to Bill 197 - COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020, which amended the Planning Act, 1990, (section 37), that would no longer allow this type of “Study” to be funded from DC’s and instead provided the revenue tool CBC to fund costs related to arts, cultures, museum and administration services. Discussion: In accordance with the Parks & Recreation Master Plan, it was recommended that the City of Pickering articulate the costs to provide individual units of recreation services (cost for set of swim lessons, maintain a sports field, etc.) in order to develop an equitable and fair-minded Pricing Strategy. The Recreation User Fees Study will contribute to strategic goals of maintaining a fiscally sustainable system of community services facilities and programs. The City of Pickering strives to provide a sustainable mix of facilities that enhance our quality of life while balancing financial requirements to maintain the necessary infrastructure through use of partnerships, development charges, user fees, sponsorships, tax base funding and other innovative financial - 642 - CS 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Recreation User Fee Study & Pricing Policy Page 4 tools to ensure facilities are available to a broad range of residents. The study will develop a vision and set of guiding principles that would address the issues of equity, fair-minded cost recovery, and continuing to include residents of all ages. It will also ensure that user fees are a reflection of true costs and that an Access Policy addresses affordability for those with lower income backgrounds. The City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan recommended that staff work to fully understand the costs of programs and services before a pricing policy can outline what percentage of the costs should be recovered through rates and fees. The following provides a framework to assist Pickering in setting a fair-minded pricing policy: • Note that all programs and services should have a cost associated with providing them whether they are fee based or are provided at no cost. Further, all costs in the Department should be associated with providing a program or a service; • Articulate all programs and service and the administrative supports required to provide them including, but not limited to, administrative support, the development and distribution of the City Leisure Guide, promotions, etc.; • Differentiate between direct and indirect costs including hourly facility costs; • Articulate the direct and indirect (facility and overhead operating costs) for each program type. Determine an hourly cost and program/service cost (based on the number of hours a program is designed for and the cost of annual and other membership types); and, • Based on the actual costs as determined, calculate the current cost recovery rates per program and membership type. The objective of the study is to provide strategic direction regarding user fees for indoor recreational facilities such as arenas ice/floor, outdoor facilities such as sports fields and parks, indoor and outdoor recreational programs, memberships and services, admissions, facility rental fees, as well as, charge backs to community organizations for special events in the City of Pickering. The specific scope of the study includes: Facility Rentals • Ice/floor • Parks – gazebos, picnic shelters, general • Sports Fields • Pools • Banquet Halls & Meeting Rooms • Gymnasiums • Equipment Rentals Admissions • Swimming • Racquet Sports • Health club • Gym • Aquafit • Skating • Public Tours • Museum programs Leased Spaces • Storage • Tennis Clubs • Community Centres • Concessions Programs (pre-school, children, youth, adult & older adult) Services Ticketed & Community Events - 643 - CS 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Recreation User Fee Study & Pricing Policy Page 5 • Fitness • Personal & Small Group • Senior’s Events • Sport Training • Pickering Museum Village • Leisure • Child Supervision Events • Aquatics, learn to swim, leadership courses, first • Community Centre Memberships • Free Community Events, i.e., Waterfront Concerts aid • Swim Passes • Guest Speakers & • Educational Outreach • Free Teen Stuff Presentations Programs • Camps • Museum programs The process outlined in the proposal from Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates will engage stakeholders and the public in the setting of fair-minded fees and further allow City staff to better understand the process of setting fees in the future. An important part of our proposed methodology is to form a “Reference Group” consisting of City staff, stakeholders of the local recreation system, and partners involved in delivery of programs and services. The project will be completed over a six to nine month period in three stages: Phase One: Project Initiation Phase Two: Development of the Pricing Policy Phase Three: Refinement and Finalization The Community Services Department will have a better understanding of current costs and cost recovery levels for each service area. The proposal from Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. and Tucker-Reid & Associates provides an achievable methodology and will demonstrate the processes required by staff in the future in setting fees that are competitive, reflect the costs to provide the service, and consider any fiscal barriers that the public may face in accessing services. Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. is a multi-disciplinary consulting firm specializing in recreation and parks planning, municipal policy development, land use planning, project management, and public consultation. As a multi-faceted consulting firm continually challenged by diverse planning projects, Monteith Brown Planning Consultants Ltd. is a leader in the preparation of effective and pragmatic needs assessments and feasibility studies. Over the past 45 years, they have prepared over 400 parks, recreation, cultural and community services studies for municipalities and organizations throughout North America. Tucker-Reid & Associates is an innovative consulting firm specializing in strategic and operational planning with a focus on recreation, parks, sports and culture. The principal, Claire Tucker-Reid, has enjoyed a stellar career in municipal leadership positions for over 30 years and has been consulting to the industry since 2003. - 644 - CS 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Recreation User Fee Study & Pricing Policy Page 6 Attachments: None Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Jody Morris Sarah Douglas-Murray Manager, Community Services Administration Director, Community Services Original Signed By Original Signed By Jason Bekramchand Stan Karwowski Senior Financial Analyst, Director, Finance & Treasurer Capital & Debt Management SDM:jm Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 645 - Report to Council Report Number: ENG 23-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services Subject: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2 - Tender T2022-9 - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Tender No. T2022-9 for the Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2 as submitted by Orin Contractors Inc. in the total tendered amount of $2,141,350.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $3,083,771.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $2,777,031.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $2,777,031.00 as follows: a) the sum of $1,000,000.00 available budget in capital project C10320.1912 as approved in the 2021 Parks Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from Development Charges – City’s Share Reserve; b) the sum of $1,000,000.00 available budget in capital project C10320.1912 as approved in the 2021 Parks Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the Development Charges Reserve Fund – Parks & Recreation Services be increased to $1,365,244.00; c) the sum of $46,543.00 available budget in capital project C10320.1912 to be funded by a transfer from Third Party Contributions (Swim Drink Fish); d) the sum of $365,244.00 to be funded by a transfer from the Rate Stabilization Reserve to cover the remaining over expenditure; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. - 646 - ENG 23-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park, Reconstruction Phase 2 – Tender T2022-9 Page 2 Executive Summary: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park (RFBWP) is situated on land owned by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) under the Management Agreement with the City of Pickering. The first phase of implementation of the RFBWP Master Plan, which included the reconstruction of Beachpoint Promenade and associated park features at the west end of the park, were completed in 2018. Following the high water events of 2017 and 2019, the RFBWP Master Plan was slightly modified and re-endorsed by Council in November 2020. As part of the 2021 Parks Capital Budget, $2 million was approved for the implementation of the balance of works in the RFBW Park Master Plan. This budget amount includes funds for design and contract administration consulting fees, the Lake Ontario shoreline restoration work and other park and trail improvements on the west spit. In 2018, the City of Pickering received a grant from Swim Drink Fish in the amount of $200,000.00 for shoreline restoration work in Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park. The majority of funds were spent in the Phase 1 project. The balance of $46,543.00 will be used in the Phase 2 project to fund the shoreline restoration work completed by TRCA. Tender No. T2022-9, for Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2, was advertised on the City’s Bids & Tenders portal on July 28, 2022 and closed on August 31, 2022 with seven bidders responding. The low bid of $2,141,350.00 (HST included) submitted by Orin Contractors Inc. is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost which includes the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, is estimated at $3,083,771.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost is estimated at $2,777,031.00 (net of HST rebate). Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Tender No. T2022-9 $1,895,000.00 HST (13%) 246,350.00 Total Gross Tender Amount $2,141,350.00 - 647 - ENG 23-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park, Reconstruction Phase 2 – Tender T2022-9 Page 3 2. Estimated Project Cost Summary Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2 – Tender T2022-9 $1,895,000.00 Associated Costs Design & Contract Admin. Consulting (The MBTW Group) Geotechnical Investigations (GHD) Lake Ontario Shoreline Restoration (TRCA) TRCA permit fees Materials Testing Allowance 156,019.00 2,535.00 434,732.00 7,315.00 6,000.00 Contingency (12% of Tender No. T2022-9) 227,400.00 Sub Total – Costs $2,729,001.00 HST (13%) 354,770.00 Total Gross Project Cost $3,083,771.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (306,740.00) Total Net Project Cost $2,777,031.00 3. Approved Source of Funds – 2021 Parks Capital Budget Expense Code Source of Funds Budget Available Required C10320.1912.01- 504700 Reserve-DC’s City’s Share DC Reserve Fund – Parks & Recreation Services RF – Third Party Contribution Rate Stabilization Reserve $1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 46,543.00 0.00 $1,000,000.00 1,365,244.00 46,543.00 365,244.00 Total $2,046,543.00 $2,777,031.00 Net Project Cost under (over) Approved Funds ($730,488.00) The costs for the design and construction administration consulting fees for this project, including a contingency, amounting to $156,019.00 (excluding HST), were approved by Council (ENG 12-21, Resolution #600/21) and awarded to The MBTW Group. The Lake Ontario Shoreline Restoration work was approved by Council (ENG 01-22, Resolution #788/22), and completed by the TRCA during the spring of 2022, at a cost of $434,732.00 (excluding HST). These previously committed expenses are indicated as associated costs to the estimated project cost summary as outlined in Table 2. - 648 - ENG 23-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park, Reconstruction Phase 2 – Tender T2022-9 Page 4 Discussion: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park (RFBWP), is situated on land o the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) under the Management Agr with the City of Pickering. The park underwent the first phase of improvements in 20 were based on the 2012 Council endorsed RFBWP Master Plan. This work included reconstruction of Beachpoint Promenade and other features at the west end of the Following the high water events of 2017 and 2019, the RFBWP Master Plan was m endorsed by Council in November 2020. wned by eement 18 that the park. odified and As part of the 2021 Parks Capital Budget, $2 million was approved for the implementation of the balance of works in the RFBW Park Master Plan. This budget amount includes funds for design and contract administration consulting fees, the Lake Ontario shoreline restoration work and other park and trail improvements on the west spit. In 2018, the City of Pickering received a grant from Swim Drink Fish in the amount of $200,000.00 for shoreline restoration work in Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park. Of these funds, $140,000.00 was spent on plant material for the first phase of the master plan implementation. Additional funds were spent on interpretive signage in the park with $46,543.00 as the remaining balance that have been carried over to cover a portion of the shoreline restoration work that was been completed in 2022. The MBTW Group Inc. were retained to provide and coordinate the design and construction administration services for this project at a total cost of $156,019.00 (excluding HST). The Lake Ontario shoreline restoration work extended along the Phase 1 area, from the turning circle at the east end of Beachpoint Promenade, west to beyond the picnic area. The work included the removal of old cottage foundation walls and the installation of a stone revetment treatment to protect the shoreline from further erosion. An armourstone protection wall was also installed between the turning circle at the east end of Beachpoint Promenade and beach, to protect this infrastructure from wave uprush during high water levels and severe storm events. This work was completed by the TRCA during the spring of 2022, at a cost of $434,732.00 (excluding HST). The work to be completed in Tender No. T2022-9 includes the following items: • reconstruction of the maintenance access road/pedestrian path, from the round-about on Beachpoint Promenade to the Frenchman’s Bay Harbour Entrance; • installation of pedestrian level lighting along the main pedestrian path from the round-about to the canoe/kayak launch area; • removal of redundant overhead electrical lines and poles at the east end of the spit; • construction of an accessible canoe/kayak launch and dock area on Frenchman’s Bay; • installation of a shade structure adjacent to the canoe/kayak launch; • construction of a recreational fishing node on Frenchman’s Bay; • construction of secondary trails to various site features including accessible mats to the Lake Ontario beach at various locations; - 649 - ENG 23-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park, Reconstruction Phase 2 – Tender T2022-9 Page 5 •installation of site furniture; •restoration plantings and dune restoration activities; and, •habitat creation along the Frenchman’s Bay shoreline. Tender No. T2022-9, for Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2, was advertised on the City’s Bids & Tenders portal on July 28, 2022 and closed on August 31, 2022 with seven bidders responding. The low bid of $2,141,350.00 (HST included) submitted by Orin Contractors Inc. is recommended for approval. Orin Construction Inc. completed site improvement works at the Pickering Museum Village which included the reconstruction of the pathway from the Administration Building to the Village and drainage improvements at Gate 3 in 2011. The total gross project cost which includes the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, is estimated at $3,083,771.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost is estimated at $2,777,031.00 (net of HST rebate). References for Orin Contractors Inc. and their Waste Management Plan have been reviewed and are deemed acceptable by the Manager, Landscape & Parks Development. The City’s Health & Safety Policy form and current Certificate of Clearance issued by the Workplace Safety & Insurance Board have been submitted by Orin Contractors Inc. The Certificate of Insurance has been reviewed by the Division Head, Finance, and is deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staff’s review of the contractor’s previous performance on City projects and references available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Engineering Services Department recommends the acceptance of the low bid submitted Orin Contractors Inc. for Tender No. T2022-9 in the amount of $2,141,350.00 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of $2,777,031.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved. Attachments: 1.Supply & Services Memorandum dated September 1, 2022 2.Bids and Tenders – Submission Summary 3.Location Map - 650 - ENG 23-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park, Reconstruction Phase 2 – Tender T2022-9 Page 6 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Arnold Mostert, OALA Richard Holborn, P. Eng. Manager, Landscape & Parks Development Director, Engineering Services Cathy Bazinet Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Manager, Procurement Director, Finance & Treasurer AM:mjh Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by: - 651 - To: Richard Holborn September 1, 2022 Director, Engineering Services From: Cathy Bazinet Manager, Procurement Copy: Administrative Assistant, Engineering Services Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development, Engineering Services Subject: Tender No. T2022-9 Tender For Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2 Closed: Wednesday, August 31, 2022 – 2:00pm File: F-5400-001 Tender No. T2022-9 was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on July 28, 2022. Sieven (7) companies have submitted a bid for this project. A copy of the Bid Closing Submission Summary is attached. Tenders shall be irrevocable for 90 days after the official closing date and time. Orin Contractors Corp. is the compliant low bid at a value of $1,895,000.00 (excl. of HST). Pursuant to Appendix B – RFT Particulars, item E. Pre-Condition of Award (page 19 of 23), the following documentation will be requested of Orin Contractors Corp. for your review. Please advise if Supply & Services is to proceed with collecting the following documentation: (a)Performance Bond and Labour and Materials Bond (b)The City’s certificate of insurance or approved alternative form completed by the Bidder’s agent, broker or insurer; (c)A copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (d)A copy of the City’s Health and Safety Policy form currently dated and signed; (e)Waste Management Plan. A budget of $1,860,000.00 was provided to Supply & Services for this procurement. If the recommendation to award exceeds the budgeted amount, refer to Financial Control Policy Item 11 for additional instructions. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.04, the authority for the dollar limit as set out below excludes HST. Memo Attachment #1 to Report ENG 23-22 - 652 - Page 2 As such, in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.11, where the compliant quotation or tender meeting specifications and offering best value to the City is acceptable or where the highest scoring proposal is recommended and the estimated total purchase price is: c)Over $250,000, the Manager may approve the award, subject to the approval of the Director, Treasurer, CAO and Council Please include the following items in your report: 1.If item (a) is acceptable to Engineering Services 2.if Item (b) is acceptable to the Division Head, Finance 3.if Items (c) and (d) noted above are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety or designate, if required; 4.if Item (e) is acceptable to Engineering Services; 5.if the list of subcontractors is acceptable to Engineering Services; 6.any past work experience with low bidder Orin Contractors Corp. including work location; 7.without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable to Engineering Services; 8.the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; 9.the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; 10.Treasurer’s confirmation of funding; 11.related departmental approvals; and 12.related comments specific to the project. After receiving Council approval, an approved requisition will be required to proceed. Enquiries can be directed to the City’s bids&tenders portal for the unofficial bid results. Bidders will be advised of the outcome in due course. If you require further information, please feel free to contact me. CB - 653 - T2022-9 Attachment #2 to Report ENG 23-22 Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park Reconstruction Phase 2 Closing Date: Wednesday, August 31, 2022 Submission Summary Vendor City/Province Submission Name Unofficial Value or Notes ORIN CONTRACTORS CORP Concord, ON Submission 1 $1,895,000.00 Hawkins Contracting Services Limited Stouffville, Ontario Submission 1 $2,202,337.83 2220742 Ontario Ltd o/a Bronte Construction Burlington, Ontario Submission 1 $2,261,306.00 Blackstone Paving & Construction Limited Stouffville, Ontario Submission 1 $2,735,353.00 Rutherford Contracting Ltd. Aurora, Ontario Submission 1 $2,867,719.94 Mianco Group Inc.Stouffville, Ontario Submission 1 $2,979,464.00 Pine Valley Corporation Concord, Ontario Submission 1 $3,768,337.00 Witness (Print Name) Signature Date Witness (Print Name) Signature Date Witness (Print Name) Signature Date - 654 - WE S T S H O R E B O U L E V A R D YE R E M I ST R E E T LE A S I D E ST R E E T BR E E Z Y D R I V E MARK S B U R Y ROA D OKLA H O M A DRIVE SURF AVENUE CH I P M U N K S T R E E T TULLO STREET PARK CRESCENT SUNRISE AVENUE BEAC H P O I N T P R O M E N A D E MINK STREET SCALE: Engineering Services Department Rotary Frenchman's Bay West Park Phase II Master Plan ImplementationNov 10, 2022 DATE: 1:5,168 Frenchman's Bay Lake Ontario Attachment #3 to Report ENG 23-22 - 655 - Report to Council Report Number: ENG 24-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services Subject: Additional Cost for Project Management and Design Services for the Pickering Innovation Corridor - Seaton Community - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That additional project management and design services fees requested by Sabourin Kimble & Associates Ltd. in the amount of $122,000.00 (plus HST) for the change in scope of work to undertake the necessary studies and design work associated with the provision of municipal services within the Pickering Innovation Corridor, be accepted, in accordance with Purchasing Policy 10.3 (c) as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 2. That the total net project cost $1,307,616.00 be revised to $1,431,763.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to fund the revised net project cost of $1,431,763.00 from Capital Budget account C10600.1802.01 (formerly 5203.1802.6265) from the Sale of Land, and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Executive Summary: The hiring of Sabourin Kimble & Associates Ltd. (SKA) to provide project management, undertake studies and complete design work required to provide municipal services within the Pickering Innovation Corridor was endorsed by Council in May 2018 through Report CAO 04-18. The scope of work was increased and additional costs related to the assignment was approved in January 2019 through Report CAO 02-19. During approval of the 2020 Current and Capital Budgets, further additional fees were approved by Council through Recommendation 25 of Report FIN 02-20. SKA has recently requested additional fees in the amount of $122,000.00 (plus HST) in order to cover additional costs incurred to date, and to complete project management, studies and design services for the Highway 7 at Sideline 24 signalization and intersection improvements. The additional cost can be attributed to fulfilling requirements of the Ministry of Transportation, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and Department of Fisheries and Oceans for design approval of the intersection improvements. It can also be attributed to additional time requirements for cost sharing allocation services related to the municipal services component, and other aspects of the project such as landscape and environmental services. - 656 - ENG 24-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Additional Cost for Project Management and Design Services for the Pickering Innovation Corridor – Seaton Community Page 2 Financial Implications: 1. Estimated Project Costing Summary Original Proposal Amount (CAO 04-18) $590,000.00 Scope Change #1 (CAO 02-19) 270,000,00 Scope Change # 2 (FIN 02-20) 425,000.00 Subtotal $1,285,000.00 Scope Change #3 (ENG 24-22) 122,000.00 Subtotal – Revised Gross Project Cost $1,407,000.00 HST (13%) 182,910.00 Total Revised Gross Project Cost $1,589,910.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (158,147.00) Total Net Project Cost $1,431,763.00 2. Source of Funds Account Code Source of Funds Budget Required C10600.1802.01 504000 Sale of Land $2,145,505.00 $1,431,763.00 Total $2,145,505.00 $1,431,763.00 Discussion: The engineering firm of Sabourin Kimble & Associates Ltd. (SKA) was hired in May, 2018 to undertake the required studies and complete the design work to provide municipal services to the Pickering Innovation Corridor in the Seaton Community. At the time, the primary reason for initiating this work was to provide municipal services for the Kubota Canada Ltd. site, however, the services being designed benefitted other future development parcels within the Pickering Innovation Corridor. As time and work on this assignment progressed, the scope of work awarded to SKA increased, such as the required intersection improvements and signalization of Highway 7 at Sideline 24. As such, fees for SKA’s services, including project management fees, increased and additional funds were approved by Council in January 2019 and February 2020. Originally, SKA proposed to undertake the Highway 7 at Sideline 24 intersection improvements and signalization design at the same fixed percentage rate as the municipal services design, Net project cost (over) under approved funds $713,742.00 - 657 - ENG 24-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Additional Cost for Project Management and Design Services for the Pickering Innovation Corridor – Seaton Community Page 3 based on the estimated cost of construction. Over time, the complexity of the design with respect to grading, drainage, utility relocations, and lane requirements has increased. As such, SKA has requested that the fixed fee percentage rate be increased moderately to better reflect the type of infrastructure project being designed, recognizing that it is much more complex then municipal servicing for a subdivision. The estimated cost of construction work for the intersection improvements and signalization of Highway 7 and Sideline 24 has also increased over the last three years, upon which the design fee is based. In an attempt to advance the signalization of the Highway 7 at Sideline 24 intersection, a temporary signal design was completed and submitted to the Ministry of Transportation for review and approval. Although the Ministry ultimately did not accept the concept of temporary signals for operation and safety reasons, the additional design work has resulted in additional costs. All costs related to this assignment undertaken by SKA are costs allocated to the benefitting landowners within the Pickering Innovation Corridor, and are recovered through Third Party Contributions. Attachments: 1. Location Map - 658 - ENG 24-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Additional Cost for Project Management and Design Services for the Pickering Innovation Corridor –Seaton Community Page 4 Prepared/Approved/Endorsed By: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer RH:mjh Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: - 659 - - 660 - Report to Council Report Number: ENG 25-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services Subject: Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction - Tender No. T2022-12 - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Tender No. T2022-12 for Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction as submitted by Mianco Group Inc. in the total tendered amount of $1,165,015.88 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the firm of Aquafor Beech Limited be retained to provide contract administration services during construction as approved in Resolution #280/20 in the amount of $92,886.00 (HST included) as per their proposal dated November 8, 2021; 3. That the total gross project cost of $1,547,576.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $1,393,640.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $1,393,640.00 as follows: a) the sum of $1,045,230.00 (net of HST rebate) available in capital project C10575.1903.01 Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction as approved in the 2019 and 2022 Capital Budgets to be funded by a transfer from Development Charges – City’s Share Reserve; b) the sum of $348,410.00 (net of HST rebate) available in capital project C10575.1903.01 Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction as approved in the 2019 and 2022 Capital Budgets to be funded by a transfer from Development Charges – Storm Water Management Reserve Fund; and, 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: Tender No. T2022-12 was issued on Wednesday, October 5, 2022 and closed on Thursday, November 3, 2022 with ten bids submitted. The low bid submitted by Mianco Group Inc. in the amount of $1,165,015.88 (HST included) is recommended for approval. - 661 - ENG 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction Page 2 In 2020, Council Resolution #280/20 (ENG 04-20) approved Proposal No. RFP2020-2 submitted by Aquafor Beech Limited to undertake the detailed design and approvals for the Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction. The resolution also approved Aquafor Beech Limited be retained for contract administration, construction supervision and certification of works associated at the construction stage. Financial Implications 1. Tender Amount Tender No. T2022-12 $1,030,987.50 HST (13%) 134,028.38 Total Gross Tender Amount $1,165,015.88 2. Estimated Individual Project Cost Summaries Tender Amount $1,030,988.00 Associated Costs Detailed design (Aquafor Beech) $79,559.00 Geotechnical & Materials Testing 10,000.00 Contract Administration (Aquafor Beech) 82,200.00 3 year Monitoring Program 43,070.00 Construction Contingency (12%) 123,719.00 Total Project Cost $1,369,536.00 HST (13%) 178,040.00 Total Gross Project Cost $1,547,576.