Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-2023 General Government Committee Post-MeetingAgenda Date:December 4, 2023 Time:9:30 a.m. Location:Council Chambers or Microsoft Teams Municipal Administrative Centre 40 Temperance Street, 2nd Floor Bowmanville, Ontario Inquiries and Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to make arrangements for accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please contact: Laura Preston, Temporary Records Administrator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2104 or by email at lpreston@clarington.net. Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Audio/Video Record: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio and/or video record of General Government Committee meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a General Government Committee meeting, the Municipality will be recording you and will make the recording public on the Municipality’s website, www.clarington.net/calendar Noon Recess: Please be advised that, as per the Municipality of Clarington’s Procedural By-law, this meeting will recess at 12:00 noon, for a one hour lunch break, unless otherwise determined by the Committee. Cell Phones: Please ensure all cell phones, mobile and other electronic devices are turned off or placed on non-audible mode during the meeting. Copies of Reports are available at www.clarington.net/archive The Revised Agenda will be published on Friday after 3:30 p.m. Late items added or a change to an item will appear with a * beside them. Pages 1.Call to Order 2.Land Acknowledgement Statement 3.Declaration of Interest 4.Announcements 5.Presentations/Delegations (10 Minute Time Limit) 5.1 Delegation by Lorraine Sunstrum-Mann and Neil Pasher, Sloane's House, Regarding, Sloane's House Hospice, Palliative Care and Respite Centre 5 5.2 Delegation by Mitch Conan, Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, Regarding, An Update on the Port Hope Area Initiative - Port Granby Project 26 5.3 Delegation by Sher Leetooze, Cornish Society of Durham Region, Regarding, a Request to Erect a Cornish Cross in Rotary Park 39 *5.4 Delegation by Allison Hansen, Regarding, a Request to Immediately Cease the Use of Rodenticides at all Municipally Owned Properties 47 6.Consent Agenda 6.1 Communications 6.2 Staff Reports and Staff Memos 6.2.1 CAO-019-23 - Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol 50 6.2.2 CAO-021-23 - Green Fleet and Equipment Policy 87 6.2.3 LGS-033-23 - OPG Trail Licence Agreement 103 6.2.4 LGS-034-23 - Review of Notice By-law and Proposal of New Notice Policy 107 6.2.5 LGS-035-23 - Lakeview Cemetery – Transfer to Municipality 120 6.2.6 FSD-041-23 - Engineering Services DHRC Dehumidification 130 General Government Committee December 4, 2023 Page 2 Replacement 6.2.7 FSD-042-23 - Supply and Delivery of One Grader 135 6.2.8 FSD-043-23 - Supply and Delivery of One Rescue Truck 139 6.2.9 FSD-045-23 - Consulting Services for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Pathway Feasibility Study 143 6.2.10 PWD-011-23 - Proposed Amendments to Traffic By-law 2014- 059 148 *6.2.11 CSD-004-23 - West Beach Cottages 158 (Councillor Zwart intends to introduce additional provisions attached to the recommended motion) 7.Items for Separate Discussion 7.1 PDS-068-23 - Land Division Process - Recommendation 164 (Mayor Foster Intends to Introduce a Motion to Suspend the Rules to add this Report to the Agenda) (Requires a 3/4 Vote) 7.2 Correspondence by Ben McWade, P.Eng, Acting Manager, Construction Management Services, Region of Durham, Regarding a Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption Extension 173 8.Unfinished Business *8.1 CSD-003-23 - Rodenticide Use in Municipal Facilities 175 (Correspondence from L. Zehel attached) 9.New Business 9.1 Backyard Chickens (Councillor Zwart)184 9.2 Request to Support Bill C-310, Regarding, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (volunteer firefighting and search and rescue volunteer tax credit) (Councillor Elhajjeh) 185 9.3 Accessible Housing Petition (Councillor Traill)186 General Government Committee December 4, 2023 Page 3 10.Confidential Items 11.Adjournment General Government Committee December 4, 2023 Page 4 A paediatric respite and hospice care centre for Durham Region Presentation To:Clarington General Government Committee Date: Monday, December 4, 2023 Presenters: Neil Pasher (Founder of Sloane's House Board), Lorraine Sunstrum-Mann (Director of Sloane's House Board) Page 5 www.sloaneshouse.org Our Vision A paediatric respite and hospice care centre to be created in Durham Region,Ontario,founded on and guided by shared values,we will redefine paediatric respite care through personalized and contemporary care for children as well as their caregivers and families,to strengthen the fabric of their families and communities .Sloane’s House will demonstrate leading practices,innovation and a high level of skill,training and compassion in the delivery of its care,upholding the