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (153,936.00) Total Net Project Cost $1,393,640.00 3. Approved Source of Funds Expense Code Source of Funds Budget Required C10575.1903.01-504550 C10575.1903.01-504550 Total R DC - City Share RF DC – Storm Water Management $1,300,315.00 446,885.00 $1,747,200.00 $1,045,230.00 348,410.00 $1,393,640.00 Net project cost (over) under approved funds $353,560.00 - 662 - ENG 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction Page 3 Discussion: The Frenchman’s Bay Stormwater Management Master Plan, completed in 2009, identified the Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall as one of the sites requiring restoration/enhancement measures. The Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall is located south of the Frenchman’s Bay Yacht Club (FBYC) on Sunrise Avenue (Attachment #1). The existing outfall was originally constructed in 1968 and requires reconstruction due to its poor condition. Years of sediment transport and deposition and associated coastal engineering processes that have occurred within Frenchman’s Bay (which is a coastal marsh) and flows from the West Shore community to the storm sewer outfall, have necessitated the need for regular dredging over the years by the FBYC to enable safe access from their southern dock area. The reconstruction of the outfall will improve the quality of the stormwater that is currently being discharged untreated into Frenchman’s Bay. The project will include restoration of the eroded shoreline, replacement of the storm sewer outfall and a section of storm sewer pipe, creation of a sediment forebay and installation of an oil-grit separator. Tender No. T2022-12 was issued on Wednesday, October 5, 2022 and closed on Thursday, November 3, 2022 with ten bids submitted. The low bid submitted by Mianco Group Inc. in the amount of $1,165,015.88 (HST included) is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost is estimated at $1,547,576.00 (HST included), with an estimated total net project cost of $1,393,640.00 (net of HST rebate). Award of T2022-12 to Mianco Group Inc., will be conditional upon receiving the City's Health & Safety form, Certificate of Clearance issued by the Workplace Safety & Insurance Board, Certificate of Insurance and requisite approvals. The previous work experience and references of Mianco Group Inc. have been reviewed and deemed to be acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Engineering Services Department recommends acceptance of the low bid submitted by Mianco Group Inc. for Tender No. T2022-12 in the amount of $1,165,015.88 (HST included), and the total net project cost of $1,393,640.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved. Attachments: 1. Resolution #280/20 2. Supply & Services Memorandum date November 9, 2022 3. Bids and Tenders – Submission Summary 4. Location Map - 663 - ENG 25-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction Page 4 Prepared By: Scott Booker Manager, Capital Projects & Infrastructure Cathy Bazinet Manager, Procurement DL:mjh Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by: Original signed by: Approved/Endorsed By: Original signed by: Richard Holborn, P. Eng. Director, Engineering Services Original signed by: Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer Original signed by: - 664 - Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum April 30, 2020 To: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Special Meeting of City Council held on April 27, 2020 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 04-20 Consultant Selection for Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction -Proposal No. RFP2020-2 Council Decision Resolution #280/20 1.That Proposal No. RFP2020-2 – Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction, submitted by Aquafor Beech Limited in the amount of $78,066.05 (HST included) for detailed design be accepted; 2.That the total gross project cost of $89,902.00 (HST included), including the proposal amount, a contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $80,960.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3.That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the total net project cost in the amount of $80,960.00 as follows: a)The sum of $60,720.00 to be funded by a transfer from the Development Charges – City’s Share Reserve; and, b)The sum of $20,240.00 to be funded by a transfer from the Development Charges – Stormwater Management Reserve Fund. 4.That Aquafor Beech Limited be retained for contract administration and construction supervision, at the construction stage of the project; and, 5.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Please take any action deemed necessary. Attachment #1 to Report ENG 25-22 - 665 - Susan Cassel Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Finance & Treasurer - 666 - Tender No. T2022-12 Page 1 of 2 To: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services Nov 9, 2022 From: Cathy Bazinet Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Administrative Assistant, Engineering Services Scott Booker, Manager, Capital Projects & Infrastructure, Engineering Services. Subject: Tender No. T2022-12 Tender For Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue – Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction Closed: Thursday, November 3, 2022, – 2:00 PM File: F-5400-001 T2022-12 was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on September 7, 2022. Ten (10) companies have submitted a bid for this project. A copy of the Bid Analysis is attached. Tenders shall be irrevocable for 90 days after the official closing date and time. Mianco Group Inc.is the compliant low bid at a value of $1,030,987.50. Pursuant to Appendix B – RFT Particulars, item E. Pre-Condition of Award (page 18 of 22), the following documentation will be requested of Mianco Group Inc. for your review during the evaluation stage of this tender call. Please advise if Supply & Services is to proceed with collecting the following documentation: (a) A copy of the City’s Health and Safety Policy form currently dated and signed; (b) A copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (c)The City’s certificate of insurance or approved alternative form completed by the Bidder’s agent, broker or insurer; and (d) Waste Management Plan. A budget of $1,750,000 was provided to Supply & Services for this procurement. If the recommendation to award exceeds the budgeted amount, refer to Financial Control Policy Item 11 for additional instructions. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.04, the authority for the dollar limit as set out below excludes HST. Memo Attachment #2 to Report ENG 25-22 - 667 - Tender No. T2022-12 Page 2 of 2 As such, in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.11, where the compliant quotation or tender meeting specifications and offering best value to the City is acceptable or where the highest scoring proposal is recommended and the estimated total purchase price is: (c) Over $250,000, the Manager may approve the award, subject to the approval of the Director, Treasurer, CAO and Council. Please include the following items in your report: 1. if Items (a) through (b) noted above are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety or designate, if required; 2. if Item (c) is acceptable to the Manager, Budgets & Internal Audit; 3. if the list of subcontractors is acceptable to Engineering Services; 4. if Item (d) is acceptable to Engineering Services; 5. any past work experience with low bidder Mianco Group Inc. including work location; 6. without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable to Engineering Services; 7. the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; 8. the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; 9. Treasurer’s confirmation of funding; 10. related departmental approvals; and 11. related comments specific to the project. After receiving Council approval, an approved “on-line” requisition will be required to proceed. Enquiries can be directed to the City’s bids&tenders portal for the unofficial bid results. Bidders will be advised of the outcome in due course. If you require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Services. CB - 668 - T2022-12 Breezy Drive/Sunrise Avenue – Storm Sewer Outfall Reconstruction Closing Date: Thursday, November 3, 2022 Submission Summary Vendor City/Province Submission Name Unofficial Value or Notes Mianco Group Inc.Stouffville, Ontario Submission 1 $1,030,987.50 Nick Carchidi Excavating Limited Lindsay, Ontario Submission 1 $1,069,364.91 Dig Tech Infrastructure Newtonville, Ontario Submission 1 $1,080,158.00 Ratcliff Excavating & Grading Stouffville, Ontario Submission 1 $1,119,445.00 614128 Ontario Ltd o/a Trisan Construction Schomberg, Ontario Submission 1 $1,431,620.30 Neptune Security Services Inc Mississauga, Ontario Submission 1 $1,611,059.50 Comer Group Limited Concord, Ontario Submission 1 $1,655,415.00 Primrose Contracting (Ont.) Inc.Schomberg, Ontario Submission 1 $1,659,133.16 Lancoa Contracting Inc.Caledon, Ontario Submission 1 $1,863,293.00 Elirpa Construction & Materials Ltd.Pickering, Ontario Submission 1 $3,921,063.75 Witness (Print Name)Signature Date Witness (Print Name)Signature Date Witness (Print Name)Signature Date Attachment #3 to Report ENG 25-22 - 669 - - 670 - Report to Council Report Number: FIN 15-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer Subject: 2023 Interim Spending Authority - File: F-1000-001 Recommendation: 1. That the 2023 Interim Operating Expenditures be approved at 50 percent of the prior year’s budget, including adjustments, as contained in Attachment 1, pending approval of the formal 2023 Current Budget by Council; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: Adoption of the interim current operating spending authority will provide funding authorization for the payment of salaries, overhead and such other accounts as may be necessary for the normal day-to-day operations of the City pending approval of the 2023 Current Budget. Financial Implications: Adoption of the interim current operating appropriations does not constitute approval of a formal budget but rather is required to provide funding authorization at the transitional stage. At the conclusion of the budget process, all interim current operating appropriations are nullified and replaced with the appropriations as approved by Council. Discussion: Each year, pending approval by City Council of the annual Current Budget, it is necessary to provide expenditure authority respecting the payment of accounts for the interim period from January 1 until the Budget is adopted by Council. Such authority is in the form of interim current operating appropriations to meet estimated expense requirements of the individual departments, agencies and boards . Staff are seeking approval to provide for interim spending authority for up to the first 6 months of 2023 or when Council approves the 2023 Budget, whichever occurs first. The Roads cost centre has been adjusted to reflect greater than 6 months of the annual budget due to the seasonal nature of this cost centre and past spending patterns. This has been reflected in Attachment 1. Under the same Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) requirements regarding tangible capital assets, library materials have been deemed capital and included in the Capital Budget starting from 2010. In the library business, the publishing cycle demands that materials be purchased while they are “in print”. As a result, certain materials must be purchased in a timely manner, and it is essential for the library to continue purchasing materials throughout the year. - 671 - FIN 15-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: 2023 Interim Spending Authority Page 2 On this basis, 50 percent of last’s year library capital materials has been included in the interim appropriations and reflected in Attachment 1. A minor provision has been included for small capital expenditures from current funds. Specific capital projects proposed prior to the app roval of the 2023 Capital Budget will require specific approval by Council. Attachments: 1.2023 Interim Appropriations for Current Budget Operating Expenditures Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Jason Bekramchand, CPA Stan Karwowski, CPA, CMA, MBA Senior Financial Analyst – Capital & Director, Finance & Treasurer Debt Management - 672 - City of Pickering Attachment #1 to Report FIN 15-22 2023 Interim Current Operation Appropriations Cost Centres 2022 Approved Budget 2023 (Jan. 1- June 30) Interim Appropriations 10000 Office of the CAO - Admin 1,795,057$ 897,529$ 10005 Customer Care Centre 482,458 241,229 10010 Public Affairs & Corp. Comm.1,247,053 623,527 10100 City Development - Admin 1,252,121 626,061 10105 Planning 4,912,293 2,456,147 10110 Building Services 2,165,184 1,082,592 10115 Sustainability 847,609 423,805 10120 Committee of Adjustment 10,992 5,496 10125 Heritage Pickering 17,525 8,763 10200 Cult. & Rec. - Admin.3,228,425 1,614,213 10240 Civic Centre 1,150,206 575,103 10245 Senior Citizens Centre 581,252 290,626 10205 Programs 2,782,129 1,391,065 10210 Dunbarton Pool 448,550 224,275 10215 Don Beer Arena 1,409,028 704,514 10220 Community Centres 934,310 467,155 10225 Recreation Complex - Central Core 3,687,600 1,843,800 10230 Recreation Complex - Pool 963,423 481,712 10235 Recreation Complex - Arenas 1,093,694 546,847 10250 Museum 1,915,148 957,574 10255 Pickering Arts Centre - - 10325 Operations - Admin.1,501,554 750,777 10300 Public Works - Admin.1,182,925 591,463 10305 Property Maintenance 1,445,018 722,509 10310 Fleet Services 2,085,597 1,251,358 10315 Roads 8,583,303 4,291,652 10320 Parks 5,454,925 2,727,463 10405 Information Technology 3,314,196 1,657,098 10400 Legal Services 741,176 370,588 10410 Clerks Office 511,545 255,773 10415 Records Management & Elections 590,832 295,416 10420 Print Shop/Mail Room 555,357 277,679 10425 By-law 1,880,347 940,174 10430 Animal Services 696,309 348,155 10500 Engineering Services - Admin.3,112,605 1,556,303 10505 Crossing Guards 424,400 212,200 10510 Water Resources & Development Services 2,297,464 1,148,732 10515 Sidewalks 395,590 197,795 10520 Street Lights 1,081,780 540,890 10600 Finance 4,823,737 2,411,869 10605 Supply & Services 478,582 239,291 10700 Fire Protection 18,922,854 9,461,427 10705 Emergency Operations 178,979 89,490 10800 Human Resources 1,405,552 702,776 10805 Health & Safety 170,061 85,031 10900 Libraries 6,283,410 3,141,705 Gen Govt -Various 30,047,702 13,186,742 Capital -Library Materials 295,000 147,500 Capital -Equipment & Furniture - 200,000 TOTAL 129,384,857 63,263,889 - 673 - Report to Council Report Number: FIN 16-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer Subject: 2023 Temporary Borrowing By-law - File: F-1000-001 Recommendation: 1. That the temporary borrowing limit of $63 million be established to meet 2023 current expenditures pending receipt of taxes and other revenues for the period of January 1 to September 30, 2023 inclusive, and $32 million thereafter until December 31, 2023; 2. That the temporary borrowing limit for capital purposes for 2023 be established at $160 million; 3. That the attached draft By-law providing for the temporary borrowing of monies be enacted; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: Staff recommend that Council approve temporary 2023 borrowing limits as set out in the above recommendations. Council approval is required to undertake temporary borrowings, if necessary, for current operations and capital projects in order to meet the expenses of the City for 2023, until the taxes are collected and other revenues are received. Approval is always sought at the end of the City’s fiscal (calendar) year in order to be prepared, in the event that loans are necessary, as we proceed into the new year. The approval of this report and the attached By-law will provide the City with financial flexibility to deal with unanticipated negative events. Put another way, this report provides the City with a financial safety net. Financial Implications: At this time, it is difficult to estimate the interest costs as it is uncertain how much temporary financing may be required and for how long. The City will undertake external borrowing from The Regional Municipality of Durham in 2023 for approved capital expenditures. For current purposes, the $56 million limit for January 1 to September 30, 2022 has been increased to $63 million for January 1 to September 30, 2023 and the $28 million limit for October 1 to December 31, 2022 has been increased to $32 million for October 1 to December 31, 2023. The limit for capital purposes for 2023 has been established at $160 million based on the draft 2023 Capital Budget forecast dated October 5, 2022. The actual amount to borrow may have to be adjusted once the 2023 Capital Budget has been approved by Council. - 674 - FIN 16-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: 2023 Temporary Borrowing By-law Page 2 Discussion: The borrowing of funds for current and capital purposes may become necessary in the normal course of operations during 2023. Under Section 407 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended (the “Act”), Council may pass a by-law to provide for the temporary borrowing of funds to meet current operating expenditures pending receipt of taxes and other revenues of the City. Under the Act, the Corporation may also undertake temporary borrowings under individual project approvals, and for capital projects, pending permanent financing. Current Budget Financing The amount of such temporary borrowing outstanding at any one time is limited by the Act, unless otherwise approved by the Ontario Municipal Board, to 50 percent of the estimated annual revenues from January 1 to September 30 and to 25 percent thereafter. Until the current year’s estimates are adopted, the limitation may be calculated upon the revenues set forth in the estimates adopted for the preceding year. Based upon the 2023 estimates of the Corporation, the allowable level of temporary borrowing outstanding under the Act is estimated at $63 million from January 1 to September 30 and $32 million thereafter. The requested $63 million should be sufficient to meet the current expenditures of the City until the levies for 2023 are received. It is expected that this amount will provide a sufficient level of temporary borrowings, taking into account the potential effects of taxation legislation and its impact on cash flows. Capital Budget Financing Borrowing for capital purposes under the Act can only be undertaken on projects approved by Council and will only be undertaken in the event that sufficient funds are not available at the time they are required. Recommendation 3 provides the authority for staff to obtain additional temporary interim financing (internal or external) for capital projects approved by Council. The $160 million capital borrowing limit should provide sufficient funds to cover the estimated 2023 capital expenditures. Attachments: 1. By-law to Authorize the Temporary Borrowing of Monies to Meet the Current and Capital Expenditures of the City of Pickering for the Year 2023 - 675 - FIN 16-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: 2023 Temporary Borrowing By-law Page 3 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Jason Bekramchand, CPA Stan Karwowski, CPA, CMA, MBA Senior Financial Analyst – Capital & Director, Finance & Treasurer Debt Management Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 676 - Attachment #1 to Report FIN 16-22 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 7975/22 Being a by-law to authorize the temporary borrowing of monies to meet the current and capital expenditures of the City of Pickering for the year 2023. Whereas Section 407(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, provides that the Council of the City of Pickering may by by-law authorize the Mayor and Treasurer of the City to borrow from time to time by way of promissory note such sums as Council may deem necessary to meet, until the taxes for the current year are collected and other revenues are received, the current expenditures of the City for the year, including the amounts required for principal and interest falling due within the year upon any debt of the City, and the sums required by law to be provided by the Council for any local board of the City; Whereas Section 407(2) limits the total of such borrowings to not exceed 50 percent of the estimated annual revenues from January 1 to September 30, 2023 and 25 percent thereafter; Whereas it is deemed necessary by the said Council to borrow the sum of $63,000,000 to meet, until the taxes for the current year are received, the current expenditures of the City for the year 2023, including the amounts and sums aforesaid; Whereas the said sum of $63,000,000 plus any similar borrowings that have not been repaid, is less than 50 percent of the total amount of the estimated revenues of the City from January 1 to September 30 as set forth in the estimates adopted by the Council for the year 2022 exclusive of revenues derivable from the sale of assets, borrowings or issues of debentures or from a surplus including arrears of levies, and $32,000,000 is less than 25 percent of the estimated revenues thereafter; Whereas the Municipal Act, 2001, provides that if a municipality has by by-law approved an undertaking to be financed in whole or in part by incurring long-term debt, the Council may by by-law authorize temporary borrowing to meet expenditures made in connection with the undertaking; and, Whereas it is deemed necessary by the Council to borrow the sum of $160,000,000 to meet the capital expenditures approved by Council. Now therefore the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.The Mayor and Director, Finance & Treasurer of the City of Pickering are hereby authorized to borrow from time to time by way of promissory notes a sum or sums not exceeding $63,000,000 to meet, until the levies for the year 2023 are received, the current expenditures of the City for such year, including the amounts required for principal and interest falling due within the year upon any debt of the City for the period January 1 to September 30, 2023 inclusive and $32,000,000 thereafter until December 31, 2023. - 677 - By-law No. 7975/22 Page 2 2.The Mayor and Director, Finance & Treasurer of the City of Pickering are hereby authorized to borrow from time to time by way of promissory notes a sum or sums not exceeding $160,000,000 to meet the capital expenditures as approved by Council of the City including the amounts required for principal and interest. 2.Any promissory notes made under the authority of this by-law shall be sealed and signed in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, 2001, and may be countersigned in writing by the Manager, Accounting Services of the Corporation in accordance with the provisions of the said Act. 3.This By-law shall come into effect on the first day of January, 2023. By-law passed this 5th day of December, 2022. _______________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ______________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 678 - Report to Council Report Number: FIN 17-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer Subject: 2021 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund - File: F-4910-001 Recommendation: It is recommended that Report FIN 17-22 from the Director, Finance & Treasurer regarding the 2021 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund be received for information. Executive Summary: Section 7(4) of the Building Code Act (the “Act”) requires the City to prepare an annual report of building permit and inspection fees and related administrative and enforcement costs. This report fulfills the requirements of Section 7(4) of the Act. This report also contains information about the City’s Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund. Financial Implications: This report contains information pertaining to the financial status of the Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund as at December 31, 2021. Discussion: In December 2005, Council approved Report PD 41-05, which enacted a new building permit process and fees under the Act. The Act requires permit fees to be accounted for, and not used to subsidize City functions other than administration and enforcement of the Act and the Ontario Building Code. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. was retained to undertake a comprehensive analysis of all Planning & Development costs, fees and legislative requirements and to develop an Activity Based Costing (ABC) model for the City. Using this information, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. recommended an increase in building permit fees to provide for cost recovery. The purpose of the Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund is to provide a source of funds for current operating budget costs during an economic downturn to offset lower building permit revenues. Without such a reserve fund, reduced growth and permit volumes during a downturn could result in severe budgetary pressures which could impair the City’s ability to enforce the Act and the Ontario Building Code. The Act requires that an annual report be prepared that includes total Building Permit fees collected in the previous 12 month period and a summary of directly and indirectly related administrative costs. Until recently, the City experienced a relatively low rate of development since the Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund was established in 2006. As a result, the accumulated shortfall for this reserve fund as of December 31, 2020 was $2.81 million. Due to an excess of building permit revenues over costs in 2021, the accumulated shortfall can be reduced by the - 679 - FIN 17-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: 2021 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Page 2 excess of revenues in the amount of $326,535, translating into a revised accumulated deficit figure of $2.48 million for the Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund. Annual Report – Building Permit Fees for the year ended December 31, 2021 Building Permit Revenue $3,515,180 Costs: Direct Costs $ (2,725,338) Indirect Costs (463,307)) Capital Costs (3,188,645) Excess (Shortfall) Revenue Over Costs $ 326,535 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Opening Balance, January 1, 2020 $ - 2021 Contribution 326,535 Transfer to the Rate Stabilization Reserve (326,535) Closing Balance, December 31, 2020 $ - Transfers to the Rate Stabilization Reserve For the majority of municipalities, building permit revenues are sufficient to cover direct and indirect operating costs. In addition, many municipalities have excess funds that are transferred to their Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund and these funds are used to cover any future operating shortfall in their Building Services section. As stated earlier, up until 2017, Pickering had historically experienced a low level of construction activity that translated into lower building permit revenues. For most municipalities, the budgeted and actual cost of their Building Services section and/or department is fully funded from building permit revenues. Historically, the Building Services section required a financial subsidy from the Pickering taxpayer to fund their operations. As of December 31, 2020, the accumulated financial subsidy or deficit was $2.81 million. From a financial perspective, this subsidy was funded from the Rate Stabilization Reserve. The City’s financing strategy is to reduce this deficit (subsidy) over time by transferring the Building Services operating surpluses to the Rate Stabilization Reserve. In 2021, Building Services had an operating surplus of $326,535 which was transferred from the Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund to the Rate Stabilization Reserve which further reduced the deficit. - 680 - FIN 17-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: 2021 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Page 3 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: James Halsall Stan Karwowski Division Head, Finance Director, Finance & Treasurer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Original Signed By: - 681 - Pl(KER]NG Report to Council Report Number: LEG 14-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Subject: Amendment to the Municipality Contribution Agreement between Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and The Corporation of the City of Pickering -File: L-4100 Recommendation: 1.That the attached Amendment to Municipality Contribution Agreement between Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and The Corporation of the City of Pickering be approved; 2.That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the said Amendment to Municipality Contribution Agreement; and 3.That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. Executive Summary: The Municipality Contribution Agreement dated February 12, 2020 between Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (“OLG”) and the City sets out the timing and calculation of payments to the City out of gaming revenues of the Pickering Casino Resort. OLG is now introducing new sports and other betting activities at the Pickering Casino Resort. This will generate additional revenues which OLG proposes to share with the City. The attached Amendment to Municipality Contribution Agreement (the “Amending Agreement”) will provide the City with a share of new sportsbook revenues. City staff recommend that the Amending Agreement be executed to increase Pickering’s share of gaming revenues. Financial Implications: The Amending Agreement will entitle the City to receive 4% of sports book revenue in each operating year of the Pickering Casino Resort. Sportsbook revenues are defined in the Amending Agreement to be gaming revenues generated from wagering on sporting events, competitive video games and other similar events. Pickering’s share of sportsbook revenues will be in addition to the share of gaming revenues already being paid to the City. Discussion: The draft Amending Agreement is Attachment No. 1 to this Report. The Agreement will govern the timing and calculation of payments to be made to the City out of gaming revenues from the Pickering Casino Resort. The Agreement will remain in effect for as long as casino games are conducted and managed by OLG at the Pickering Casino Resort site at 1802 and 1902 Bayly Street and 2028 Kellino Street (North-west corner of Bayly Street and Church Street). - 682 - LEG 14-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Amendment to the Municipality Contribution Agreement between OLG and The Corporation of the City of Pickering Page 2 Pursuant to Paragraph 2 of the Amending Agreement, the City shall be entitled to receive payment from OLG calculated as follows: (a) During the Term and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Municipality shall be entitled to receive from OLG in respect of each Operating Year the amount (the “Annual Contribution”) equal to the sum of (A) + (B) + (C), where: (A) is the aggregate (without duplication) of: (i) 5.25% of the Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year that is less than or equal to $65 million; plus (ii) 3.00% of the Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year, that is more than $65 million and less than or equal to $200 million; plus (iii) 2.50% of Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year, that is more than $200 million and less than or equal to $500 million; plus (iv) 0.50% of Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year, that is more than $500 million; (B) is 4.00% of Live Table Games Revenue, if any, generated during such Operating Year; and (C) is 4.00% of Sportsbook Revenue, if any, generated during such Operating Year. The Amending Agreement has been prepared by OLG, and contains OLG’s mandatory provisions regarding the calculation and timing of payments to a gaming host municipality. City staff recommend that Council approve the Agreement, and that it be executed on behalf of the City by the Mayor and City Clerk. Attachments: 1. Amendment to Municipality Contribution Agreement between Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and The Corporation of the City of Pickering. Prepared/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor PB:ks - 683 - LEG 14-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Amendment to the Municipality Contribution Agreement between OLG and The Corporation of the City of Pickering Page 3 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 684 - Attachment #1 to Report LEG 14-22 EXECUTED VERSION AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPALITY CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPALITY CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) made as of the ___ day of ___________________, 2022 (the “Effective Date”), BETWEEN: ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as “OLG”) - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING, with its administrative office located at 1 The Esplanade, Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 (hereinafter referred to as the “Municipality”). WHEREAS OLG and the Municipality (the “Parties” and each a “Party”) are parties to that certain Municipality Contribution Agreement dated as of February 12, 2020 (the Contribution Agreement”); AND WHEREAS capitalized terms that are used but not defined in this Amendment, including in the recitals hereto, have the respective meanings specified in the Contribution Agreement; AND WHEREAS pursuant to the Contribution Agreement, the Municipality is entitled to receive from OLG in respect of each Operating Year an Annual Contribution, which is defined and calculated by reference to a percentage of Electronic Games Revenue and Live Table Games Revenue, subject to the terms and conditions of the Contribution Agreement; AND WHEREAS OLG is willing to conduct and manage Sports and Other Betting (as defined below) at the Location, if OLG’s service provider wishes to offer Sports and Other Betting at the Location; AND WHEREAS the Parties are entering into this Amendment in accordance with Section 19 of the Contribution Agreement for the purpose of amending the manner in which the Annual Contribution will be calculated if and when Sports and Other Betting is operated at the Location; NOW THEREFORE THIS AMENDMENT WITNESSES THAT in consideration of the respective covenants and agreements of the Parties herein contained and for other good and valuable consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged by each Party), the Parties agree as follows: OLG Internal - 685 - - 2 - 1. Amendment to Section 1 (Definitions) From and after the Effective Date, Section 1 of the Contribution Agreement is hereby amended by inserting the following definitions in such Section in alphabetical order: ““Sports and Other Betting” means, (a) with respect to sports betting, the making of a bet or placing of a wager on any actual sport event or any other athletic contest, race or fight, and (b) with respect to other betting, the making of a bet or placing of a wager on (i) video games that are played competitively, (ii) any non- sporting event (for greater certainty, other than Electronic Games and Live Table Games) where real-world factual occurrences are the contingency on which an outcome is determined (“Novelty Events”), and (iii) any pay-to-play sport betting product that allows participants to assemble a virtual team composed of real players in a given sport and compete against other virtual teams based on the performance of those players in real matches. The making of a bet or placing of a wager on horse racing or on a computer- generated presentation of a random number draw that provides sport-like visual presentation for entertainment purposes only, so that the outcome of the “event” is determined by a random number generator rather actual sports, players or Novelty Events, does not constitute Sports and Other Betting;” ““Sportsbook Revenue” means, for any period, the sum of net revenue generated from Sports and Other Betting at the Location, if any, calculated in accordance with International Financial reporting Standards or such other Canadian generally accepted accounting principles as OLG adopts from time to time in its sole discretion. For greater certainty, the Sportsbook Revenue will only include the net revenue generated from Sports and Other Betting at the Location and will not include any revenue whatsoever from other products or services provided by OLG at the Location;” 2. Amendments to Section 3 (Payments) From and after the Effective Date, Section 3(a) of the Contribution Agreement is amended by deleting the provisions thereof in their entirety and replacing them with the following: “3 Payments (a) During the Term and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Municipality shall be entitled to receive from OLG in respect of each Operating Year the amount (the “Annual Contribution”) equal to the sum of (A) + (B) + (C), where: (A) is the aggregate (without duplication) of: OLG Internal - 686 - - 3 - (i) 5.25% of the Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year that is less than or equal to $65 million; plus (ii) 3.00% of the Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year, that is more than $65 million and less than or equal to $200 million; plus (iii) 2.50% of Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year, that is more than $200 million and less than or equal to $500 million; plus (iv) 0.50% of Electronic Games Revenue, if any, generated in such Operating Year, that is more than $500 million; (B) is 4.00% of Live Table Games Revenue, if any, generated during such Operating Year; and (C) is 4.00% of Sportsbook Revenue, if any, generated during such Operating Year.” 3. Amendment to Exhibit A (Calculation of Annual Contribution) From and after the Effective Date, Exhibit A of the Agreement is amended by deleting the provisions thereof in their entirety and replacing them with Exhibit A attached to this Amendment. 4. Effect of Amendment on Contribution Agreement Except as modified by this Amendment, the Contribution Agreement remains unchanged and in full force and effect. 5. Electronic Execution Delivery of an executed signature page to this Amendment by either Party by electronic transmission will be as effective as delivery of a manually executed copy of this Amendment by such Party. [The next page is the signature page.] OLG Internal - 687 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the Effective Date. ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING CORPORATION by Name: Title: Date: (“I have the authority to bind OLG.”) CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING Name: Title: Date: Name: Title: Date: (“I/We have the authority to bind the Municipality.”) OLG Internal - 688 - EXHIBIT A Calculation of Annual Contribution For example and by way of illustration only: if the Electronic Games Revenue, the Live Table Games Revenue and the Sportsbook Revenue for an Operating Year is $650 million, $100 million and $10 million respectively and as further described in Table A below, then the applicable Annual Contribution for such Operating Year would be $20,112,500. TABLE A Electronic Games Revenue (in millions) Live Table Games Revenue (in millions) Sportsbook Revenue (in millions) Annual Contribution Quarterly Payment (in millions) Operating Year Quarter No. 1 (March 1 – June 30) $100 $25 $2.5 [(0.0525 x $65) + (0.03 x $35)] + [0.04 x $25] + [0.04 x $2.5] = $5.5625 Operating Year Quarter No. 2 (July 1 – September 30) $175 $22 $2.2 [(0.03 x $100) + (0.025 x $75)] + [0.04 x $22] + [0.04 x $2.2] = $5.843 Operating Year Quarter No. 3 (October 1 – December 31) $170 $23 $2.3 [0.025 x $170] + [0.04 x $23] + [0.04 x $2.3] = $5.262 Operating Year Quarter No. 4 (January 1 – March 31) $205 $30 $3.0 [(0.025 x $55) + (0.005 x $150)] + [0.04 x $30] + [0.04 x $3.0] = $3.445 Total $650 $100 $10 $20.1125 OLG Internal - 689 - Report to Council Report Number: OPS 11-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Brian Duffield Director, Operations Subject: 2023 Pre-Budget Approval Purchase Order for Supply & Delivery of One Gradall Hydroscopic Excavator -File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That the quotation submitted by Amaco Equipment, dated July 7, 2022, in the amount of $767,270.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $767,270.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost of $690,950.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) 2023 pre-budget funding approval in the amount of $770,000.00 from the 2023 Roads Capital Budget from the Major Equipment Reserve; b) The Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions, or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s pre-budget approval to enter into a contract with Amaco Equipment for the Pre-Approval Purchase Order for Supply & Delivery of One Gradall Hydroscopic Excavator. The 2023 Capital Budget submission includes the life cycle replacement of one 2005 Gradall Hydroscopic Excavator, unit #114, which is a heavy excavator essential for roadwork and ditching. This 17 year old piece of equipment has reached the end of its useful life cycle and is scheduled for replacement. Extending the life cycle any longer is not feasible as major component breakdowns and repairs are likely and would be prohibitively expensive along with long periods of down time and loss of essential service. - 690 - OPS 11-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Pre-Approval Purchase Order for Supply & Delivery Page 2 of One Hydroscopic Excavator The pricing for the 2023 draft Capital Budget has been prepared as accurately as possible and reflects current volatile market conditions. To ensure the submitted budget for 2023 reflects current market costs, staff obtained a quote from Amaco Equipment that confirmed a current value amount of $767,270.00 for a 2022 Gradall Hydroscopic Excavator. Amaco Equipment has indicated that they expect a 21 percent increase for the 2023 model year based on steel sur- charges as base rate price increase, and further increases occur due to the US exchange rate. This increase will add $161,167.00 to the purchase of a 2023 Gradall Hydroscopic Excavator. Gradall Industries is a Vendor of Record with Canoe Procurement Group, a collaborative agency which the City is a member of, and therefore, meets the criteria of a Cooperative Purchase as per Section 13.01 of the Purchasing Policy. Amaco Construction Equipment Inc. is the sole distributor of Gradall in Ontario and therefore allows the City to seek a quotation from Amaco Construction Equipment Inc. Operations are seeking approval to work with Supply & Services and request pre-budget approval to proceed with issuing a purchase order to Amaco Construction Equipment Inc. in order to secure 2022 pricing and protect the City against potential inflation price increases, estimate at $161,167.00 in 2023. Financial Implications: 1. Quotation Amount Quotation $679,000.00 HST (13%) 88,270.00 Total Gross Tender Cost 767,270.00 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary Quotation $679,000.00 Total Project Cost $679,000.00 HST (13%) 88,270.00 Total Gross Project Costs $767,270.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (76,320.00) Total Net Project Costs $690,950.00 3. Approved Source of Funds -Operations Centre Capital Budget Pre-Approved Code Source of Funds Budget Funds Required C10315.2304.01 Major Equipment Reserve $770,000.00 $690,950.00 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $79,050.00 - 691 - OPS 11-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Pre-Approval Purchase Order for Supply & Delivery Page 3 of One Hydroscopic Excavator Discussion: The 2023 Capital Budget submission includes the life cycle replacement of a Hydroscopic Excavator, unit #114 (2005 Gradall). This is a 17 year old piece of equipment that has reached the end of its useful life cycle and is scheduled for replacement. Over the last two years in service, Fleet Operations has spent over $40,000.00 in repairs. Continued maintenance and repair costs are expected to double in the upcoming years as this unit continues to age. Entering into a contract to purchase a new Gradall Hydroscopic Excavator prior to 2023 budget approval will save the City approximately $161,167.00 in potential inflation costs in 2023. Attachment: 1. Quotation from Amaco Equipment dated July 7, 2022 Prepared By: Original Signed By: Matt Currer Manager, Fleet Operations Original Signed By: Brian Duffield Director, Operations BD:mc Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Cathy Bazinet Manager, Procurement Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 692 - SAME AS BELOW 01 - AMACO 07/07/2022 15:58:29 (O) 1 02 PICKE001 9054204616 A01030 CITY OF PICKERING TBD ONE THE ESPLANADE PICKERING ON L1V 6K7 DAVID BRIDLE DBR / _3B Attention: Matthew Currer Description ** Q U O T E ** EXPIRY DATE: 12/31/2022 Amount NEW GRADALL 2022 XL4100 V 6X4 HIGHWAY SPEED WHEELED 679000.00 EXCAVATOR ** OPTIONS INCLUDED: ** HYDRAULIC EXCAVATOR, REMOTE, HIGHWAY SPEED 6X4 Beacon Warning Light LED Amber - Per PA DOT Spec EQN-120C Foot Pedal Operated Auxiliary Hydraulics UniDirectional Flow Low Pressure Aux. Return To Tank Seat Belt Upper w/Shoulder Restraint $320.00 $320.00 Sun Visor - Upper Cab Air Restriction Gauge - Chassis Cab AM/FM Stereo Radio With Weatherband - Beacon Light -LED - Chassis - w/Branch Guard Camera System Left Hand Rear Step ** OPTIONS NOT INCLUDED: ** 72" DITCHING BUCKET--$9,700 FIXED THUMB GRAPPLE--$15,400 LIMB SHEAR--$18,900 Sale # 01 Subtotal: 679000.00 ON HST: 88270.00 TOTAL: 767270.00 Subtotal: 679000.00 ON HST: 88270.00 Authorization: _________________________ Quote Total: 767270.00 WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN AMACO EQUIPMENT AND OUR PRODUCTS. - 693 - Attachment #1 to Report OPS 11-22 SAME AS BELOW 01 - AMACO 07/07/2022 15:58:29 (O) 2 02 PICKE001 9054204616 A01030 CITY OF PICKERING TBD ONE THE ESPLANADE PICKERING ON L1V 6K7 DAVID BRIDLE DBR / _3B Attention: Matthew Currer Description ** Q U O T E ** EXPIRY DATE: 12/31/2022 Amount AMACO IS HERE TO SUPPORT YOUR EQUIPMENT INVESTMENT. ARE YOU INTERESTED IN A PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM? CALL US TODAY FOR A FACTORY TRAINED AND CERTIFIED PROGRAM. TERMS OF SALE: ** QUOTED IN CND FUNDS AT 1.30 FX RATE -- SUBJECT TO CHANGE AT TIME OF ORDER ** FOB YOUR FACILITY ** TRAINING INCLUDED ** 2 YEAR/3000HRS LIMITED WARRANTY ** - 694 - Report to Council Report Number: OPS 18-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Brian Duffield Director, Operations Subject: Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds in Frenchman’s Bay -Review of Results of 2022 Pilot Project -File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That Report OPS 18-22 from the Director, Operations regarding the mechanical harvesting of Eurasian watermilfoil weeds in Frenchman’s Bay 2022 pilot project be received for information; and, 2.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: In 2021, Council approved $50,000.00 in the Current Budget to fund a pilot project to remove invasive weeds from Frenchman’s Bay to enhance opportunities for recreational water activities. The City was prepared to hire a specialist contractor to harvest weeds in Frenchman’s Bay; however, the City was advised by the Pickering Harbour Company Ltd. (PHC) that by the Charter of 1853, prior to Confederation, Frenchman’s Bay’s waterbed and lands are owned and operated exclusively by PHC and are under their care and control. As a result, PHC was contracted to deliver a pilot project for the mechanical harvesting of Eurasian watermilfoil weeds in Frenchman’s Bay. The pilot project commenced on August 31, 2021 and was completed on September 24, 2021—later than the cutting window required by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. It should be noted that the method of mechanical harvesting performed by PHC for the 2021 pilot project used specialized equipment that emulsified the weeds, returning the material into the water rather than cutting and removing the weeds from the Bay. The results of the 2021 pilot project were inconclusive due to only a single cut, the late start of the cutting, and the emulsification method used. Therefore, staff recommended submitting a request for funding to the 2022 Current Budget to repeat the pilot project and suggested that it start as early as permitted by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. This request also included a revised harvesting methodology. As a result, on March 28, 2022, Council approved the 2022 Current Budget which included a total of $100,000.00 to continue with the pilot project. The City met with PHC and Toronto Region and Conservation Authority (TRCA) to discuss the method of weed harvesting used in 2021 and recommendations for the continuation of the 2022 pilot project. As a result of this meeting, it was determined that the best method of weed control in Frenchman’s Bay was the mechanical harvesting and removal of the weeds, rather than the previous year’s emulsification method. - 695 - Report OPS 18-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds Page 2 in Frenchman’s Bay The City consulted with stakeholders who use Frenchman’s Bay for recreational purposes to determine the most appropriate areas to cut during the 2022 pilot project. It was determined that cutting one lane of five acres oriented north to south would best benefit the Dragon Boat Club, Pickering Rouge Canoe Club, and small watercraft users. PHC agreed to cut an additional five acres, in a triangular pattern at their expense to accommodate the needs of small sail boat programming for the Yacht Club. The areas to be cut were marked appropriately with buoys for easy visual identification and follow up inspections to evaluate the pilot project. Discussion: On an annual basis, PHC completes weed harvesting, without weed removal, around the docks of Frenchman’s Bay Marina, Frenchman’s Bay Yacht Club, and an East/West oriented channel linking the two to the harbor entrance. The harvesting is normally undertaken twice during the growing season, but it may be completed up to five times per season if lower water levels accelerate weed growth. In 2022, PHC was contracted by the City to continue with a pilot project for the mechanical harvesting and removal of Eurasian watermilfoil and other weeds in the areas of Frenchman’s Bay as identified in the contract. An inspection by boat of the areas to be cut was completed on July 25, 2022. The purpose was to document and determine the density and height of the weeds to be cut. An aerial drone video was taken of the areas prior to the first cut to document and assist in determining the effectiveness of the cut method. The first cut was completed on July 30, 2022, and a video of the same areas were taken for comparison. The weeds were cut, harvested and stocked piled on PHC lands to dry and reduce the overall weight for disposal at a later date. The City conducted an inspection by boat of the cut areas to assess the effectiveness and success of the completed areas. It was observed that the cut area was very visible and many large fish were observed within this area. Overall, City staff determined the first cut to be successful. Four weeks later, a second harvesting of the weeds commenced on August 25, 2022 and was completed on September 3, 2022. Post cut videos were taken using an aerial drone by the same vendor for the purpose of comparison. City staff conducted a final inspection on September 9, 2022 and the observations appeared to validate the revised methodology of the 2022 pilot project. TRCA had been providing their support and expertise during the pilot project and verified that the 2022 pilot project methodology was better suited for a long-term weed management program. The main takeaways from the 2022 pilot project were as follows: • It is essential to use the entire allowable cutting season from the start of July to the end of August to maximize the control benefits of a second cut. • Harvesting and removal of the weeds from the Bay reduces the reseeding of cut weed. • The harvesting vessel used in 2022 seemed to be effective and efficient in the limited cut. • Freshwater Bryozoan, an aquatic invertebrate were found in Frenchman’s Bay during the harvesting and inspection. This species is an indicator of good water quality that lacks containments such as heavy metals. - 696 - Report OPS 18-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds Page 3 in Frenchman’s Bay • It would appear that approximately 90 percent of the weeds harvested from Frenchman’s Bay were Ceratophyllum Demersum, also known as coontail and that only 10 percent of the weeds harvested were Eurasian milfoil. The pilot projects identified the following challenges that will need to be addressed in a sustainable weed management program: • The minimum depth of water needed to operate the harvesting vessel prevents the weeds from being cut close to shore which can hinder small watercraft access. • Fluctuations in Lake Ontario water levels can decrease the relative depth to the top of the cut weeds as the water level drops after a successful cut. • The five acres cut twice in the 2022 pilot project only allowed one North/South channel suitable for kayaks and dragon boat activities but some distance from shore and a considerable distance from Bruce Handscomb Memorial Park located on the West side of the Bay. • Cutting a significantly larger area is a more efficient removal method for the cut weeds, as frequent returns to shore to empty the cut weeds is inefficient. Next Steps The two pilot projects have allowed for the development of a weed harvesting methodology that can be used in a weed management program and permit an increased level of small watercraft use of Frenchman’s Bay. There is no indication that the trend for increased weed growth in the Bay will decline and that climate change and upstream development may be contributing to the heavy weed growth observed in the past few years. The cutting contractor noted that phosphate is likely not a contributing factor of excessive weed growth as significant algae blooms occur in phosphate rich water and none was observed in the Bay. The contractor advised that higher nitrogen sources making their way into the Bay are a more likely factor in the weed growth. Staff, with the cooperation and assistance of TRCA, need to complete a water quality sampling and investigation. This will help to understand where the nutrients are coming from in both the upstream watershed and the Hydro Marsh. Given the unique ownership rights of PHC to control access to Frenchman’s Bay for weed control, staff will assess the appropriate method to participate in a weed management program moving forward considering the rights and responsibilities of both both parties. The 2023 Current Budget will reflect staff’s recommendation for funding to address the implementation of a sustainable and effective weed management program in 2023. Attachment: 1. Before and after photographs of first and second weed cuts - 697 - Report OPS 18-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Mechanical Harvesting of Eurasian Watermilfoil Weeds Page 4 in Frenchman’s Bay Prepared/Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Brian Duffield Director, Operations BD:sv Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 698 - Attachment #1 to Report OPS 18-22 Canoe Cut Zone – First Cut on July 30, 2022 Pre-Cut (taken on July 16) Post-Cut (taken on August 5) - 699 - Canoe Cut Zone – Second Cut on August 25, 2022 Pre-Cut (taken on August 5) Post-Cut (taken on September 9) - 700 - - 701 - Report to Council Report Number: PLN 46-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Collaboration on Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project - Memorandum of Understanding - File: D-7001-022 Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 46-22 of the Director, City Development & CBO, regarding a partnership opportunity for the Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project, be received; 2. That Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute a Memorandum of Understanding between the Town of Whitby, City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Mattamy Development Corporation, and Clean Air Partnership as set out in Attachment #1 of this report, subject to the terms and conditions satisfactory to Director, City Development, Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor and Director, Finance & Treasurer; 3. That the appropriate City staff be directed to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report; and 4. That staff be directed to report back with a summary of the results at the conclusion of the project. Executive Summary: In 2021, Pickering staff applied for, and were successful in securing funds from, The Atmospheric Fund (TAF) to offset the consulting costs for the Integrated Sustainable Design Standards project (ISDS). Initially, a component of this project included researching the financial costs associated with building to more advanced sustainable performance measures. During the grant submission process, TAF recommended that the budget requested be reduced, and that the City collaborate with the Town of Whitby for the costing study component, since the Town was seeking similar funding for their own study. Anticipating that this arrangement could be mutually beneficial, the City of Pickering focused its grant application on developing the ISDS, while the Town of Whitby led a proposal for an in-depth costing study. City staff provided the Town of Whitby with a letter of support for their grant application. TAF supported Pickering’s grant submission and staff proceeded with a process to develop the ISDS. On September 20, 2022, Council adopted the City of Pickering’s Integrated Sustainable Design Standards (ISDS) as per Council Resolution #982/22. These standards are a tool to assist the City in implementing and achieving the vision of a sustainable community through the development review process. - 702 - PLN 46-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Collaboration on Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project Page 2 TAF also supported the Town of Whitby’s Green Standard Demonstration Project grant submission to undertake a costing study. The goal of the project is to measure the costs and benefits of integrating the three voluntary tiers of the Whitby Green Development Standards at the design, construction, and occupancy stages, for low-rise residential development. The project will allow for a better understanding of the challenges, opportunities, costs, and benefits developers face when building to advanced sustainability design criteria. The results could inform incentive programs to help address and overcome these barriers, as well as future updates to green standards. The project partners include the Town of Whitby, City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Clean Air Partnership, and Mattamy Development Corporation. Natural Resources Canada is supporting the project through use of its Cost Benefit Analysis Tool. The project partners/parties are being asked to enter into the attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The MOU has been reviewed by appropriate City of Pickering staff from a legal and insurance perspective. The MOU outlines the project’s key outcomes, participant’s roles, and funding sources, among other matters. The City of Pickering is not providing funding for the project. Pickering’s contribution is through in-kind staff support to: • be a member of the project team; • assist with funding applications, if required; • assist with stakeholder engagement and sharing results; • engage Pickering developers by seeking volunteers to test the costing model tool and reflect on region-wide applicability of the tool; and • be a resource regarding green development standards. Financial Implications: Not applicable to this report. Discussion: In Durham Region, the building sector is responsible for 40% of total carbon emissions. As Durham Region is slated for significant growth, it is essential that the associated development is carried out in a