dignity and respect of each individual. Our Mission What we do: enrich the lives of children with persistent high health needs, their families & caregivers. How we do it: by providing a personalized family centered approach to safe & contemporary care. Why we do it: because Durham families need a place for respite and hospice care. Page 6 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org It begins with love Sloane was an endearing little girl with pretty ponytails and a smile that would warm your heart. Sloane was loved deeply by her mum,dad,her sisters, grandparents and all the care team that had the honour to care for her. Sloane captivated those around her by her occasional,but so worth waiting for,smiles and her endless snuggles . Page 7 1 large Photo www.sloaneshouse.org Sloane Sloane had Aicardi Syndrome Sloane had multiple seizures a day Sloane required 24-hour care Page 8 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org The relief of respite Paediatric Respite is the provision of appropriately trained individual(s) to care for terminally ill children (for a specified period of time), so that the usual caregiver may have a complete break from the demands of care. Respite care supports both the recipient of care and the caregiver. Page 9 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org Jack Jack was a typically developing little boy. He loved his family and being silly. Jack was diagnosed with a brain tumour at the age of 6. He eventually required the use of a wheelchair due to the impacts of his diagnosis. A couple of days after Sloane’s death, the Pashers received a panicked call from Jack’s dad saying that he didn’t think Jack had long to live. Page 10 1 large Photo www.sloaneshouse.org The Hope of Hospice Death is a moment in time …all we know until that moment is how to live. Hospice palliative care focuses on the beauty of each and every day,for however many days there are left. Page 11 www.sloaneshouse.org Hospice Services Specialist respite,emergency,palliative,and end-of-life care to children with life threatening conditions. Brings a range of professional skills &services under one roof. Offers care and support to ALL family members. Services may be day programs,hospice at home,telephone advice,terminal care,emergency care,and/or bereavement services. Page 12 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org High need in the Durham region Durham has one of the highest populations of families that are requiring this service in the province with no dedicated respite or hospice beds . It is now estimated that there are 1900 children with medically complex needs in Durham region and surrounding communities, with a need for this service,800 in Durham alone. Page 13 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org The Impact on Families Statistics Canada study found 82% of parent - caregivers of medically fragile children were distressed; 51% reported psychological distress; 28% reported financial stress and hardship. Page 14 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org What will Sloane’s House offer? Sloane’s House will be a place where the whole family and community will be able to connect through recreation programs,offering stress release, fun and a chance to learn more about one another. Sloane’s House will support children and their families with a palliative care approach -a philosophy of care that focuses on quality of living from a holistic perspective where the child and family are truly the centre of care. Page 15 www.sloaneshouse.org Strategic Directions Sloane’s House has an ambitious growth agenda for the organization. There is much work to be done over the next 5 years.We have established three strategic directions that set forth a desired course of action for Sloane’s House. Page 16 1 large Photo www.sloaneshouse.org Realizing the vision With the support of the West Whitby Landowners Group,land has been secured at the northwest corner of Des Newman Drive and Dundas St.W in Whitby Page 17 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org Capital Campaign Feasibility Study •20 + Community Leaders •Phase 1 Completed Summer 2023 Capital Campaign •Phase 2 – 1-2 years Page 18 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org Stakeholder Outreach All levels of government to build awareness and support. Ministry of Health /Ontario Health to secure approval and operational funding. Durham Ontario Health Team /Grandview /Lakeridge / UOIT and other clinicians to build service partnerships and training. Families and caregivers to ensure we meet their needs . Page 19 1 large Photo www.sloaneshouse.org Operational Readiness Summer Camp Day at WindReach Farm Program Definition &Development Page 20 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org Partnerships Sloane’s House is actively working with the following groups to achieve our vision: •Grandview Kids •Durham Paediatric Complex Care Program (in partnership with Sick Kids Complex Care Team, Lakeridge Health, CCKO, Home and Community Care Services Central East and Grandview Kids) •Provincial Paediatric Hospices and local Palliative Care providers Page 21 www.sloaneshouse.org Board •Jason Hunt, CHAIR •Neil Pasher, FOUNDER •Audrey Andrews •Katie Cronin -Wood •Dr. Julie Johnstone •Diane MacEachern •Brad MacIsaac •Jatinder Singh •Lorraine Sunstrum-Mann •Chris Vanclief •Lindsay Watt Page 22 Photo www.sloaneshouse.org How can you help Sloane’s Legacy? •Share •Support •Sustain Page 23 1 large Photo www.sloaneshouse.org For more information Website: www.sloaneshouse.org Email: info@sloaneshouse.com Page 24 Thank You Page 25 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF Municipality of Clarington Council December 4, 2023 Deputy General Manager, Historic Waste Program November 2023 Page 26 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF Page 27 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF Environmental Assessment Storage Mound Ready Remediation Complete CNSC Licence Issued Remediation Begins Storage Mound Closed Long-Term Monitoring Begins CNSC 10-year Licence Renewal Page 28 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF •End stage planning •Port Granby Nature Reserve November 2023 November 2023 •Storage mound leachate collection •Treatment plant output to licensed, offsite storage •East Gorge groundwater collection •Site remains fenced •Mound surface, internal sensors •Grounds monitored, maintained •Air, Soil •Plants; wildlife •Water; groundwater •Plans in place to ensure any event is properly managed •Minimize risk to people and environment Waste Water Treatment LTWMF Monitoring Environmental Monitoring Continued Safety Oversight Page 29 OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF Page 30 OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF May 2023 Page 31 OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF May 2023 Page 32 OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF May 2023 Page 33 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF •AECL considering collaborative vision for surplus lands surrounding storage mound •AECL staff ongoing dialogue in a positive direction with representatives of Alderville First Nation, Curve Lake First Nation, Hiawatha First Nation, Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation, SECRA, MOC and MPH •Port Granby End-Use Working Group continues discussion on goals, objectives stewardship plans, governance options AECL/WTFN tour of Port Granby Proposed Nature Reserve Lands 2021 Page 34 OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF November 2023 Page 35 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF One-on-one property owner communications, dedicated communications staff/field officer, neighbourhood information sessions/project update cards Port Granby Discussion Group, Port Hope resident observation/focus groups, increased presentations/tours Site tours, enhanced website/social media; field demonstrations Consent packages, advertising, information sessions, phone calls, emails, letters Public Information Office, info sessions, newsletters, PHAI.ca/social media, presentations, tours, events, municipal communications Page 36 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF Port Hope Harbour Port Hope Long-Term Waste Management Facility Page 37 UNRESTRICTED OFFICIAL USE ONLY / À USAGE EXCLUSIF 13 info@phai.ca PHAI.ca PH.Area.Initiative @PHAI_PORT_HOPE Phai_porthope CNL’s Port Hope Area Initiative Page 38 The Cornish in Clarington Page 39 Cornwall UK Page 40 Cornish Settlement in this area Page 41 Commemorating our Cornish ancestors… Page 42 Are you descended from Cornish settlers? Why not find out? May 31, June 1 & 2nd, 2024 A Conference about Cornish Heritage at Bowmanville Page 43 A Cornish Cross Page 44 Page 45 THANK YOU! Page 46 From:Allison Hansen To:Preston, Laura Subject:Re: New Delegation Request from Hansen Date:Friday, December 1, 2023 1:51:31 PM Attachments:Support Letter from Bruno Project.pdf EXTERNAL Good afternoon Laura Attached you will find a letter of support from a rescue organization that rehomes dogs all throughout the GTA. Their letter directed to Clarington is on page two. Also, below is a short note to accompany the support letter. Dear Mayor and Council I am deeply concerned about the recommendations put forth in report CSD 03-23. The recommendations fall seriously short of the issue that I brought to council on October 16th. Not acting against these poisons on all municipally owned properties immediately will only continue to put wildlife, companion animals, humans and the environment at serious risk. Additionally, nowhere in the report is there any mention of addressing any potential entryways and attractants in and around the Courtice Community Complex. Not addressing these issues will only allow rodents to continue to enter the building. As you will see from the attached letter of support from Bruno Project, who rehomes dogs throughout Ontario, they too understand how