sustainable manner. To support this goal, City of Pickering Council recently adopted the Integrated Sustainable Design Standards (ISDS), which will replace the 2007 Sustainable Development Guidelines on January 1, 2023. Pickering’s ISDS were drafted following a comprehensive review process, involving extensive consultation, engagement, and outreach with many stakeholders, including the development community, key agencies, Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area municipalities, and the public. During this consultation, one of the concerns expressed by the development community was that costs to implement sustainable measures were perceived to be high. The Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project seeks to verify the actual challenges, costs, opportunities and benefits of building more sustainable homes. - 703 - PLN 46-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Collaboration on Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project Page 3 Project Phases The project is intended to be completed in four phases. Phase 1: Design and Modelling (2022-2023) Whitby will retain an independent third-party consultant to act as Project Manager, and assist with coordination among all parties. The parties will develop a full costing model for designing and building 3 to 6 low-rise detached residential homes (Demonstration Homes) that will meet the Whitby Green Standard (WGS) voluntary tiers (Tier 2, Tier 3 and Tier 4), and leverages the Natural Resources Canada Cost Benefit Analysis Tool. Phase 2: Construction (2024) Mattamy will construct the Demonstration Homes at its own cost in Whitby. Together with the Town of Whitby’s Project Manager, Mattamy will measure the actual design and construction costs of each Demonstration Home and share these costs with the Project Manager to allow for calibration against the costing model. Phase 3: Monitor (2025) Led by the Town of Whitby’s Project Manager, in collaboration with the end-user owners of the Demonstration Homes, the parties will monitor the homes’ performance over a period of one year of occupancy, and measure and calculate the actual real-life costs, greenhouse gas emission reductions, and other relevant metrics associated with each of the homes. Phase 4: Report (2025-2026) Led by the Town of Whitby’s Project Manager, the parties will develop a report summarizing the results of the project. The parties will develop potential solutions to any issues or challenges identified in the report, and will develop an incentives program and/or municipal toolkit to support the continued implementation of the WGS. The parties will share the project’s outcomes and recommendations with other municipalities through the Clean Air Council network. Project Partners and Roles The Town of Whitby received support for this project through the following: The Atmospheric Fund – funding partner for $250,000.00 Through this partnership, the Atmospheric Fund will provide financial and technical support in developing and evaluating green standard performance. Regional Municipality of Durham – funding partner for $10,000.00 Durham Region will provide financial support for the engagement process while providing technical expertise related to climate mitigation and planning. - 704 - PLN 46-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Collaboration on Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project Page 4 City of Pickering – proposed in-kind support as municipal partner The City of Pickering will assist with stakeholder engagement, funding applications (if required) and sharing results. The City will also be a resource about green standards. The City may also connect with developers in Pickering to seek volunteers to test the costing model that will be developed as part of this project. Clean Air Partnership – in-kind support The Clean Air Partnership will lead the delivery of an engagement process with region-wide municipal and development stakeholders. Natural Resources Canada – in-kind support Natural Resources Canada will provide in-kind support and use its Cost Benefit Analysis Tool. Mattamy Development Corporation – developer partner Mattamy Development Corporation will cover the incremental costs of developing advanced sustainability-performing homes. Town of Whitby staff are exploring external grant opportunities that may be used to offset the incremental construction/equipment costs, and for post-construction monitoring equipment. If Pickering Council authorizes the execution of the MOU, City staff will collaborate with the Town of Whitby and project partners to undertake this initiative. By working together, Pickering can support the project by sharing information, engaging with project partners and promoting the costing model to the development community. Although the costing study will focus on the WGS tiers, the findings around the actual costs, return on investment, and homeowner benefits associated with sustainable development are not unique to Whitby, Pickering or Durham Region. The relevancy of this work far exceeds these borders. Due to the similarities of municipal green standards and comprehensive nature of this project, the process and findings will benefit the building industry as a whole and municipalities across the GTHA, who are engaged in similar dialogues around sustainable community development. Attachment: 1. Draft Memorandum of Understanding WGS Demo Project - 705 - PLN 46-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Collaboration on Whitby Green Standard Demonstration Project Page 5 Prepared By: Original Signed By Chantal Whitaker, BESc (Hons), CSP-P Manager, Sustainability & Strategic Environmental Initiatives Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P.Eng. Director, City Development & CBO CW :ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 706 - 1 of 13 Attachment #1 to Report PLN 46-22 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE WHITBY GREEN STANDARD DEMONSTRATION PROJECT This memorandum of understanding is dated the 26th day of September 2022 B E T W E E N: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF WHITBY (“Whitby”) -and - MATTAMY DEVELOPMENT COPORATION (“Mattamy”) -and - THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM (“Durham”) -and - THE CITY OF PICKERING (“Pickering”) -and - CLEAN AIR PARTNERSHIP (“CAP”) INTRODUCTION 1.In 2020, Whitby approved a tiered Green Development Standard (the “Whitby Green Standard” or “WGS”) to increase the uptake of sustainable design criteria in new development, with a focus on low-rise development (available here www.whitby.ca/greenstandard). During development of the Whitby Green Standard, the development community raised concerns regarding the impact on housing costs and challenges associated with the availability of skilled tradespersons and technology to implement, and the reliability of the materials to build according to, the Whitby Green Standard. 2.Whitby, Mattamy, Durham, Pickering, and CAP (collectively, the “parties”) have agreed to collaborate on a demonstration project that measures the costs and benefits of integrating the three voluntary tiers (Tiers 2-4 of the WGS) of Green - 707 - 2 of 13 Development Standards at the design, construction and occupancy stages of low-rise residential development (the “Project”). 3. The Project will allow for a better understanding of the challenges, opportunities, costs and benefits developers face when building to advanced sustainability design criteria. Results will inform incentive programs that help address and overcome these barriers, helping to accelerate the uptake of sustainable design criteria and building energy-efficient communities. 4. This memorandum of understanding (“MOU”) establishes the framework by which the parties intend to cooperate and complete the Project. This MOU does not provide the parties or any third parties with any legal rights, nor does it incur any legal obligations, except as relating to Confidential Information as set out in paragraph 16, and liability and indemnification as set out in paragraphs 24 and 25 herein. However, the parties may enter into one or more further agreements with each other on terms to be negotiated in good faith, in order to facilitate completion of the Project. PROJECT GOAL 5. The goal of the Project is to help calculate the costs and benefits of municipal Green Development Standards on the design, construction and occupancy of new low-rise homes. KEY OUTCOMES 6. The following outcomes will guide the parties in the development and implementation of the Project (the items identified below in Sections 6(a)-(g) inclusive shall be referred to collectively as the “Key Outcomes”): Expand Green Development Standards a) To assist other municipalities in the uptake of their own green development standards by providing a better understanding and measured benefits of advanced sustainability criteria and building towards net-zero carbon. - 708 - 3 of 13 Inform Builders b) To support the development community in understanding the associated costs, technologies, skills, and marketing required to implement and build to advanced building standards. Build Incentive Programs c) To inform the development of incentive programs that will encourage the development community to adopt the voluntary tiers of Green Development Standards Bridge the Skills Gap d) To inform local education institutions of skilled trade shortages and education gaps to help inform and advance skilled trades’ college curriculum. Transparent Analysis e) To calculate the cost impact of building to advanced energy efficient standards and compare those costs with alternative strategies, such as supporting deep home energy retrofits in future years. Greenhouse Gas Reductions f) To calculate the actual greenhouse gas emission savings of designing, building, and occupying advanced WGS homes. Inform Homeowners g) To educate the community and potential homeowners of the long-term costs and benefits of owning advanced energy efficient and net-zero energy homes. PROJECT OUTLINE 7. The Project will proceed in accordance with the following phases: a) Phase 1: Design and Modelling (2022-2023) Whitby will retain an independent third-party consultant (the “Consultant”) to act as project manager and assist with coordination among all parties. The parties will develop a full costing model for designing and building 3-6 low-rise detached - 709 - 4 of 13 residential homes (the “Demonstration Homes”) that will meet the WGS voluntary tiers (Tier 2, Tier 3 and Tier 4), that leverages the Natural Resources Canada Cost benefit analysis tool. b) Phase 2: Construction (2024) Mattamy will construct the Demonstration Homes at its own cost. Together with the Consultant, Mattamy will measure the actual design and construction costs of each Demonstration Home and share these costs with the project manager to allow for calibration against the costing model c) Phase 3: Monitor (2025) Lead by the Consultant, in collaboration with the end-user owners of the Demonstration Homes, the parties will monitor the homes’ performance over a period of 1 year of occupancy and measure and calculate the actual real-life costs, greenhouse gas emission reductions, and other relevant metrics associated with each of the homes. d) Phase 4: Report (2025-2026) Lead by the Consultant, the parties will develop a report summarizing the results of the Project. The parties will develop potential solutions to any issues or challenges identified in the report and will develop an incentives program and/or municipal toolkit to support the continued implementation of the WGS. The parties will share the Project’s outcomes and recommendations with other municipalities through the Clean Air Council Network. THE PROJECT TEAM 8. The primary Project team consists of the parties to this MOU, being Whitby, Pickering, Durham, Clean Air Partnership, and Mattamy. THE PARTIES’ ROLES 9. Whitby will focus on all Key Outcomes and: • be the overall Project lead; • enter into a grant funding agreement with TAF (the “TAF Grant Agreement”); - 710 - 5 of 13 • create a project charter; • develop the RFP for and procure the Consultant; • be the lead for funding applications; • be responsible for the development and planning application approval process; and, • review design and construction for compliance with the applicable WGS tier. 10. Pickering will focus on Key Outcomes (a)-(c) and (e)-(g) and: • be a member of the Project team; • assist with funding applications; • assist with stakeholder engagement and sharing results; • engage developers in participating in the design process; • provide consultation in further developing municipal green development standards; and, • work on developing and adopting its own green development standards. 11. Durham will focus on Key Outcomes (a), (b), & (e)-(g) and: • be a member of the Project team; • assist with stakeholder engagement and sharing results; • provide technical expertise; and, • support the costs associated with the project through the provision of $10,000. 12. CAP will work on all Key Outcomes and: • be the Project lead for stakeholder engagement; • assist with costing modelling for the Demonstration Homes; - 711 - 6 of 13 • provide technical support; and, • assist with report preparation, sharing results, and developing a WGS implementation toolkit. 13. Mattamy will focus on Key Outcomes (b), (c), (e), & (f) and: • be a member of the Project team; • be the Project Lead for designing and modelling the Demonstration Homes and allow the other parties to oversee the design and construction process to ensure compliance with the WGS tiers; • obtain all approvals and permits necessary for the construction of the Demonstration Homes; • construct the Demonstration Homes; • monitor and record the costs and construction of the Demonstration Homes and provide all relevant information to the Consultant and make all relevant costing information publicly available; • market and sell the Demonstration Homes; • enter into agreements with the purchasers of the Demonstration Homes for the installation of smart-meters or other measures necessary to monitor the performance of the Demonstration Homes, including the consent from the herein noted purchasers for the Project Team to review the data gathered and include the depersonalized data in its reports; and, • assist with report preparation, stakeholder engagement, and sharing results. FUNDING 14. Grant funding and in-kind support is a key component of the completion of the Project and the development of the Demonstration Homes. The parties will provide the following minimum funding contributions and in-kind support for the Project: - 712 - 7 of 13 a) Whitby will provide in-kind support estimated at $30,000 in staff time as well as $250,000 which has been provided through grant funding to support the administrative and modelling costs of the project; b) Pickering will provide in-kind support estimated at $5,000 in staff time; c) Durham will provide in-kind support estimated at $10,000 in staff time, as well as $10,000 in funding to Whitby to support the costs of stakeholder consultation; d) CAP will provide in-kind support estimated at $64,500 in staff time to support the costs for project administration and stakeholder engagement; e) Mattamy will construct and sell the Demonstration Homes at its own cost, estimated at $800,000 in construction and warranty costs and staff time. Mattamy will receive the revenues from selling the Demonstration Homes; f) Whitby will use any funding received towards the Project and activities directly related to the Project, including retaining the Consultant; and, g) Should additional grant sources be identified and any additional funding be received, then such funding will be applied by the party receiving it towards the Project which could include the reimbursement of costs for the construction of the demonstration homes and incentive programs to the homeowner for the monitoring post construction, subject to Whitby Council approval and, where authorized, such additional funding may be issued as a grant pursuant to Section 107(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, c.25, as amended. FEES AND COSTS 15. The parties shall be responsible for their own fees and costs incurred in connection with this MOU and any other agreement or transaction related to the Project, and for any fees or commissions payable to any person it has retained in respect of the Project. - 713 - 8 of 13 CONFIDENTIALITY 16. Throughout the Project, the parties may provide, exchange, or allow access to each other’s proprietary, technical, or business data, and/or other confidential information in connection with the Project (collectively, “Confidential Information”). The parties, individually and on behalf of those they represent, agree that: a) they shall treat and keep the Confidential Information secure and confidential; b) they shall not disclose any Confidential Information without obtaining the written consent of the party from whom it originated; c) they shall not use any Confidential Information acquired through the performance of this MOU to gain an unfair advantage in any other project or undertaking; and, d) the parties acknowledge that this MOU or portions thereof, and any other information or documents that are provided to Whitby, Pickering, or Durham, may be released pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“MFIPPA”). 17. For clarity, the parties agree that a party may use the data and results gathered from the Project, in a depersonalized manner or in the aggregate, to report publicly to its respective Committees, Council, Board of Directors or shareholders. Pursuant to Section 18 below, a party seeking to report publicly on the Project shall share the data and results expected to be reported publicly with the other parties to ensure that no Confidential Information is disclosed without written consent. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT 18. No party shall make any public announcement regarding the Project without the consent of the other parties. The parties shall make efforts to coordinate their respective public engagement and messaging efforts to ensure that they are timely, consistent, and unified. - 714 - 9 of 13 TERM 19. This MOU will be effective once signed by all parties and the parties will adhere to this MOU for the duration of the Project of which the end date is anticipated to be January 31, 2026. NO ASSIGNMENT 20. The parties will not assign their roles, rights, or obligations under this MOU without the prior written consent of the other parties. Except, however, that Mattamy may delegate its roles, rights, or obligations to one or more wholly- owned subsidiary corporations, in which case its subsidiary shall agree to be a party to and bound by the terms of this MOU and this MOU will be amended accordingly. ADDITIONAL PARTIES 21. Throughout the Project, new partners may be identified who wish to contribute funding or in-kind support for the Project. After consultation, the existing parties may choose to invite third-parties to join the Project. This MOU will be amended to reflect the addition of any new parties. NOTICE AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES 22. The parties will remain in regular contact with each other and attempt to resolve any issues cooperatively. Notice or communications given under this MOU may be given personally or by email at the following addresses: a) for Whitby: Sarah Klein Director, Strategic Initiatives 575 Rossland Road East Whitby ON L1N 2M8 strategicinitiatives@whitby.ca cc: Legal Services (legal@whitby.ca), Town Clerk (clerk@whitby.ca) - 715 - 10 of 13 b) for Pickering: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO One the Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 kbentley@pickering.ca c) for Durham: Ian McVey Manager of Sustainability 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 ian.mcvey@durham.ca d) for CAP: Gabriella Kalapos Executive Director 75 Elizabeth Street Toronto, Ontario M5G 1P4 gkalapos@cleanairpartnership.org e) for Mattamy: Mitchell Minniti Director, Land Development 433 Steeles Ave E, Milton, ON L9T 8Z4 Mitchell.Minniti@mattamycorp.com GOVERNING LAW 23. This MOU shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the applicable laws of the Province of Ontario and Canada. NO CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY 24. The parties agree that each of them is responsible for fulfilling their own roles under this MOU. Except for claims related to a breach of paragraphs 26 or 25 of this MOU, no party shall be liable to any other party or any third party for any claim alleging breach of contract or any other claims, damages, or costs of any - 716 - 11 of 13 kind, including claims for lost revenue or profit or increased costs, related to any purported rights or obligations under this this MOU. INDEMNIFICATION 25. The parties agree to indemnify and hold each other and their officers, elected officials, directors, agents, and employees harmless from and against any and all third-party claims for equitable relief, costs, or damages caused by their respective negligence or willful misconduct related to the Project. COUNTERPARTS 26. This MOU may be executed in two or more counterparts (including counterparts signed or delivered electronically), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. SIGNATURES Executed by Whitby this ______ day of __________________, 2022. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF WHITBY Matthew Gaskell, Chief Administrative Officer Fuwing Wong, Commissioner of Financial Services / Treasurer We have authority to bind the corporation. - 717 - 12 of 13 Executed by Mattamy this ______ day of __________________, 2022. MATTAMY DEVELOPMENT COPORATION Andrew Sjogren, Senior Vice President I have authority to bind the corporation. Executed by Durham this ______ day of __________________, 2022. THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM Elaine Baxter-Trahair, Chief Administrative Officer I have authority to bind the corporation. Executed by Pickering this ______ day of __________________, 2022. THE CITY OF PICKERING Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, Clerk We have authority to bind the corporation. - 718 - 13 of 13 Executed by CAP this ______ day of __________________, 2022. CLEAN AIR PARTNERSHIP Gabrielle Kalapos, Executive Director I have authority to bind the corporation. - 719 - Report to Council Report Number: PLN 48-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Community Garden Policy - File: D-7001-021 Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 48-22 of the Director, City Development & CBO, regarding community gardens, be received; 2. That Council adopt the Community Garden Policy as set out in Attachment #1; and 3. That the appropriate City staff be directed take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. Executive Summary: Community gardens support local food security, promote healthy food, create a welcoming space for residents to come together and learn, and often help others through donations to the local food bank. On March 28, 2022, Council passed Resolution #840/22 (see Attachment #2) that directed staff to form a working group to formalize a framework for new community gardens, and to bring a Community Garden Policy to Council for their consideration. This policy would provide direction on how to establish and manage new garden sites. Staff from City Development, Engineering Services, and Operations Departments met to discuss requirements that any new community garden site would require, as well as to assess each of Pickering’s existing parks against the criteria. Aside from Diana Princess of Wales Park, which already has a large community garden, none of the existing parks had the characteristics needed to successfully support a community garden site. The reasons varied from: • programming space at capacity with other activities (e.g., tennis, soccer, baseball, playground units); • uneven sloped ground; • no access to or ability to create parking (including accessible parking); • no access to water; • ownership (e.g., parking area owned by school board, limiting daytime use); • area size too small; • low visibility or unclear sightlines; and • too far from an urban area. - 720 - PLN 48-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Community Garden Policy Page 2 Moving forward, the 2017 Recreation & Parks Master Plan is scheduled to be updated in 2023. As part of that review, the section pertaining to community gardens can be amended to assist in the identification and planning process for specific park space(s) to be designed to meet the community garden criterion, as one of many program offerings. Staff are also still exploring the ability to include community gardens as part of the development of the hydro lands between Kingston Road and Finch Avenue. In addition, through the development review process, staff are encouraging proponents to explore the feasibility of providing food garden plots within their development sites, as a sustainable feature for the residents who will live there. Staff developed the attached draft Community Garden Policy (Attachment #1) to help establish a foundation to support new community gardens in the future. The policy reflects a review of best practices in other municipalities and the existing framework with Valley Plentiful Community Garden. The draft Community Garden Policy includes an example Memorandum of Understanding and Garden Agreement, which a prospective group would need to enter into with the City, and would be subject to Council’s approval. Within the appendices, the Policy also provides an example Gardener Agreement and Conflict Resolution Procedure, which the group must be willing to prepare and execute. A Gardener Application example is also provided. These documents are based on those that were developed in 2021 for use with Valley Plentiful Community Garden. As reported to Council in April 2021 (PLN 25-21), City staff and the Valley Plentiful Community Garden Committee, along with guidance from Durham Integrated Growers, worked together to create the necessary agreements for the continued operation of Valley Plentiful Community Garden. The change resulted in a clearer and transparent framework by formalizing expectations, rules and roles for the City, Garden Committee and gardeners. The new approach provided the Garden Committee with tools to use when trying to manage issues in a fair manner. The City was able to use the experience gained from this exercise to create a draft policy for new garden sites. Staff recommend Council approve the draft Community Garden Policy for adoption. Financial Implications: Not applicable to this report. Discussion: Community food gardens play a valuable role in the City. These unique spaces have many benefits for participants including: •allows residents to grow fresh, healthy produce; •reduces family grocery bills; •creates pride and knowledge of where the organic produce came from; •increases local food security; •grows food for the local food bank; •provides an opportunity for gardeners to interact with people from their community they may have otherwise not met; and •provides a location where residents of all ages and cultures can come together to enhance a space in their community. - 721 - PLN 48-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Community Garden Policy Page 3 In 2021, City staff worked with Valley Plentiful Community Garden Committee to develop and execute many new agreements. The agreements included an Annual Gardener Membership Application, Garden Membership Agreement & Code of Conduct, Hydro One Agreement Terms and Conditions, COVID-19 Protocols Agreement, Conflict Resolution Policy Procedure and a Memorandum of Understanding. These governing documents helped create a clear and transparent framework by formalizing expectations, rules and roles for the City, Valley Plentiful Community Garden Committee and gardeners. Having formalized the arrangement with Valley Plentiful Community Garden, the City sought to support future groups’ interest in new community gardens by establishing a process and policy to consider requests for new garden sites. Establishing New Garden Sites As part of this process, staff from City Development, Engineering Services and Operations Departments met to discuss elements that any new community garden site would require, as well as to assess each of Pickering’s existing parks against those criteria. As reported in March 2022 (PLN 13-22), staff explained why it was necessary to pre-identify suitable sites for a community garden if on city owned/leased lands. In other examples that staff reviewed, a group of residents interested in starting a community garden would apply and outline among other items, their preferred location. Unfortunately, this approach can lead to a lot of back and forth and disappointment for the group. Community garden sites need to be assessed for suitability based on, for example: current use of the space, future plans, neighbourhood impact, accessibility, safety, soil test results, access to parking and water supply, maximum number of garden plots, and in consultation with residents whose homes surround the site (if applicable). Most of this information is not readily available to residents. Therefore, the assessment is better suited to be done by municipal staff. This approach helps to manage time, expense, and expectations of the groups who may be interested in starting a community garden. Based on staff’s review of each of the existing parks, none were suitable to successfully host a new community garden space. Due to the many requirements of community gardens, it requires advanced planning. With the update to the 2017 Recreation & Parks Master Plan, the City will be able to consider the installation requirements when planning future program space. In the interim, staff are still exploring other options, such as opportunities within the development of the hydro lands between Kingston Road and Finch Avenue. Also, while commenting on development applications from a sustainability perspective, staff are encouraging proponents to explore the feasibility of providing food garden plots within a development for their buyers to use. For example, in the townhouse condominium development on the south side of Kingston Road, just east of Valley Farm Road, planning staff and the property owner (Daniel’s Corporation) worked collectively to redesign the eastern portion of the amenity space with a greenhouse structure and an indoor community gardening space for growing food. Staff continue to advocate for a similar approach for medium to higher density residential developments. - 722 - PLN 48-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Community Garden Policy Page 4 Developing a Community Garden Policy As directed by Council, staff prepared a draft Community Garden Policy for consideration to adopt. The attached draft policy reflects best practices used in other municipalities as well as procedures that were recently established in consultation with, and for, the Valley Plentiful Community Garden. The policy and supporting Memorandum of Understanding and Garden Agreement (Appendix 1 of Community Garden Policy) outline the role and responsibilities of the City and of the Community Garden Group, including insurance requirements. Appendix 2 of the policy is an example of a Gardener Application to be used by the Community Garden Committee. Appendix 3 of the policy provides an example Gardener Agreement for Community Gardens that the Community Garden Committee must enter into with each gardener/plot user. The purpose of this agreement is to ensure each gardener understands the rules and their individual responsibilities. Appendix 4 of the policy provides an example Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens. The purpose of this procedure is to assist gardeners/plot users and the Garden Committee by providing a process to deal with disputes in an effective manner so as to minimize negative impacts. The Gardener Application, Gardener Agreement and Conflict Resolution Procedure must be developed by the Community Garden Committee to the satisfaction of the City. Staff and Financial Resources In many municipalities, the initial cost to create a community garden is the sole responsibility of the community garden group. This may be a barrier to participation. The financial resources required to establish a garden are dependent on many factors such as the conditions of the site itself, anticipated number of plots, style (raised versus in-ground plots), etc. Once a viable site is identified and a group expresses interest, staff will be able to assess the financial and staff resource impact of the site based on the above factors. These assessments will inform how site development is funded whether by the community garden group itself, a joint grant application to offset cost, and/or through the City’s annual budget process. At the same time, staff will also give consideration to the resources required to successfully support the garden’s needs, and work with the group to identify the number of plots that could be made available. Valley Plentiful Community Garden is a well-loved space and the City of Pickering has supported its operation for many years. Establishing a Community Garden Policy provides the necessary foundation for the City to consider expanding the community garden program as viable future sites become available, so that more residents can grow fresh produce in an environment that supports collaboration, engagement and healthy living. As such, staff recommend Council approve the draft Community Garden Policy for adoption. Attachments: 1.Draft Community Garden Policy 2.Resolution #840/22 - 723 - PLN 48-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Community Garden Policy Page 5 Prepared By: Original Signed By Chantal Whitaker, BESc (Hons), CSP-P Manager, Sustainability & Strategic Environmental Initiatives Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO CW :ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 724 - Attachment #1 to Report PLN 48-22 Policy Procedure Title: Community Garden Policy Policy Number ADM 240 Reference Resolution 840/22 Date Originated (m/d/y) December 5, 2022 Date Revised (m/d/y) Pages 4 Approval: Chief Administrative Officer Point of Contact Director, City Development & CBO Policy Objective The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the “City”) supports Community Gardens on approved City-owned and leased/licensed lands in partnership with Community Groups in order for residents to grow fresh produce in an environment that supports collaboration, engagement and healthy living. Index 01 Definitions 02 Procedures 03 Insurance 01 Definitions 01.01 City – The Corporation of the City of Pickering. 01.02 Community Garden – a site, located on City-owned or leased/licensed lands, that is approved to be divided into plots and operated by a Community Garden Committee for a Community Garden Group to grow produce, herbs and flowers for not-for-profit use. 01.03 Community Garden Committee – a group of community garden members responsible for the governing and organization of the Community Garden. 01.04 Community Garden Group – all the people participating in the Community Garden. 01.05 Donation Plot – a garden plot where food is planted and harvested by a Community Garden Group and donated to a local food bank, soup kitchen or other such related organization. - 725 - Policy Title: Community Garden Policy Page 2 of 4 Policy Number: ADM 240 01.06 Garden Plot – a delineated section of the Community Garden including raised beds, intended for gardening produce, herbs and flowers for personal not-for- profit use by a Community Garden Group member. 01.07 Gardener Agreement – an agreement between the Community Garden Committee and the Gardener/Plot User that outlines the rules, roles and expectations of membership in the Community Garden. 01.08 Gardener/Plot User – person(s) assigned to a plot within the designated area. Responsible for the planting and maintenance of the assigned plot and bound by the terms of a gardener agreement. 02 Procedures 02.01 The City to: a. support the development of Community Gardens; and b. provide promotional support to Community Gardens though the City’s website and social media. 02.02 City Development, Engineering Services and Operations Departments to: a. identify and pre-select suitable locations for Community Gardens based on, but not limited to the following criteria: • current use and future plans for the space; • neighbourhood impact; • accessibility; • safety; • soil test results; • maximum number of garden plots; • access to water; • accessible parking; and • consultation with residents whose homes surround the site (if applicable). b. oversee the application and approval process for community group requests to establish a community garden on pre-approved locations. 02.03 Through its application, the interested Community Garden Group must demonstrate the following: • number of core Community Garden Group members (at least four to five) to form the Community Garden Committee; • identification of primary leader; • vision for the space, including number of plots, approach to accessibility, and features; • commitment to operate the site for five years; - 726 - Policy Title: Community Garden Policy Page 3 of 4 Policy Number: ADM 240 • relevant experience with community gardening, volunteering, leadership, and community development; • willingness to develop and sign all applicable agreements; • ability to secure and pay for insurance; and, • how development and maintenance of the site will be funded. 02.04 If approved for a Community Garden, the Community Garden Committee must sign a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) and Garden Agreement between the City and the Community Garden Committee. The example MOU in Appendix 1 will be amended based on conditions at the time of execution and is subject to Council’s approval to enter into the MOU with the Community Garden Group. 02.05 If approved for a Community Garden, the Community Garden Committee must develop to the satisfaction of the City, a Gardener Application form. An example Gardener Application is provided in Appendix 2. 02.06 If approved for a Community Garden the Community Garden Committee must develop, to the satisfaction of the City, a Gardener Agreement. The approved Gardener Agreement must be signed by each Gardener/Plot User. An example Gardener Agreement for Community Gardens is provided in Appendix 3. 02.07 If approved for a Community Garden, the Community Garden Committee must develop to the satisfaction of the City, a Conflict Resolution Procedure. An example Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens is provided in Appendix 4. 03 Insurance 03.01 If approved for a Community Garden, the Community Garden Committee must at its own expense, arrange and maintain commercial general liability insurance, including products and completed operations, satisfactory to the City for all liability arising out of bodily injury (including death) and property damage, such insurance to be not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or loss, to be in full force and effect at all times. A copy of the Certificate of Insurance confirming such insurance coverage shall be provided to the City and the City shall be an Additional Insured on such policy. The policy shall contain an undertaking to the insurer to notify the City in writing not less than thirty (30) days prior to any material change, cancellation or termination of the policy. - 727 - Policy Title: Community Garden Policy Page 4 of 4 Policy Number: ADM 240 Appendices Appendix 1 Example Memorandum of Understanding and Garden Agreement Appendix 2 Example Gardener Application Appendix 3 Example Gardener Agreement for Community Gardens Appendix 4 Example Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens - 728 - 1 Appendix 1 Example Memorandum of Understanding and Garden Agreement Between The Corporation of the City of Pickering and (insert name of Community Garden Group) This Memorandum of Understanding is between (insert name of group) Community Garden Group and the City of Pickering, and constitutes a garden agreement regarding use of (insert name of site or park) as a community garden, located at (insert address). City of Pickering Responsibilities • Facilitate the use of the identified site for a community garden. • Supply of pathway woodchips subject to availability. • General grounds maintenance of surrounding park space and trees related to grass cutting, water supply system (if applicable), public pathway maintenance (if applicable) and garbage pickup. • Assist the (insert name of group) with the communication and promotion of garden events and initiatives, as appropriate. Community Garden Committee Responsibilities • Comply with all City of Pickering by-laws, provincial regulations, terms and conditions of the site, including of a third party if the site is leased/licensed. • At its own expense, arrange and maintain commercial general liability insurance, including products and completed operations, satisfactory to the City for all liability arising out of bodily injury (including death) and property damage, such insurance to be not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or loss, to be in full force and effect at all times. A copy of the Certificate of Insurance confirming such insurance coverage shall be provided to the City and the City shall be an Additional Insured on such policy. The policy shall contain an undertaking to the insurer to notify the City in writing not less than thirty (30) days prior to any material change, cancellation or termination of the policy. • Administer the formation, signing and compliance of the following: • Gardener Application; • Gardener Agreement for Community Gardens; and a • Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens. • Maintain regular contact with the designated City of Pickering representative. • Provide the City of Pickering representative with a list of Garden Committee members and their contact information. - 729 - 2 • If requested, provide the City of Pickering representative with signed copies of the Gardener Agreement for Community Gardens for each member. • Maintain a ‘waiting list’ for those interested in participating in the garden. • Maintain and secure the community garden, garden sheds, and other community garden infrastructure at no cost to the City of Pickering. • Provide the City of Pickering representative with a brief year-end report summarizing garden activities and future garden plans. • Assist the City of Pickering with communication and promotion of events and initiatives, as appropriate. Community Garden Committee Representative Date _______________________________ Name Community Garden Committee Representative Date _______________________________ Name Community Garden Committee Representative Date _______________________________ Name The Corporation of the City of Pickering Date _______________________________ Name Title - 730 - 3 I have the authority to bind the Corporation. The Corporation of the City of Pickering Date _______________________________ Name Title I have the authority to bind the Corporation. - 731 - Appendix 2 Example Gardener Application Residency in the City of Pickering is a requirement of memberships. I will provide a copy of my photo ID as proof of residency if requested by a Community Garden Committee member. Member since _______ Plot#_____ Name__________________________________________ Address________________________________________ City___________________ Postal Code______________ Home Phone____________________Cell Number_______________________ Email__________________________________________ Payment Terms and Conditions The garden plot fee of $(insert fee) for the year must be paid before any membership comes into effect. The fee can be paid in cash or by cheque made payable to (insert name of group) Community Garden Group or by e-transfer payable to (insert email address of group) Community Garden Group. Please initial the following _____ I agree to have my name, phone number, and email address provided to the other gardeners by the administrators, if requested. This information may be used to share in garden activities such as distribution of Community Garden information, trading of garden plot maintenance during vacations, plants and/or seeds. Your privacy will be respected if you decline. _____I consent to the use of my photo image in (insert name of group) Community Garden Group promotional materials. _____I am interested in serving on the (insert name of group) Community Garden Committee. _____ I consent to receive emails from (insert name of group) Community Garden Committee. If not, then I will read the posted minute’s on-line _____. __________________________ _________________________ Signature of Garden Applicant Date - 732 - 1 Appendix 3 Example Gardener Agreement for Community Gardens 1. Definitions: 1.1 City – The Corporation of the City of Pickering. 1.2 Community Garden - a site, located on City-owned or leased/licensed lands, that is approved to be divided into plots and operated by a Community Garden Committee for a Community Garden Group to grow produce, herbs and flowers for not-for-profit use. 1.3 Community Garden Committee - a group of community garden members responsible for the governing and organization of the Community Garden. 1.4 Community Garden Group - all the people participating in the Community Garden. 1.5 Donation Plot - a garden plot where food is planted and harvested by a Community Garden Group and donated to a local food bank, soup kitchen or other such related organization. 1.6 Garden Plot - a delineated section of the Community Garden including raised beds, intended for gardening produce, herbs and flowers for personal not-for-profit use by a Community Garden Group member. 1.7 Gardener Agreement – an agreement between the Community Garden Committee and the Gardener/Plot User that outlines the rules, roles and expectations of membership in the Community Garden. 1.8 Gardener/Plot User - person(s) assigned to a plot within the designated area. Responsible for the planting and maintenance of the assigned plot and bound by the terms of a Gardener Agreement. 1.9 Board, Board of Directors, Board Committee (if applicable to the group) - defined as the elected Board of Directors responsible for the governing and organization of the Community Garden; elections to be held at the end of the membership season each year. - 733 - 2 2. Term: 2.1 Participation in this Community Garden Agreement will be annual and can be renewed each year at the Annual General Meeting in the fall (or at such other time and place as the Garden Committee or Board of Directors determines). 3. Rules: 3.1 I understand that the City of Pickering in conjunction with the (insert name of group) Community Garden Group is hereby granting permission at its sole discretion for me to use the designated plot at (insert name of garden), located in (insert name of site or park), on a non-exclusive basis and for the sole purpose of community gardening, from the (insert start date and end of gardening season date) annually for a one (1) year period, unless extended on a mutual agreement. Notification to the Community Garden Committee via email is required to plant any winter crops that may extend the gardening calendar beyond (insert date). 3.2 I will abide by the applicable policies, practices, by-laws, and laws and regulations, terms and conditions set out. 3.3 I agree that I am a resident of the City of Pickering. I further acknowledge that I will provide a copy of my photo ID as proof of residency if requested by a Community Garden Committee member. 3.4 I will not smoke or vape, drink alcoholic beverages, use illegal drugs, or gamble in the garden. I will not come to the garden while under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs. 3.5 I understand that children under the age of 16 are allowed in the garden; however, they must be accompanied and supervised by an adult at all times. I understand that I am responsible for supervising those individuals I may bring to the garden. 3.6 I understand that animals, i.e., dogs, cats, other pets are not permitted in the garden and all pets in public park areas are to be leashed at all times. 3.7 I agree not to cause a nuisance, disturbance or to interfere with the quiet enjoyment of other gardeners or neighbours of the garden area. 3.8 I understand that the use and storage of hazardous substances at the garden site is prohibited. - 734 - 3 3.9 I understand that camp fires, candles, gas and/or open flame lanterns or torches are prohibited on the garden site. 3.10 I will not plant any illegal plants, invasive species or noxious weeds. 3.11 I understand that cannabis plants are prohibited. 3.12 I will utilize the designated parking area(s) and not drive motorized vehicles into the garden area. 3.13 I understand that nighttime activities in the garden areas are not permitted. 3.14 I will plant my garden no later than (insert date) and provide continued maintenance to my plot, plant materials within my plot and the adjacent pathways, for the duration of the season. 3.15 I understand that this is a green garden, and I will only use organic fertilizers and insecticides in accordance to provincial regulations and any municipal level requirements, if any. 3.16 I will be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of my garden plot and surrounding areas including: watering, weeding, removal of fallen or rotten produce, litter removal, path maintenance and any other garden related maintenance on a weekly basis. 3.17 I will only water my plot with hand watering methods. I will use water wisely. 3.18 I understand that edges walkways and paths are to be kept clear of obstacles and that any tools and personal property must not be left on the site overnight. 3.19 I will not plant anything beyond the boundaries of my own plot, nor will I plant anything in any other gardener’s plot. 3.20 I understand and agree that I will only pick crops that I grow in my own plot and that I will not pick anything in any garden plot that is not assigned to me. 3.21 I understand that taking food or plants from other gardeners’ plots, or theft of any gardening equipment will result in an automatic and immediate removal of gardening privileges. 3.22 I will keep trash and litter out of the garden, the plot, as well as from adjacent edges, walkways, paths, and composters (if any). - 735 - 4 3.23 I will ensure that my plot is entirely free of weeds and that only winter crops, if any, will remain after (insert date). 3.24 I agree that all structures (tomato cages, wooden poles, etc.) will be removed and taken home, or laid flat on the bed no later than (insert date). 3.25 I agree that I will not sell the production of my gardening efforts from the Community Garden. 3.26 I agree that if I must withdraw from maintaining my plot and participating in the garden for any reason, I will notify the Community Garden Committee. 3.27 I agree that I am responsible for having someone attend to my garden if I am unable to do so. In the event that I am unable to continue to tend to my garden, I will contact the Community Garden Committee to see if they are able to have a volunteer member assist. I agree that should there be any produce that I am unable to harvest from my garden plot, I will contact the food bank coordinator and arrange to donate the harvest to the local food bank. 3.28 I will respect other gardeners, and I will not use abusive or profane language or discriminate against others. 3.29 I agree that the number of plots per gardener is limited to one (1) per household, depending upon demand. 3.30 I agree that I will not use any types of manufactured or lumber edging around the boundaries of my garden. 3.31 I agree that I will not, in any way, extend the boundaries of my (insert size) plot. Plots will be randomly measured from time to time and gardeners will be expected to remove vegetation that is creeping into pathways. 3.32 I will volunteer a minimum (insert number) hours per season of my time, as determined by the Garden Committee, for general maintenance. I will be advised regularly as to the status of my volunteer time by the Community Garden Committee. If my volunteer hours are not completed by the end of (insert month), my plot will not be renewed for the following year and I will not be eligible for another plot for (insert number) years. I understand that work on my own plot and pathways does not count towards my volunteer hours. It is understood and recognized that the Community Garden membership has a diverse population with different skill sets and abilities. There are many volunteer jobs available that do not - 736 - 5 require physical labour and jobs less physical will be assigned to persons with limited mobility. 3.33 I understand that (insert name of group) Community Garden Group has an Exclusive Action Procedure (Section 5) and a Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens in place. I agree that it is my responsibility to ensure that I understand this process and agree to follow it should there be a dispute in which I may be involved. Failure to comply may result in a forfeit of gardening privileges and plot. I agree that all decisions made by the Garden Committee and the (if applicable) Board of Directors are final and binding. 4. Indemnity: 4.1 I, __________________________________ agree to fully defend, indemnify and save harmless, The City of Pickering, its directors, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, agents, successors and assigns; (insert name of group) Community Garden Group, its directors, officers, employees, volunteers, consultants, contractors, agents, successors and assigns, or any of them, from and against all actions, claims, injuries, damages, costs, expenses, charges, losses or liabilities whatsoever, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, claims of third parties of whatsoever kind, legal fees or other costs that the City of Pickering may suffer, incur or be liable for, resulting from the performance of this agreement, be it by me or any of my guests. 4.2 I understand that contravention of any rules, terms, conditions, by-laws, and legislation is cause for exclusion from the garden and loss of the plot and possible liability on my part. 5. Exclusive Action Procedure: Should the rules of this agreement be breached, the following procedure will follow: 5.1 You will receive one (1) written warning on behalf of the Community Garden Committee. If the warning requires action on your garden plot, a yellow card will be posted in your plot. 5.2 If no response or correction has been made after one (1) week, you will receive a second written notice. If the second warning requires action on your garden plot, a red card will be posted in your plot. 5.3 If after a third week, no response or correction has been made, you will receive written and final notification that you have forfeited your gardening privileges and plot. - 737 - 6 5.4 Upon request, and provided notification is sent to the Community Garden Committee before the end of the third week, you will be permitted to state your case to Committee members. However, the final decision belongs to the Community Garden Committee and is binding upon all members. 5.5 You will be allowed to reapply for another garden plot only after (insert number) years have elapsed after the infraction has occurred, and only at the discretion of the Community Garden Committee and subject to plot availability. 6. Conflict Resolution Procedure: It should be recognized that the Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens is a different and additional procedure than the Exclusive Action Procedure that may be taken as a result of a breach of the Gardener’s Agreement for Community Gardens. 6.1 I understand that should a problem arise, that I cannot solve, or if I feel that the rules have been violated by another Gardener/Plot User, I will provide a written complaint to the Community Garden Committee. The Community Garden Committee agrees that all formal complaints will be discussed at an executive meeting and appropriate action, following the (insert name of group) Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens, will be taken. All parties to the complaint will be given an opportunity to state their positions, however, all Community Garden Committee decisions are final and binding. I ___________________________________________, have read and understand this agreement and accept these rules, terms, and conditions stated above, for the participation in the Community Garden. I understand that (insert name of group) Community Garden, and/or The City of Pickering have the right to create new rules if a situation warrants. I have reviewed and received a copy of the (insert name of group) Community Garden Gardener Application, Gardener Agreement, and the Conflict Resolution Procedure documents. Signed: __________________________________ Plot#:__________ Date: _______________ Gardener Approved:_______________________________________________ Date:_______________ (insert name of Community Garden Committee Representative) - 738 - 1 Appendix 4 Example Conflict Resolution Procedure for Community Gardens Purpose To guide the (insert name of group) Community Garden in providing a pathway to resolving conflicts within the Community Garden. Disputes between Gardeners/Plot Users may arise and this procedure has been established to assist members in dealing with them effectively so that their impact is minimal. Members are encouraged to discuss issues as they arise but not spread rumours or to involve people outside of the (insert name of group) Community Garden membership. When members cannot address these issues themselves, a mediator or Community Garden Committee member will be appointed to assist the process. Objectives • It is inevitable that conflicts will arise periodically. • It is recognized that most conflicts should be able to be resolved to the reasonable satisfaction of all concerned. • Disputes may arise due to a simple misunderstanding or communication not being as effective as it could be. Problems may be resolved by simply communicating the problem directly to the person concerned. • Conflicts should be dealt with at an early stage and actively addressed. • Complaints should be raised and dealt with by the people involved and with the Community Garden Committee; efforts should be made to ensure that the general public are protected from the effects of the dispute. • Openness, honesty, confidentiality and equal respect for views of all parties are crucial for the successful resolution of conflicts. Procedure Members may initiate the conflict resolution procedure, or a member with a grievance/dispute is encouraged to discuss the issue with the other person directly involved, if they feel comfortable doing so. 1. If the person with a grievance or dispute does not feel comfortable in approaching the other person directly, or if that person has already spoken to the other person directly and the complaint/difficulty continues, then the complainant should initiate the conflict resolution process by either: • Talking to a Community Garden Committee member; • Emailing the general account for the Community Garden (insert community garden email address); and or • Calling a Community Garden Committee member. - 739 - 2 •Emails or telephone calls to non-committee members should be avoided as they may lead to misinformation. 2.A Community Garden Committee member will be assigned the responsibility of attempting a mediation between the parties. 3.The assigned mediator (e.g., Community Garden Committee member) will be impartial to the dispute. The mediator will act as a point of contact for persons with a grievance. If the mediator is not impartial, the matter will be referred back to the (insert name of group) Community Garden Committee, and another Committee member will be appointed to address the matter. 4.The mediator will endeavour to reconcile the dispute by hearing the concerns of both parties. 5.If the mediator believes that the issue is of a sufficiently serious nature, they can advise the parties of the following: a.A clear statement of the specific concerns; and b.The expectations regarding the resolution of the concerns. 6.If the conflict still continues, the mediator should inform the Community Garden Committee about the measures taken to date so that they can take further steps to resolve the conflict, including but not limited to: a.Issue a clear situation statement about the matter and expectations; b.Determine that the behaviour is not acceptable, is negative to the garden harmony, negatively affects relationships between Community Garden Group members or outside bodies, or is not aligned with the Community Garden’s purpose; c.Select another Committee Member to attempt to mediate the conflict or arrange for mediation efforts using external mediators; d.Advise that changes are to be made within a certain time span to address the issue; and e.Review procedures or organizational matters that may be contributing to the continuation of the conflict. Membership Termination The (insert name of group) Community Garden Committee may advise of, and terminate Community Garden membership. This termination is subject to appeal to a General Meeting to be called with three-week (3) notice to vote upon the intention to terminate a membership. Prior to a decision being made, the person whose membership may be terminated can address the meeting and will then leave the General Meeting before the decision is reached by the Community Garden Committee. - 740 - Attachment #2 to Report PLN 48-22 Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum April 4, 2022 To: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on March 28, 2022 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 13-22 Community Gardens -Valley Plentiful Community Garden Update and Next Steps for New Community Garden Sites Council Decision Resolution 840/22 1.That Report PLN 13-22 of the Director, City Development & CBO regarding community food gardens and an update about Valley Plentiful Community Garden be received for information; 2.That, through the Office of the CAO, a multi-departmental staff working group be established to formalize a framework for new community gardens; 3.That staff be directed to return a Community Garden Policy, to establish and manage new community garden sites, in late 2022 for Council’s consideration; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. Please take any action deemed necessary. Susan Cassel Copy: Chief Administrative Officer - 741 - Report to Council Report Number: PLN 49-22 Date: December 5, 2022 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Planning Reform - Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 - Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Plan - Proposed Integration of A Place to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement - Various Other Legislative and Regulatory Proposals - Comments to the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing - File: L-1100-058 Recommendation: 1. That the comments in Report PLN 49-22, regarding Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, and various other Environmental Registry, Regulatory Registry, and Provincial Plans and Policy reforms, be endorsed; 2. That staff be authorized to submit (and resubmit where required) the comments in Report PLN 49-22 to the Province via the respective consultation portals; and 3. That a copy of Report PLN 49-22 and Council’s resolution thereon, be forwarded to the Premier Douglas Ford, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, MPP Peter Bethlenfalvy, the Regional Municipality of Durham, and the other Durham area municipalities. Executive Summary: On October 25, 2022, the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) introduced Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 for first reading. On November 28, 2022, Bill 23 was passed by the Ontario Legislature. Over the past month, MMAH introduced a series of other proposed Acts and legislative changes for consultation. The proposals were released through a series of postings on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO) and the Ontario Regulatory Registry, with commenting periods varying from 30 days (November 24, 2022) to 60 days (December 30, 2022). Bill 23 will have significant implications on the role, function, capacity and fiscal health of municipalities, conservation authorities, and on the planning and development process in Ontario. Significant changes (reductions, exemptions and caps) are proposed to key revenue generating tools, including development charges, community benefits charges, and cash-in lieu for parkland acquisition. This undermines the philosophy that ‘development pays for development’. The City does not support the changes. A key change is proposed to the definition of ‘affordable’ housing, and new definition ‘attainable’ housing is introduced. In both cases, the Province is proposing to relate the classification of a home as either affordable or attainable, relative to a percentage of average resale price, or a percentage of average market rent. This approach to classification has no relation to an individual’s or household’s income to afford such units. The City does not support the changes. - 742 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 2 Four proposed legislative changes are aimed at releasing lands, known as the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve, for future urban development (see Location Map of Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Lands, Attachment #1). These include the proposed revocation of the Central Pickering Development Plan, the proposed removal of the Duffin-Rouge Agricultural Preserve lands from the Greenbelt, the proposed revocation of Minister’s Zoning Order – Ontario Regulation 154/03 and the proposed Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Repeal Act, 2022. These measures are in keeping with the City’s 2004 Growth Management Study, that concluded urban development on the lands was appropriate and desirable. As such, these legislative changes aimed at releasing lands are largely supported by the City. This report provides a high-level summary of the major changes proposed through Bill 23 and the various other legislative, regulatory, plan and policy reforms to planning and development. Staff, through the Chief Administrative Officer, submitted comments on behalf of the City, to the postings that had a deadline of November 24. However, on November 23, all but one of those postings (the revocation of the Central Pickering Development Plan) were extended to December 9, 2022. Staff have also submitted comments on the proposed changes to the Greenbelt Plan as it has a comment deadline of December 4, 2022. The City’s comments have been prepared by City Development staff with assistance from Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Engineering Services, Finance, and Legal Services. Staff are seeking Council’s endorsement of those comments submitted by the provincial deadlines (prior to Council’s consideration of this Report); authorization to submit any revised or additional comments on those matters; and, Council’s endorsed comments on those matters having later comment deadlines. Financial Implications: The outcome of the proposed Bill 23 changes, if approved, will have significant adverse financial implications for the City, the full extent of which is not yet known. However, preliminary review shows a loss of approximately $12.3 million for the four-year phase-in of the maximum development charge rates; a reduction in eligible DC funding for growth-related studies and prescribed land costs; a reduction in the amount community benefits revenue; and, a reduction in the amount of cash-in-lieu of parkland that can be collected. These losses of revenues will either be funded directly or indirectly by the Pickering taxpayers. Discussion: On October 25, 2022, the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) introduced Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, and it was passed on November 28,2022. Bill 23 proposes sweeping changes to various provincial statutes that govern development, including the Planning Act, the Development Charges Act and the Conservation Authorities Act, with the stated goal of removing barriers to get more homes built in Ontario. The MMAH released the proposal through a series of postings on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO) and the Ontario Regulatory Registry, with commenting periods varying from 30 days (November 24, 2022) to 60 days (December 30, 2022). MMAH also released a posting to revoke the Central Pickering Development Plan. On November 4, 2022, the MMAH released another ERO posting seeking comments on a proposal to revoke the Minister’s Zoning Order on the lands known as the Duffins-Rouge - 743 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 3 Agricultural Preserve (see Location Map Attachment #1), and a posting to remove the lands from the Greenbelt Plan, with the intent to make it available for urban development. Coupled with this, the MMAH also introduced the Better Municipal Governance Act, 2022, in November 17, 2022 which, if passed, would repeal the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005, to allow development of those lands. A summary of the major changes proposed through Bill 23 and the various ERO postings and other consultations, including staff’s comments and concerns, are discussed below. 1. ERO Posting # 019-6174 – Central Pickering Development Plan (commenting deadline: November 24, 2022; comments submitted on November 24, 2022) 1.1 Proposed Revocation of the Central Pickering Development Plan The MMAH is proposing to revoke the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP), to support the Province’s commitment to streamline and potentially increase housing supply. The CPDP comprises the lands known today as the Seaton Community, as well as the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve, located between Seaton and the York-Durham Town Line in the West. This is one of a set of four regulatory mechanisms put in place to restrict lands uses in the Preserve primarily to agriculture, conservation, and detached dwelling residential uses. It also established land use designations for the development of the Seaton Community. The MMAH‘s intention to revoke the CPDP is based, amongst other things, on the fact that the development and construction of many areas of the urban community component of the CPDP (Seaton) is underway and, as set out in the CPDP, and the intention is that the more detailed planning approvals (e.g., subdivision approvals, etc.) would be implemented by the City. Staff Comments: In principle, revocation of the CPDP is supported. However, it is recommended that the proposed revocation of the Central Pickering Development Plan, as it affects the Seaton Urban Area, not be given 3rd reading or proclaimed at this time until the stakeholders have an opportunity to review all agreements respecting fiscal and legal matters. In principle, revocation of the CPDP is supported. The City of Pickering commissioned a land use review study for the employment lands in Seaton in 2022 (through Council Report CAO 09-22; Resolution #938/22), and the conclusions of the report identified the need for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to amend the CPDP (at the very least) to permit a broader range of employment uses. As such, Pickering’s Mayor issued a letter to Minister Clark dated September 2, 2022 asking the Minister to review and endorse our request to cut red tape in Pickering by repealing the CPDP in its entirety. However, the revocation of the CPDP will create some significant transitional issues respecting legal and financial matters. This will result in the need to amend the Pickering Official Plan – Seaton Policies, the Pickering Financial Impacts Agreement, the Seaton Community Master Parks Agreement, the Seaton Landowners’ Amended - 744 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 4 and Restated Cost Sharing Agreement and the Seaton Regional Infrastructure Front Ending Agreement. While these issues are likely to be of a housekeeping nature, there must be sufficient time to ensure that the integrity of these policies and agreements is sound, given that they are based on the CPDP. It is important that required agreement amendments are collaboratively formulated by all stakeholders (Pickering, Seaton Landowners’ Group, Regional Municipality of Durham, and Infrastructure Ontario). Any required official plan amendments will involve a public meeting, per the Planning Act. Revocation of the CPDP for the Seaton Urban Area should not come into effect until the amended policies and agreements are in place, failing which those policies and agreements may become ambiguous and/or unenforceable. 2. ERO Posting 019-6216 (Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Plan), ERO Posting 019-6238 (Proposed Revocation of the Minister’s Zoning Order – Ontario Regulation 154/03) and ERO 019-6304 (Repeal of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005 (commenting deadline: December 4, 2022; comments submitted on November 28, 2022) 2.1 Proposed Amendment to Remove the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Lands from the Greenbelt The Province proposes to remove 15 areas of land totalling approximately 7,400 acres from the Greenbelt area, including the approximately 4,950 acres of land in the Duffins- Rouge Agricultural Preserve. The lands are bounded by the Canadian Pacific Railway to the south, the Pickering-Toronto/York Townline on the west, the lands west of the West Duffins Creek valley, in Pickering. Including the Preserve lands in the Greenbelt was one of a set of four regulatory mechanisms that the Province put in place to restrict the land uses in the Preserve primarily to agriculture, conservation, and detached dwelling residential uses. Should these lands be removed from the Greenbelt, the Province’s expectation is that new home construction will begin on these lands by no later than 2025, and that significant progress on approvals and implementation must be achieved by the end of 2023. Staff comments: The removal of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve lands from the Greenbelt is supported. This will allow the implementation of an urban area boundary expansion on these lands. This is consistent with Pickering Council’s adoption of Amendment 13 to the Pickering Official Plan in 2004, which implemented the results of the City’s Growth Management Study. It is also consistent with subsequent requests from Pickering Council in 2016, the former Mayor in 2019 and 2022, and the current Mayor on November 16, 2022 (see Background section below). - 745 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 5 However, should the lands be removed from the Greenbelt, the City’s objective is not just to see houses built, but a ‘community’ built. Accordingly, it is recommended that an appropriate land use and policy framework be put in place that (a) establishes a robust open space and natural heritage system that protects significant and sensitive natural features and functions, including required corridors, linkages, and buffers; (b) establishes generous active recreational areas; (c) requires the implementation of the results of appropriate subwatershed/master environmental servicing studies; (d) requires front funding agreements for municipal soft and hard services, for other community infrastructure such as school, and for regional infrastructure; and (e) commits to building an agreed to percentage of housing that is affordable housing to low and moderate income households. Background Between 2002 and 2004, the City of Pickering undertook a Growth Management Study to determine if, and where, urban settlement boundaries should be expanded. On December 13, 2004, Pickering Council adopted Amendment 13 to the Pickering Official Plan. This amendment incorporated the results of the City’s Growth Management Study. The Study concluded the urban area boundary for Pickering should be expanded to include the southern half of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve. Additionally, the Study concluded that development in the Seaton Urban Area should generally be restricted to the central and north part of the lands. On February 28, 2005, the Provincial Greenbelt Plan (2005) was approved. This plan permitted municipalities who had initiated settlement area expansions studies prior to the effective date of the Greenbelt Plan, (December 16, 2004), to complete and implement their studies (policy 3.4.4.1), but expressly prohibited Pickering from implementing the results of its municipally initiated settlement area expansion study (policy 3.4.4.2a). Despite Pickering Council having completed its Growth Management Study prior to the Greenbelt Plan coming into effect, the City was prohibited from implementing its results, and the Province used four other legislative tools to prevent any uses other than agriculture, conservation and detached residential on the lands. In 2015, the Province undertook a review of its Plans in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. On September 19, 2016, Pickering Council endorsed Planning Report PLN 15-16, which as part of the first recommendation, requested the removal of clause 3.4.4.2a in the former Greenbelt Plan (renumbered as 3.4.5.2a in the Greenbelt Plan 2016). There was no response from the Province. During a further review of the Provincial Growth Plan, former Mayor Ryan wrote to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in correspondence dated February 7, 2019. The letter reiterated the request from Report to Council PLN 15-16 to eliminate the policy in the Greenbelt Plan preventing Pickering from implementing the results of its settlement area expansion study. - 746 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 6 Former Mayor Ryan also wrote the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on November 14, 2022, identifying support for the repeal of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005, which had re-established, by statute, agricultural easements on the Preserve lands. On November 16, 2022, Mayor Ashe wrote the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing indicating support for the removal of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve from the Greenbelt Lands and the repeal of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005. 2.2 Proposed revocation of Minister’s Zoning Order – O. Reg. 154/03 for the Duffins- Rouge Agricultural Preserve This Zoning Order was put in place as one of a set of four regulatory mechanisms to control the land uses in the Preserve to conservation, agriculture, and detached dwelling residential uses. For the reasons set out in sections 1.1 of this Report, responding to ERO Posting # 019-6174, and section 2.1 of this Report, responding to ERO Posting 019-6216, the revocation of O. Reg.154/03 is supported. 2.3 Proposed Repeal of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005 This Act was put in place as one of a set of four regulatory mechanisms to re-establish agricultural easements on the lands in Preserve, conservation easements on natural heritage lands, and permit detached dwelling residential uses. For the reasons set out in sections 1.1 of this Report, responding to ERO Posting # 019-6174, and section 2.1 of this Report, responding to ERO Posting 019-6216, the proposed repeal of the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005, is supported. 3. ERO Posting 019-6163 – Proposed Planning Act and City of Toronto Act changes (original commenting deadline: November 24, 2022, since changed to December 9, 2022; comments submitted on November 24, 2022) 3.1 Permitting Additional Dwelling Units as of right This Proposed legislation, read together with ERO Posting 019-6197 (Proposed Changes to Ontario Regulation 299/19: Additional Residential Units (ADUs) for which the commenting deadline is December 9, 2022) would override existing zoning by laws to allow up to 3 units per lot (2 in primary building and 1 in ancillary) “as of right” (rezoning not needed, but building permits and all other regulatory approvals required to construct or make renovations would be). The proposed changes would also prohibit municipalities from imposing development charges (DCs) (regardless of unit size), parkland dedication or cash in lieu requirements, applying minimum unit sizes or requiring more than one parking space per unit in respect of any second unit in a primary building and any unit in an ancillary structure. Staff comments: The Planning Act currently authorizes the use of two residential units in a detached house, semi-detached house or row house, as well as the use of a residential unit in a building or structure ancillary to a detached house, semi-detached - 747 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 7 house or row house, but the Pickering Zoning By-laws have not yet been updated to reflect these permissions. If this proposal comes into effect, the Pickering Zoning By-laws will only require a minor amendment to bring them into conformity with the new provisions of the Planning Act. The City of Pickering is already experiencing parking challenges for low rise residential development, particularly within newer neighbourhoods. These subdivisions have smaller lot sizes in order to achieve required densities, and yet have none, to limited public transit service. It is recommended that the Minister reconsider the ADU provision and, as a minimum, include criteria that limit the size of ADUs or the number of bedrooms in an ADU to be no more than two bedrooms. There is a concern that the proposed limitation of only one additional parking space per additional dwelling unit will exacerbate the existing on-site parking problems and problems with parking spilling on to adjacent roads. This would occur particularly where a number of ADUs of larger size, e.g., 3-bedroom units, are proposed on a single site. As for the proposed prohibition on charging DC’s and parkland dedication or cash-in- lieu, the City does not currently charge DC’s or cash-in-lieu of parkland for ADUs. It is not expected that these new permissions would result in any unprecedented surge of ADUs, since many residential properties do not lend themselves to infill or gentle intensification, and many residents do not have the financial means or appetite to entertain such a venture. Some neighbourhoods in the City do lend themselves to be intensified by the construction of ADUs, but not to the scale where it warrants the upgrading of infrastructure services. 3.2 Removing the planning policy and approval responsibilities from certain upper- tier municipalities, including the Region of Durham This proposal means that the Durham Regional Official Plan will be the official plan for the lower-tier municipalities; lower tier municipalities will assume approval authority for all Planning Act decisions, except official plans, which will need Ministerial approval (with exceptions to be defined through future regulations); commenting responsibilities would be retained by the Region; and lower tier municipalities will have approval authority over Official Plan Amendments, subdivisions, land division, part lot control exemptions. Upper Tier municipalities would continue to be responsible for servicing and regional roads. Staff comments: Removing the Regional planning function, implies that matters of regional planning interest or impact, becomes a local municipal responsibility. If the Province does not provide the required funding to local municipalities to fulfil these added responsibilities, municipalities may not have a choice but to fund the additional costs for additional staff and resources from property taxes, and/or pass on the cost to developers through planning application processing and approvals, both of which would be counter-intuitive to the Province’s goal to cut costs and make housing more affordable. - 748 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 8 Regional Planning also represents the Provincial interest in planning matters. These include conformity with Provincial plans and policy, archaeological site assessments, soil and groundwater assessments, noise impacts, land use compatibility, environmental impact assessments, etc. Removing the Regional Planning authority from the planning hierarchy implies that this function will have to be either downloaded to lower tier municipalities, or uploaded to the Province, which would add further delays to planning approvals, including approvals for new housing. Planning staff at either the local or Provincial level would need to be trained to fulfill this function. The Province needs to clarify who, in the absence of Regional Planning, would represent the Provincial interest in planning matters. 3.3 Higher Density Around Transit Changes are proposed to require municipalities to implement “as-of-right” zoning for transit supportive densities in specified areas around transit stations, known as “major transit station areas” (MTSAs), and “protected major transit station areas” (PMTSAs) that have been approved by the Minister, within 1 year of MTSA or PMTSA approval. If zoning updates are not undertaken within the 1-year period, the usual protection from appeals to the OLT for PMTSAs would not apply. Staff comments: The PMTSA in Pickering, situated around the GO train station, has been delineated in the Durham Regional Official Plan (DROP) through the approval of Amendment #186 to the DROP, but not yet in the Pickering Official Plan. Amendment #186 to the DROP establishes a density target of 150 residents and jobs per hectare for PMTSA’s. The PMTSA in Pickering is situated in part (85%) in the City Centre, a designated Urban Growth Centre, which is already zoned to permit high density residential and mixed use development at a density of 200 residents and jobs per hectare. There are only a limited number of properties with Pickering’s PMTSA, located southwest of the corner of Liverpool Road and Bayly Road, and outside the City Centre, that will require rezoning within the prescribed one-year period to permit “transit- supportive” densities. Given the small area for which the zoning needs to be updated, staff is of the opinion that the one-year time limit to update the zoning to implement “as- of-right” zoning for transit supportive densities in Pickering’s PMTSA is attainable. 3.4 Limiting Third Party Appeals Changes were initially proposed to limit third party appeals for all planning matters (official plans, official plan amendments, zoning by-laws, zoning by-law amendments, draft plans of subdivisions, land divisions, and minor variances). Appeal rights would be maintained for key participants (e.g., applicants, the Province, public bodies including Indigenous communities, utility providers that participated in the process), except where appeals have already been restricted (e.g., the Minister’s decision on new official plan). The proposed limit on third-party appeals would apply to any matter that has been appealed (other than by a party whose appeal rights are being maintained) but has not yet been scheduled for a hearing on the merits of the appeal by the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) on the day the bill is introduced. - 749 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 9 The Province has since introduced a revision to the initial proposal by re-instating third party appeals for zoning by-law and official plan amendments. Staff comments: Staff is pleased to acknowledge the Province’s most recent proposal to have third party appeals re-instated for zoning by-law and official plan amendments. It is recommended that the limitation of Third Party Appeals to the Ontario Land Tribunal, with respect to other development applications, such as minor variances and land divisions, be withdrawn in its present form, as it severely constrains the rights of citizens, landowners, and business operators to play a meaningful a role in future of their community. This proposal would effectively leave no legal recourse to a member of the public on certain types of planning applications, which, under the current legislation, could have presented important information, which may have changed the outcome of a council or committee decision on an application, at a subsequent Ontario Land Tribunal hearing. 3.5 Cost Awards to unsuccessful party Regulatory Registry 22-MAH-17 The Province proposes to amend the OLT Act to specify that the Tribunal may “order an unsuccessful party to pay a successful party’s costs”. Staff comments: Awarding costs to the unsuccessful party should only be permitted when the Tribunal makes a finding that the parties’ conduct meets the threshold of “unreasonable, frivolous or vexatious, or bad faith”. It is recommended the language of the proposal be explicit in this regard. 3.6 Removing Public Meetings for Draft Plans of Subdivision applications Changes are proposed to remove the public meeting requirement for draft plans of subdivision. The existing public notice requirements for plan of subdivision applications would be maintained. Staff comments: Removing the requirement for statutory public meetings for draft plan of subdivision applications is supported. Public consultation on what would be permitted on the lands would be completed as part of a zoning by-law amendment application approved prior to the submission of an application for draft plan of subdivision. 3.7 Exemption for Development up to 10 units from Site Plan Control and removing the ability to regulate architectural details and landscape design The Province is proposing to exempt all aspects of site plan control for residential development up to 10 units (except for the development of land lease communities), and had proposed to limit the scope of Site Plan Control by removing the ability for municipalities to regulate architectural details (external design of buildings including matters related to sustainable design) and landscape design. - 750 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 10 Staff comments: Staff supports the amendment to Bill 23 at Standing Committee to reinstate site plan control to the appearance of elements, facilities and works on the land, or any adjoining highway under a municipality’s jurisdiction as they affect matters of health, safety, accessibility, sustainable design, or the protection of adjoining lands. This will strengthen the ability of the City to implement its Integrated Sustainable Design Standards. However, staff recommend further amendments be made to restore the original wording of section 41 (4) 2. (d) of the Planning Act .The proper attention to the placement of buildings and structures on a site, the architectural aesthetic design of the building, and the design of the surrounding landscaped open spaces, and how they relate to each other, results in the creation of a high-quality site design that helps to enhance both the private and public realms. Continuing to regulate the architectural design and associated landscape design will allow the City to promote a high standard of urban design, promote a sense of place, and encourage sustainable design. The proposal to exempt developments of up to 10 units from site plan control is supported as it would help accelerate the review of small-scale housing projects. Should a development project require site-specific zoning approval, through this process there will be an opportunity to consult the public and ensure the zoning by-law requirements address scale, massing, height, minimum landscaping, etc., so that the resulting built form is well designed to fit in with the surrounding neighbourhood. 3.8 Removing Conservation Authorities’ authorization to review and comment on development applications The Province proposes to remove the Conservation Authorities’ authorization to review and comment on development applications and supporting studies received under the prescribed Acts on behalf of a municipality, and to collect fees for that service. Staff comments: Currently, municipalities have the ability to enter into agreements with CA’s to review development applications for environmental impacts. The reason for this practice is that municipalities, including the City of Pickering, do not have the in-house expertise or resources to fulfil this function. Downloading this function to municipalities means that they need to be financially-enabled to fulfil this additional role. If the Province does not provide the required funding, municipalities may not have a choice but to fund the additional costs for additional staff and resources from property taxes, and or through higher development application processing fees, which would be counter-intuitive to the Province’s goal to cut costs and make housing more affordable. Furthermore, downloading the function to municipalities will not result in any significant cost savings or reduced timelines for development approvals, but merely shift the responsibility of the function from one agency to another agency. - 751 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 11 4. ERO Posting 019-6141 – Proposed Conservation Authorities (CA) Act and Regulatory Changes (commenting deadline: December 30, 2022; comments not yet submitted) 4.1 The Province is also proposing a series of other updates to the CA Act and language in the Planning Act which, amongst other things, would allow the Minister to exempt development authorized under the Planning Act from requiring a permit under the CA Act (e.g., natural hazard permits) subject to certain conditions set out in regulation. Staff comments: Exempting development authorized under the Planning Act from requiring a permit under the CA Act will further limit the regulatory powers of the CAs by empowering the Minister to make exceptions specifically for development approvals. Staff is concerned that this exception would undermine CAs role as “floodplain regulators” and fail to recognize the critical role CAs play in providing expert opinion on the role wetlands play in preventing flooding and their symbiotic relationship with surrounding natural heritage and hydrologic features, including the broader natural heritage system. Staff recommend that in the event the Province proceeds with this proposal, the Minister consult extensively with the relevant CA and municipality prior to granting an exemption to a proposed development from requiring a permit under the CA Act. 5. ERO Posting 019-6172 – Proposed Planning Act and Development Charges Act Changes (original commenting deadline: November 24, 2022, since changed to December 9, 2022; comments submitted on November 24, 2022) 5.1 Changes to Parkland rates and costs The Province proposes to update the maximum alternative parkland dedication rate, which is the maximum amount of parkland that can be required for higher density developments as follows: • for the purposes of land conveyed, from the current rate of 1 hectare for each 300 dwelling units, to 1 hectare for each 600 dwelling units; and • for the purposes of cash payment-in-lieu of land, from the current rate of 1 hectare for each 500 dwelling units, to 1 hectare for each 1000 dwelling units. To provide further cost certainty to developers, no more than 15 percent of the amount of developable land (or equivalent value) could be required for parks or other recreational purposes for sites greater than 5 hectares, and no more than 10 percent for sites 5 hectares or less. The Province also proposes that parkland dedication rates be set at the time the city receives a site plan application for a development; or if a site plan is not submitted, at the time the city receives an application for a zoning amendment (the status quo would apply for developments requiring neither of these applications). To encourage development to move to the building permit stage faster and provide greater certainty of costs, the parkland dedication rates is also proposed to be frozen for two years from the date the relevant application is approved. - 752 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 12 Staff comments: Staff support in principle the proposal to update the current rate of land conveyance for parkland required for high density development from 1 hectare per 300 units to 1 hectare per 600 units, because high-density development generates a disproportionately high amount of parkland on a per unit or per person basis than what is generated from a low density residential development. However, the proposed changes will limit the size and type of parks that the City will now be able to obtain in the future, particularly in high-density areas where the City will be pushed to accept smaller park “pockets” and linear parks. Although the proposed update provides a more equitable application to parkland dedication, it does not address the flawed methodology to calculate the land area for parkland dedication based on the number of units irrespective of the unit types. Unit types do not generate the same number of people nor the same parkland needs. Parkland dedication should be based on the number of people generated from the development. Regarding the proposal to update the cash-in-lieu payment of land, by reducing the current rate from 1 hectare per 500 dwelling units to 1 hectare per 1,000 dwelling units for development in High Density Residential Areas and Mixed Use Areas, the disparity between how cash in-lieu is calculated for low density residential development vs. how it is calculated for high density residential and mixed development, would be reduced. However, the Province did not provide any rationale or analysis in support of their proposal to reduce the rate from 1 hectare per 500 dwelling units to 1 hectare per 1,000 dwelling units. As for the proposal that no more than 15 percent of the amount of developable land (or equivalent value) could be required for parks or other recreational purposes for sites greater than 5 hectares and no more than 10 percent for sites 5 hectares or less, staff has no objection or concern. Regarding the proposal that parkland dedication rates be set at the time the City receives a site plan application for a development or if a site plan is not submitted, at the time the City receives an application for a zoning amendment, staff has no objection. As for the proposal to freeze parkland dedication rates for two years from the date the relevant application is approved, staff has no objection. Parkland dedication rates, once approved, remain generally unchanged for a long period of time. It is assumed that this freeze would not apply to calculating cash-in-lieu of parkland, which would present a problem, because it does not account for the potential increase in the value of land over the 2-year period. 5.2 Support more efficient use of land and provide for more parks quickly To make more efficient use of available land in a development and to provide for parks more quickly for a community, developers would be able to identify land, including encumbered land (e.g., land with underground transit tunnels or other infrastructure) and privately owned public spaces that would count towards any municipal parkland dedication requirements if defined criteria, as set out in a future regulation, were met. - 753 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 13 With regard to privately owned public spaces, a municipality would have the ability to enter into agreements with the owners of the land, which may be registered on title, to enforce parkland requirements. In cases, where disputes arise about the suitability of land for parks and recreational purposes, the matter could be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Staff comments: No objection to this change, subject to review of the regulations to be released. The implications of this proposal can be explained by the following scenarios: Scenario 1: The City will be conveyed lands for park space that may be partially encumbered. This may limit the type of plantings and City infrastructure that can be installed in certain portions of the park. However, this land will still provide public green space (lawns, sports fields, etc.). Scenario 2: Easements, in favour of the City, over Privately Owned Publicly accessible Spaces (POPS) will result in publicly-accessible park space that is not the responsibility of the City to maintain. Provided that these spaces meet minimum City requirements for accessibility, access, design, as well as seasonal and preventative maintenance, this approach would be desirable. It locates park space in the immediate vicinity of the residents it is intended to serve. The creation of the park space would directly coincide with the occupancy of the related development. 5.3 Build transparency and other measures to support the faster acquisition of more parks To build more transparency and accountability on planning for and acquiring parks, municipalities would be required to develop a parks plan before passing a parkland dedication by-law. Currently, this is a requirement before a municipality can adopt the official plan policies required to use the alternative parkland dedication rate for higher density developments. Now, this requirement is extended to municipalities that plan to use the standard parkland dedication rate. This rate requires that the maximum land to be conveyed for park or other public recreational purposes not exceed 2 percent for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes, and 5 percent for all other developments. This proposed change would apply to the passage of a new parkland by-law. To incent municipalities to acquire parks more quickly, municipalities would be required to allocate, or spend, at least 60 percent of their parkland reserve balance at the start of each year. Staff comments: The requirement to allocate 60% of the parkland reserves annually is acceptable, providing this is an internal process only. Allocating funds from the parkland reserve to one or more park acquisition projects will help build-up funds to acquire larger parcels of land required in strategic areas. However, the City needs the flexibility to shift priorities internally should an - 754 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 14 unexpected opportunity or requirement occur. However, a requirement to spend 60% annually is unacceptable. This will inhibit the ability to build up a reserve to develop community parks in strategic locations. Staff recommends that the words “or spend” be deleted from the Bill. Encourage the Supply of Rental Housing To incent the supply of rental housing units, particularly family-friendly rental housing, a tiered discount would be provided on development charges (DCs) levied on purpose- built rental units. The discount would be deeper depending on the unit type (i.e., 15 percent for a 1-bedroom unit (or smaller), 20 percent for a 2-bedroom unit; and 25 percent for a 3+ bedroom unit). This proposed change would be in effect immediately upon Royal Assent of Bill 23. The definition of purpose-built rental would be based on the definition that is currently used in a regulation under the Development Charges Act, 1997: “a building or structure with four or more dwelling units all of which are intended for use as rented residential premises”. Staff comments: Action Item 2.2 of the Pickering Housing Strategy & Action Plan 2021-2031 directs Finance staff to “Consider waiving fees or providing a grant equivalent to certain development application fees, development charges, property taxes, and/or parkland dedication requirements, for affordable rental, affordable ownership, and/or supportive housing developments on a case-by-case basis.” This work is intended to be undertaken in the medium-term (5-10 years). The benefit of the proposed development charge discount incentive for family-friendly, purpose-built rental housing, is that it should create a level playing field for all Ontario municipalities when considering development applications for this type of housing. In addition, it could provide the necessary incentive for builders to provide much needed family-sized rental housing within the City (this size of rental housing was identified as a gap through the City’s Housing Strategy Study). However, discounts on DCs will impact the City’s ability to fund infrastructure. The Province’s proposal precludes the in- depth study that Finance staff has been directed to undertake. Also of concern is that new purpose-built rental units are exempt from Ontario’s rent control guidelines. It is uncertain whether the new rental units will be affordable relative to a household’s income. It is recommended that municipalities continue to have the flexibility to determine the appropriateness, structure, and magnitude of Development Charges discounts for rental housing units. 5.4 Encourage the supply of Affordable Housing To incent the supply of more affordable housing, affordable ownership and rental housing units, affordable housing units in a development subject to inclusionary zoning, as well as non-profit housing developments, would be exempt from development charges (DC), community benefits charges (CBC), and parkland dedication requirements. - 755 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 15 An affordable housing unit would be any unit that is no greater than 80 percent of the average resale purchase price for ownership or 80 percent of the average market rent for rental, for a period of 25 years. A Minister’s (Municipal Affairs and Housing) bulletin would provide the information needed to support municipal determination of the eligibility of a unit for DC and parkland dedication exemptions. To benefit from a DC exemption, a developer must enter into an agreement with a municipality, which may be registered on title, to enforce the affordability period of 25 years and any other applicable terms set out by the municipality, such as the eligibility of buyers and renters. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing would have the authority to impose the use of a standard agreement to ensure the effective implementation of these exemptions. Affordable housing units would also be exempt from parkland dedication requirements. With regard to the standard parkland rate, the exemption would be implemented by discounting the maximum parkland rate of 5 percent of land, or its value, based on the number of affordable housing units to be built as a proportion of total units in a particular development. With regard to the alternative parkland dedication rates, the maximum parkland requirements would only be calculated based on the market units in a particular development. Similarly, affordable housing units would be exempt from CBCs. The exemption would be implemented by discounting the maximum CBC of 4 percent of land value by the floor area of affordable housing units as a proportion of total building floor area. Staff comments: In encouraging affordable housing through exemptions from development charges, community benefits charges and parkland dedication requirements, the Province is using a new definition of “affordable housing”. The Province’s new definition of “affordable housing” is “any unit that is no greater than 80 percent of the average resale purchase price for ownership or 80 percent of the average market rent for rental, for a period of 25 years”. There are two significant problems with this definition: • the proposed new definition is unrelated to an individual’s, or household’s, ability to pay (i.e., their income) as is the case now; and • the affordability period is set at 25 years. Regarding the definition of “affordable housing”, although the City of Pickering Official Plan does not formally define “affordable housing”, it does describe it as meaning annual housing costs (rent or mortgage payments) that do not exceed 30 percent of gross household income. Action Item 1.1 of the Pickering Housing Strategy & Action Plan 2021-2031 directs staff to add a definition of “affordable housing” to the City’s Official Plan which includes reference to the average purchase price and average market rent in accordance with the definition in the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020. The foundation of the City’s definition of affordable housing is based on income. - 756 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 16 CMHC defines affordable housing as generally meaning a housing unit that can be owned or rented by a household with shelter costs (rent or mortgage, utilities, etc.) that are less than 30 percent of its gross income. The Province, in the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS) and Durham Region, in its official plan, similarly define affordable housing including the measure based on income. Through the Envision Durham consultation, the City’s response to Durham Region’s question about redefining “affordable housing”, Council recommended that the Region maintain its definition of affordable housing to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and other municipalities in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. It is recommended that the Province continue to define affordability based on income, not selling price and rental rates. As far as the proposed inclusion of an “affordability period” in the definition of “affordable housing” is concerned, the current definition of “affordable housing” contains no limiting time period. In other words the housing must continue to meet affordability measures forever. The concern with adding a limiting time period to the definition of “affordable housing” is that, after the 25 years those affordable housing units could be converted to market units, thus reducing or depleting the affordable housing stock. It is possible that the Province believes that 25 years is a suitable time period since the time period may relate to the life of the physical housing units. After 25 years the housing units may require significant upgrades. However, what protections will be in place to maintain affordable housing stock beyond the 25 years? What happens to renters and the amount they pay in rent beyond the 25 years? What happens to the ownership housing stock? Will there be a “windfall” in the increased sale price to the last owner? Providing a maximum affordability period of 25 years will likely result in affordable units being converted to market units, reducing the supply of affordable units in the future. It is recommended that an affordability period not be applied to rental housing, and that an appropriate timeframe of affordability for ownership housing be determined by the municipality. As for the proposal that municipalities could determine the eligibility of a unit for DC and parkland dedication exemptions based on information provided by the Minister and that agreements be entered into between the municipality and developers to benefit from such exemptions, the content of the proposed agreement is unknown at this time and there is no information on if, or how, the Province may consult with municipalities on this matter. There should be consultation and agreement by the municipality on the criteria to qualify for exemptions and the contents of this agreement. Regarding the proposal to exempt affordable housing from parkland dedication and community benefits charges, there is no evidence to support the premise that the cost savings associated with parkland dedication and community benefits charges will lead to more affordable housing. There is however, a direct relationship - 757 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 17 between the reduction of parkland dedication and community benefits charges collected by a municipality, and its ability to provide parks, which contribute to community livability and positive human and environmental health. In addition, this proposal will directly lead to a reduction in the amount of parkland, and the level of service associated with parks. 5.5 Encourage the supply of “Attainable” housing To incent the supply of attainable housing units, a residential unit, in a development designated through regulation, would be exempt from DCs, CBCs, and parkland dedication requirements. The Lieutenant Governor in Council would be provided with regulation-making authority to prescribe any applicable additional criteria that a residential unit would need to meet to be exempt from municipal development-related charges. The parkland dedication and CBC exemptions would be calculated based on the same approach proposed for affordable housing exemptions. Staff comments: There is no evidence to support the premise that the cost savings associated with exempting DCs, parkland dedication and CBCs will lead to more attainable housing. There is, however, a direct relationship between the reduction of DCs, parkland dedication and CBCs collected by a municipality, and its ability to provide necessary infrastructure, including parks, which contribute to community livability and positive human and environmental health. It appears that the definition of “attainable housing” is related to the Province designating a residential development and to the price of a unit being sold at or below the average resale purchase price. A Minister’s bulletin will set out the average market resale values for each geographic market/municipality at the time of proclamation of the attainable housing designation. As with the Province’s proposed new definition of “affordable housing”, its proposed definition of “attainable housing” is in no way related to an individual’s, or household’s, ability to pay (i.e., their income). It is recommended that the Province continue to define affordability based on income. It is recommended that any proposed new definition for “attainable housing” be income based. 5.6 Development Charges Act Changes It is recommended that the Province not proceed with this proposal. The passage of Bill 23 will have a significant financial impact on the City. The City collects Development Charges (DC) to fund growth related infrastructure. However, with the reduction of DC collections based on Bill 23, the City would not have adequate funds to finance these growth related project costs that are needed for the anticipated increase in population. Ultimately, these costs would be passed on to existing taxpayers. To put another way, the loss of the DC dollars will probably translate into future property tax increases or a possible decrease in City services. - 758 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 18 Bill 23 also introduces the false argument that the notion that Development Charges is a major factor contributing towards higher housing prices. However, Bill 23 provides no evidence that the reduction in DC charges will be passed on directly to homebuyers through reductions of housing prices. If these reductions are indeed passed on to home buyers, shifting costs onto the tax base increases the property tax burden and those costs are ultimately shared by all tax payers, including the City’s existing low-income homeowners, who do not enjoy the benefits of the growth-related capital projects. 5.6.1 Mandatory Phase-In of Development Charges: Bill 23 is proposing a phase-in for the first 5-years of a DC bylaw, starting with 80% of the maximum charge in Year 1 (2023) and increasing by 5% each year until Year 5, where the full charge would then be in place. It is interesting to note, that one of the goals of Bill 23 is to address housing affordability and supply. However, the proposed DC fee phase-in decrease also applies to non-residential DC fees. Staff comments: This phase-in approach will result in a significant decrease in DC revenues. With the City completing its most recent DC Background Study in July 2022, the potential revenue loss is quantified below: Year 1 – Approximately $3.1 million in lost revenue (assuming 6 months of lost revenue) Year 2 – Approximately $4.6 million in lost revenue Year 3 – Approximately $3.1 million in lost revenue Year 4 – Approximately $1.5 million in lost revenue The proposed phase-in of DCs will result in a loss of an estimated $12.3 million in DC revenue for the City over 4-years, and a subsequent slower development of growth related infrastructure or in an increase in property taxes for taxpayers, or a combination of both. It is recommended that the Province not proceed with this proposal. 5.6.2 Changes in DC Eligible Capital Costs: Bill 23 further excludes capital costs that would be eligible for DC funding. Land, excluding parkland, is currently an eligible cost under the Development Charges Act. Bill 23 would allow for regulations to prescribe which services land could be included as a capital cost. Depending on which services are prescribe to allow for the inclusion of land, the impact to the City could be substantial. There are various City facilities with land requirements in the current DC Background Study, which are at risk of losing DC funding, such as the Seaton Fire Station, Animal Shelter and By-Law Services facility, Notion Road 401 Crossing, City Centre facilities and the Seaton Regional Library. Growth studies is another significant area that will be excluded from receiving DC funding. Bill 23 will allow for growth studies already included in DC Background Studies prepared prior to the passage of the bill to be eligible for DC funding, but future DC Background Studies and by-laws will exclude all growth studies. - 759 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 19 The City is currently planning to undertake multiple master planning studies (such as Transportation and Recreation Master Plans), in order to examine the increase in need of services in response to growth. The City’s current DC Background Study has approximately $6.9 million in gross costs for studies, with $5.3 million being eligible for DC funding. With these studies being excluded for DC funding in the next DC Background Study, the full cost of the studies will ultimately be passed on to taxpayers. With the reduction in DC revenues due to Bill 23, the City would recommend that the Province develop an infrastructure funding program to help municipalities to offset the loss of DC revenues. Without this, the City will be forced to re-prioritize growth related capital projects, resulting in delays or cancellations of growth projects, in turn delaying new development. Staff comments: It is recommended that the Province not proceed with this proposal. 5.6.3 Community Benefit Charges exemptions: Bill 23 proposes additional statutory exemptions for the payments of Community Benefit Charges (CBC). Affordable Units, Attainable Units and Inclusionary Zoning Units will be exempt from CBC payments. Staff comments: These additional exemptions will result in further revenue loss for the City, which will need to be made up by other funding sources (i.e., taxpayers). The City of Pickering is a going through a transformational growth stage due to major planned growth related capital projects such as the City Centre, Pickering Heritage & Community Centre, Animal Shelter, Seaton Fire Hall and Seaton Recreation & Library. These capital projects, rely on development charge funding, to varying degrees, as a major source of capital dollars. With a reduction in DC dollars, and taking into consideration that there is one other source of financing, the “Pickering Taxpayer,” there will probably have to be some difficult decisions made regarding property tax affordability, green lighting of capital projects, and/or change in capital project scope. New residents usually have an expectation regarding the level of municipal services for their new community. They expect their new community to have a wide range of recreational facilities, vibrant parks, and modern libraries. Bill 23 proposes to change that vision and/or expectation. The reduction in DC fees collected will probably result in an overall decrease in the quality of life viewed from a municipal lens. Existing facilities will become over crowded due to the possible reluctance of the existing local taxpayer to subsidy the construction of growth related facilities. It is recommended that the Province not proceed with this proposal. 6. ERO Posting 019-6196 – Proposed Heritage Act Changes (original commenting deadline: November 24, 2022, since changed to December 9, 2022; comments submitted on November 24, 2022) - 760 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 20 6.1 Proposed new requirements for Municipal Registers and inclusion of non- designated properties on the Municipal Register. The Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism (MCM) is proposing legislative changes to municipal practices around the inclusion of non-designated properties on a municipal register by: (a) Requiring municipalities to make an up to date version of the municipal register available on a publicly accessible website. Municipalities would have 6 months time to make the necessary changes to their website. (b) Allowing for property owners to use the existing process under the Ontario Heritage Act for objecting to the inclusion of their non-designated property on the municipal register regardless of when it was added to the municipal register. (c) Increasing the standard for including a non-designated property on a municipal register by requiring that the property meet prescribed criteria. MCM is proposing to have the criteria currently included in O. Reg. 9/06 (Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest) apply to non-designated properties included on the municipal register, and is proposing that the property must meet one or more of the criteria to be included, which would be facilitated through a regulatory change. MCM is further proposing that this requirement would apply only to those non-designated properties added to the municipal register on or after the date the legislative and regulatory amendments come into force. (d) Removal of a property from the register: i. If council moves to designate a listed property, but a designation bylaw is not passed, the property would have to be removed from the municipal register. ii. Non-designated properties, currently included on a municipal register, would have to be removed if council does not issue a notice of intention to designate (NOID), within two years of the amendments coming into force. iii. Non-designated properties included on the register would have to be removed if council does not issue a NOID within two years of the property being included. iv. If removed from the register under any of the above three circumstances, the property cannot be relisted for a period of five years. Staff comments: Proposed legislative changes to municipal practices around the inclusion of non-designated properties on a municipal register and the associated timelines, will create additional administrative, planning/heritage, and financial resource demands on the City. Increasing the standard for including a non-designated property on a municipal register will generally weaken the City’s heritage protection ability, will result in a reduction in the number of listed properties, and will limit how long future listings last. - 761 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 21 It is recommended that the Province does not change the criteria set out in O. Reg. 9/06 (Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest), and that it does not move forward with the requirement for either designated or non-designated register properties to meet two of these criteria. The proposal requiring a review of listed properties and decision-making on whether or not to designate within two years of the amendments coming into force, will create a resource burden, both financial and staffing, to the City. Although there may initially be a large number of properties designated, the proposal ultimately puts heritage properties at a high risk of complete loss. It is recommended that the Province not move forward with the proposal regarding removing properties from the register. 6.2 An increase in the threshold for designation of individual properties and new limitations on designation for properties subject to proposed development MCM is proposing to increase the threshold for designation of individual properties by requiring that a property meet two or more of the criteria prescribed in regulation, whereas currently a property must meet one of the criteria prescribed in regulation. In addition, the Province is proposing to change the criteria in O. Reg. 9/06 (Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest). It is not know exactly what those changes will be. Staff comments: Increasing the threshold for designation of individual properties will limit the number of properties that can be designated. It will prevent certain properties that have heritage value within, and to, a community from being protected. This proposal ultimately results in placing some heritage properties at risk of loss. In addition, should Council propose to amend an existing bylaw, the amended by-law would need to meet the new threshold for designation. This could result in the loss of some heritage properties. It is recommended that the Province not move forward with the proposal for increasing the threshold for designation of individual properties and proposed new limitations on designation for properties subject to proposed development. The criteria in O. Reg. 9/06 (Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest) reflect long standing concepts in the field of heritage conservation that evolved over decades and align with international standards. They were codified in 2006, ensuring consistency across municipalities. It is recommended that any proposed changes to the criteria in O. Reg. 9/06 (Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest) be determined by the Province in consultation with municipalities, heritage committees, and heritage associations across the province. - 762 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 22 6.3 Prohibiting Heritage Designation once a Planning Application has been made under the Planning Act MCM is proposing to require that council would only be able to issue a notice of intention to designate (NOID) where a property is included on the municipal heritage register as a non-designated property. Therefore, if a planning application is submitted with respect to a property, a NOID may only be issued if the property was already included in the municipal register as a non-designated property on the date of the application. The 90-day timeline for a municipality to issue a NOID following application submission would then apply. Staff comments: The proposal that a municipality can only issue a NOID if a property is already included on the municipal register will surely result in the loss of cultural heritage resources. Often a municipality will not be aware of a heritage property until a planning application is submitted and there is a review of the subject property, and a more detailed Heritage Impact Assessment is undertaken. Most municipalities don’t have the resources (staff and financial) to undertake a comprehensive municipality-wide survey and analysis of all potential cultural heritage resources within its boundaries. This work would have to be done to ensure that all cultural heritage resources are identified on the heritage register so that when a planning application is made there would be certainty about any cultural heritage resources present on the site. It is recommended that the Province not move forward with the proposal to prohibit a heritage designation once a planning application has been made under the Planning Act. 6.4 Changes to Heritage Conservation Districts (HCD) MCM is proposing to require municipalities to apply prescribed criteria to determine a HCD’s cultural heritage value or interest. This would include a requirement for HCD plans to explain how the HCD meets the prescribed criteria. MCM is proposing to have the criteria currently included in O. Reg. 9/06 (Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest) apply to HCDs and is proposing that the HCD must meet two or more of the criteria in order to be designated. MCM is also proposing to introduce a regulatory authority to prescribe processes for municipalities to amend or repeal existing HCD designation and HCD plan bylaws. The proposal would help create opportunities to align existing HCDs with current government priorities and make HCDs a more flexible and iterative tool that can better facilitate development. If passed, MCM would consult on the development and details of the amendment and repeal processes at a later time. Staff comments: The proposed requirement to apply prescribed criteria to determine a HCD’s cultural heritage value or interest may add a measure of complication to designating a HCD. In addition, the proposal that the HCD must meet two or more of the criteria in order to be designated, may limit the number of properties included in a HCD, and ultimately result in the loss of some heritage properties. - 763 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 23 It is recommended that the Province consult with municipalities prior to making any changes to the requirements for Heritage Conservation Districts. 7. ERO Posting 019-6173 – Inclusionary Zoning (commenting deadline: December 9, 2022; comments not yet submitted) 7.1 Proposed Inclusionary Zoning Regulatory (IZ) changes Inclusionary zoning is a land use planning tool, authorized under the Planning Act, which municipalities may use to require affordable housing units to be included in residential developments of 10 or more units, in identified Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) or in Community Planning Permit System (CPPS) areas, ordered by the Minister. Inclusionary zoning can be a useful tool to facilitate the supply of affordable housing in areas that generally have characteristics such as growth pressures, high housing demand and availability of higher order transit. The Planning Act and O. Reg. 232/18 set out the legislative and regulatory requirements for municipal implementation of inclusionary zoning, including the authority for municipalities to adopt inclusionary zoning official plan policies and make inclusionary zoning by-laws. Beyond the prescribed minimum requirements, municipalities have flexibility and discretion to tailor their inclusionary zoning policies to their local context. Currently under the regulation, municipalities have the discretion to establish an affordability period, to determine the percentage of total units to be set aside as affordable, and to develop an approach to determining affordable prices/rents for inclusionary zoning units. The Province proposes amendments to O. Reg. 232/18 that would establish an upper limit on the number of units that would be required to be set aside as affordable, set at 5% of the total number of units (or 5% of the total gross floor area of the total residential units, not including common areas). It would also establish a maximum period of 25 years over which the affordable housing units would be required to remain affordable. Amendments would also prescribe the approach to determining the lowest price/rent that can be required for inclusionary zoning units, set at 80% of the average resale purchase price of ownership units or 80% of the average market rent (AMR) for rental units. These proposed amendments would only apply on lands within PMTSAs. The proposed changes are intended to provide more development cost certainty, and establish a more consistent approach to inclusionary zoning requirements across the province. Staff comments: In order for a municipality to utilize the “inclusionary zoning” provisions enabled through the Planning Act, it must undertake an “assessment report” to inform the development of appropriate official plan policies and zoning by-law provisions. In accordance with Ontario Regulation 232/18, this assessment report must include an analysis of municipal demographics and population, household incomes, housing supply by type (current and planned), housing types and sizes that might be needed to meet anticipated demand for affordable housing, current average market price/rent by housing type across the municipality, and a written opinion on this analysis - 764 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 24 from a person independent of the municipality and who is qualified to review the analysis. The assessment report must be updated every five years to determine whether the official plan policies require amending. A report detailing the performance of the inclusionary zoning by-law is required to be prepared every 2 years and address prescribed matters. In addition, provincial regulation prohibits the application of Section 37 Density Bonusing on developments where inclusionary zoning is applied. The adoption of by-laws to implement inclusionary zoning cannot be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal, except by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Currently, there are no policies in the Pickering Official Plan that enable the use of inclusionary zoning. The Region of Durham has indicated that they will be preparing an assessment report for their jurisdiction. This work, when completed, will enable the local municipalities, including the City of Pickering, to establish official plan policies and zoning by-law provisions related to inclusionary zoning. Under the Planning Act, the IZ regulation currently provides municipalities with the discretion to establish an affordability period, to determine the percentage of total units to be set aside as affordable, and to develop an approach to determining affordable prices/rents for IZ units. The proposed cap of 5% on affordable units precludes the ability of the City to establish a “made-in-Pickering” approach that would be the result of the detailed analysis expected from the Assessment Report currently being prepared by the Regional Municipality of Durham. The detailed analysis contained in the Assessment Report is intended to inform matters such as “affordability period” as well as assist municipal decision-makers in targeting the level of household needs for their municipality. The proposal for the Province to establish the “affordability period” to be no more than 25 years essentially disregards the detailed analysis undertaken through an Assessment Report and removes the flexibility for a “made-in Pickering” approach. Proposed amendments would also prescribe in regulation the approach to determining the lowest price/rent that can be required for IZ units: 80% of the average resale purchase price for ownership units; or 80% of the average market rent (AMR) for rental units. There would be no income based approach to setting unit cost (ownership or rental). CMHC defines affordable housing as generally meaning a housing unit that can be owned or rented by a household with shelter costs (rent or mortgage, utilities, etc.) that are less than 30 percent of its gross income. The Province, in the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS) and Durham Region, in its official plan, similarly define affordable housing based on income. Through the Envision Durham consultation, the City’s response to Durham Region’s question about redefining “affordable housing”, Council recommended that the Region maintain its definition of affordable housing to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and other municipalities in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. - 765 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 25 It is recommended that the Province continue to define affordability based on income. It is recommended that the Province continue to enable municipalities to define the number of units and the associated affordability period for IZ units based on the detailed, municipality-specific, work undertaken through the Assessment Report. 8. Ontario Regulatory Registry Posting – Proposal #22-MMAH017 - proposed changes to the Municipal Act (original commenting deadline: November 24, 2022, since changed to December 9, 2022; comments submitted November 24, 2022) 8.1 Seeking Feedback on Municipal Rental Replacement By-Laws Under s.99.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, municipalities may enact bylaws to regulate the demolition or conversion of multi-unit residential rental properties of six units or more. Rental replacement by-laws vary among municipalities and currently include requirements around number, size, type, and cost of rental units, as well as right of first refusal for existing tenants. The government is proposing to enact a Minister's regulation-making authority to enable the Minister to make regulations to standardize and clarify municipal powers to regulate the demolition and conversion of residential rental properties. The proposed legislative amendments will not impact renter protections or requirements under the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA). The MMAH is also considering new regulations under this proposed authority to standardize rules and requirements municipalities may include in their by-laws (e.g., those that may be negatively impacting housing construction or renter protections). Staff comments: The Council approved Pickering Housing Strategy & Action Plan 2021-2031 directed staff to add new official plan policies to protect existing rental housing stock from conversion, and to prohibit the demolition of existing rental housing units unless the proposed redevelopment meets specified conditions (Action Items 1.5 and 1.6). The proposed Minister's regulation-making authority to standardize municipal rental replacement bylaws could directly affect what can/cannot be included in any future rental replacement policies and by-laws. This would remove the City’s ability to create its own made-in-Pickering solution and preclude the outcome of City staff’s current work. The proposed legislative changes and new regulations could lead to a loss of rental housing stock. The Durham Region Official Plan (ROP) policies currently protect purpose-built rental housing by discouraging condominium conversions when vacancy rates are at or below 3 percent. Durham Region, through Envision Durham, is considering adding policies that would permit conversions subject to certain conditions. Through the Envision Durham consultation process, the City has requested clarification of these conditions and has recommended that a ROP Amendment continue to be required for requests for rental housing conversions. - 766 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 26 The ROP does not currently have policies to protect rental housing from demolition. However, it is considering adding policies that encourage area municipalities to protect rental housing from demolition. Removing municipal authority to require replacement units and “right to return” for tenants could be seen as reducing renter protections. These policies and by-laws may prevent displacements of tenants due to no fault evictions, and enable replaced rental units for those tenants to remain in the same type of unit as before (e.g., help prevent demolition displacing tenants to create luxury rentals). In addition, the proposed changes may result in increased pressure on municipal community housing wait lists. It is recommended that the Province continue to give municipalities the flexibility to regulate the demolition and/or conversion of multi-unit residential rental properties tailored to the specific needs of the municipality. 9. ERO Posting 019-6177 – Provincial Plans and Policy (commenting deadline: December 30, 2022; comments not yet submitted) 9.1 Proposed merging of A Place To Grow (the Growth Plan) and the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) The government is reviewing the potential integration of the Grow Plan with the PPS in order to remove or streamline policies that result in duplication, delays or burden in the development of housing. The Province holds the view that evolution of the current land use planning policy framework in Ontario over the last three decades has left us with a complex system of overlapping policy instruments that can be difficult to navigate and implement. Given the importance of the PPS and A Place to Grow in guiding land use planning decisions the Province are considering ways to streamline policies to simplify navigation, to reduce complexity and create more outcome focused policies that are less prescriptive. Staff comments: Although the proposal to “declutter” and simplify the Provincial planning policy framework and remove unnecessary duplication, is commendable, it is doubtful whether such steps would speed up housing delivery and the cost of housing. The Provincial policy framework is generally sound and appropriately articulates matters of provincial interest, as set out in section 2 of the Planning Act, through policy. The current housing crisis cannot be attributed to what occurs at the front end of the planning process (when Provincial land use policies are reviewed for conformity and consistency), but rather to other matters and processes that are generally beyond the control of local municipalities, such as: • the economy of land (land costs); • the cost of development/construction; • the bureaucracy and complexity associated with the funding and delivery of affordable and social housing; • the length of time it takes for external agencies, including Provincial Ministries, to provide comments on development applications; - 767 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 27 • the length of time associated with the approval of environmental assessments; • the lack of financial tools to local municipalities to incentivize development, including affordable housing; • NIMBYism (which often result in significant delays in planning approvals and costly and time-consuming Ontario Land Tribunal hearings); and • the lack of co-ordination between the various levels of government and key stakeholders (banks and non-profit housing corporations). Although some of the matters above would be addressed in part by the changes proposed through Bill 23, addressing the above matters are equally if not more important to streamline the planning process and increase the housing supply in Ontario. 10. ERO Posting 019-6177 – Proposed Supporting Growth and Housing in York and Durham Regions Act, 2022(commenting deadline: November 24, 2022, since changed to December 9, 2022; comments submitted November 23, 2022) 10.1 Expansion to the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant in Pickering Staff Comments: Pickering remains in support of the recommended solution (the Water Reclamation Centre in York Region) from the UYSS Individual Environmental Assessment (2014). Pickering requests that the legislation, if approved, make a commitment to Pickering receiving community benefits through a Host Community Benefit Agreement as the planning and implementation of the project requires City resources through review and consultation, and results in community impacts related to twinning of the primary trunk sewer and future expansion of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant without the benefit of these projects following the Environmental Assessment Act process. Clarify who the “other proponent municipalities” are that are required to prepare environmental impact reports about the projects, as indicated in the Technical Briefing dated October 26, 2022. Indicate who the “prescribed municipalities” are which are required to work together to implement the Lake Simcoe phosphorus reduction project. Are these prescribed municipalities only within York Region? Pickering does not want this project to be a burden to Pickering or Durham Region taxpayers as this is a “made in York Region solution” that benefits only York Region. Provide details as to what is included in the improvements required for the “existing YDSS” within the geographical boundary of Durham Region, and specifically the City of Pickering. Does it include the YDSS Primary Trunk twinning from Finch Avenue to Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant? Does it include the expansion of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant to 840 MLD for the additional ultimate flow of 80MLD from York Region? Confirm that the recently constructed SEC through Pickering was designed for this additional flow. - 768 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 28 Who is funding the required improvements to the YDSS, including the future expansion of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant, for this project, considering the project only benefits York Region but cost sharing is typically an 80/20 split? The proposed legislation indicates that “both projects” would be exempt from the Environmental Assessment Act. Specifically, which elements within Durham Region are exempt? For example, the Class EA for the twinning of the Primary Trunk Sewer south of Finch Avenue was to include a component to address the location of a pumping station in Pickering’s City Centre area to accommodate a flow diversion north of Highway 401. How will this project approval now be handled? The Environmental Registry indicates capital upgrades to the existing YDSS would include: • increasing capacity of existing Pumping Stations • construction of new of twinned forcemains • upsizing or twinning sanitary sewer pipes but makes no mention of changes/expansion to Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant, however a Phase 4 expansion is required after 2039 to accommodate flows to 80 MLD (beyond 40 MLD). Growth projections made in the 2014 Individual EA (152,700 people/jobs by 2031) have been revised to not being recognized until 2039 for the 40 MLD solution, and that the 80 MLD solution could now service growth to 2055. Has the recent proposed Bill 23 legislation changed (accelerated) these revised projections? Capital cost of the expansion of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant to accommodate 80 MLD by 2055 has been estimated at $180M, however this only represents a portion of the total cost to expand from 630 MLD to 840 MLD (i.e. only 40 MLD out of 210 MLD). This cost estimate is misleading. The advice by the panel is subject to satisfactory resolution of Hydraulic Modeling of the YDSS to confirm that the ultimate flow of 80 MLD can be accommodated within the existing and expanded infrastructure, and confirmation that the existing Intrabasin Transfer Agreement will be sufficient to support this servicing strategy to 2051 and beyond. When will this confirmation take place, and how is the proposed legislation impacted if either is not confirmed? Attachment: 1. Location Map of Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve Lands - 769 - Report PLN 49-22 December 5, 2022 Subject: Planning Reform Page 29 Prepared By: Original Signed By Déan Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics Original Signed By Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO DJ:CR:ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 770 - TAUNTO N RD H W Y 7 B E A R E R D W H I T E S R D FINCH A V E A S P E N R D P E T E R M A T T H E W S DR S P R U C E H I L L R D A M B E R L E A R D N O R T H R D R E E S O R R D 14TH A V E HW Y 4 0 7 F A I R P O R T R D D I X I E R D PICKERING WHITEVALE Duffins Creek DURHAM YORK PICKERING MARKHAM TORONTO Greenbelt Area* Protected Countryside Natural Heritage System Towns/Villages Urban River Valleys Settlement Areas Outside the Greenbelt Municipal Boundary Road or Highway Proposed Modifications Greenbelt Redesignation Greenbelt Removal ORM Redesignation LEGEND Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Proposed Modifications Map 6 0 0.65 1.30.33 Km ° 1 cm equals 394 m Map North: 0° Note: While every effort has been made to accurately depict the information, this map should not be relied on as being a precise indicator of locations of features or roads. For precise boundaries and locations of Settlement Areas, including Towns/Villages and Hamlets, the appropriate municipalities should be consulted. Produced by and using data sources from the: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing; Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry; Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks; and, the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. https://www.ontario.ca/page/accessible-customer-service-policy We are committed to providing accessible customer service. On request, we can arrange for accessible formats and communications supports. Please contact MMAH by email (mininfo@ontario.ca) for regulation details. *Ontario Regulation 59/05, as amended. © 2022, King’s Printer for Ontario Maps are for Consultation Purposes Only Attachment #1 to Report PLN 49-22 - 771 - p](KER]NG Memo To: Susan Cassel November 23, 2022 City Clerk From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Request for Part Lot Control By-law -Owner: Altona Land Development Corporation - Block 1, Plan 40M-2697 File: PLC.40M-2697 The above-mentioned block is being developed in accordance with the appropriate Agreements, Zoning By-law and Common Elements Condominium Plan in such a manner as to allow the construction of 22 townhouse dwelling units (parcels of tied lands). Attached is a location map and a draft by-law, enactment of which will exempt Block 1 from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act thus allowing the 22 townhouse dwelling units to be created on parcels of tied lands (‘potls’) and the transfer of those potls into separate ownership. The draft by-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for December 5, 2022. PB:ca Attachments Location Map Draft By-law - 772 - A l t o n a R o a d Richardson Street Sheppard AvenueTwyn Rivers Drive St. Monica's Separate Schoo l 1:1,000SCALE:© The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location Map File:Applicant:Property Description: Part Lot Control THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Nov. 10, 2022 ¯ Altona Land Development Corporation Block 1, 40M-2697 Block 1 40M-2697 -CJ4o/ PJ(KERJNG -- io::::--_/ ~ I I -~ X <_, . ' -. ,. X X X " )', )tv *"' x..,. "' >11 J< X '\ ~\ ~ ,.- ~ I /' I - L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\Legal\Part Lot Control\PartLotControl_40M2697.mxd - 773 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a by-law to exempt Block 1, Plan 40M-2697, Pickering, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. Whereas pursuant to the provisions of section 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended, the Council of a municipality may by by-law provide that section 50(5) of the Act does not apply to certain lands within a plan of subdivision designated in the by-law; And Whereas Altona Land Development Corporation, the owner of Block 1, Plan 40M- 2697, intends to obtain approval of, and register a common elements condominium plan on the lands; And Whereas the proposed common elements condominium plan is to consist of 22 townhouse dwelling units; And Whereas it is intended that the owner or owners of each of the 22 townhouse dwelling units will own the parcel of tied land on which his, her or their dwelling is located, in fee simple and will also be a member or members of the common elements condominium corporation; And Whereas it is intended that the parcels of tied lands on which the 22 townhouse dwelling units are to be constructed will be subdivided by means of an exemption from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Section 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, shall cease to apply to Block 1, Plan 40M-2697, upon: (a)registration of this By-law in the Land Registry Office for the Land Titles Division of Durham (No. 40); and (b)registration of a restriction, pursuant to Section 118 of the Land Titles Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter L.5, requiring the consent of the Solicitor for The Corporation of the City of Pickering to the registration of any transfer or charge of any portion of Block 1, Plan 40M-2697 in the Land Registry Office for the Land Titles Division of Durham (No. 40). 7976/22 - 774 - ________________________________ ________________________________ By-Law No. 7976/22 Page 2 2.This By-law shall remain in force and effect for a period of two years from the date of the passing of this By-law and shall expire on December 5, 2024. By-law passed this 5th day of December, 2022. Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 775 -