dangerous these poisons are. They have witnessed first hand the deaths of several dogs from rodenticides. I sincerely hope that Clarington does too. Please consider taking stronger action by prohibiting the use of all rodenticides on all municipal owned properties immediately along with implementing long term means of exclusion by addressing entryways and removing attractants. Thank you and I look forward to speaking with council on Monday. Sincerely, Allison Hansen Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: CAO-019-23 Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol Recommendations: 1. That Report CAO-019-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Policy PSD-DG008 (Antenna Systems) be repealed; 3. That the Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol be delegated to the CAO and the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Services; 4. That Staff be directed to work directly with private sector telecommunications providers (spectrum holders) to discuss using, through a leasing arrangement, Municipal infrastructure and/or land to further expand their networks; and 5. That all interested parties listed in Report CAO-019-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 50 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CAO-019-23 Report Overview The purpose of this report is to increase the level of cellular connectivity across our community using tools available to the Municipality of Clarington. Attached is an updated Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol to further enable the development of a high-calibre wireless telecommunications environment throughout Clarington, as well as a plan to work with national carriers to discuss using Municipal infrastructure to address coverage gaps and improve connectivity. Planning and Infrastructure Services will undertake policy and process updates to assist with proactively anticipating connectivity gaps. This will allow for municipal support to be provided where possible, through the strategic use of public infrastructure. 1. Background 1.1. Council adopted Policy PSD-DG008 (Antenna Systems) (Attachment 2) in 2002. The policy was updated in 2013, following collaboration between the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Canadian Wireless Telecommunication Association on policies to make the installation of telecommunications antenna and towers consistent across the country. 1.2. The current policy ensures that the installations of telecommunication systems are treated and processed in a consistent manner. The policy acknowledges that the federal government through Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada is the approval authority. The responsibility for review of applications and providing a municipal response is delegated to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Services through the policy. 1.3. In Canada, the federal Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development (“ISED”), formerly known as Industry Canada, has the authority under the Radiocommunication Act to approve antenna system installations. The final decision to approve the location of antenna systems is made only by ISED. Municipalities do not have the authority to override ISED’s decision in this regard. 1.4. The updated Radiocommunication & Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol(Protocol), as approved by the CAO, exists so that the process for establishing antenna systems in Clarington is outlined in advance to ensure that telecommunications and broadcasting companies can satisfy the requirements of the ISED for consultation with local Land Use Authorities prior to approval of new installations. 1.5. This Protocol provides guidance and direction to proponents, Council, the Planning & Infrastructure Services staff, and members of the public about the process of establishing radiocommunication and broadcasting antenna systems , including Industry Page 51 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CAO-019-23 Canada’s authority, mandate, and process. The proponents of communication facilities will follow this Protocol as a condition of the licenses that are issued by ISED. 2. Updated Radiocommunication & Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol 2.1. The updated Protocol continues to include the requirements from the ISED and provides additional emphasis on the following:  To outline the Municipality’s site selection and design guidelines for cell towers and other antenna installations;  Encourage designs that integrate with existing and planned surrounding land use and public realm and minimize visual impacts;  To outline a Municipality of Clarington consultation process prior to the installation and modification of cell towers and other antenna installations covered by this protocol for telecommunications facilities;  Provide a straight-forward, objective process for the installation of antenna systems; and,  To enable the development of a high calibre wireless telecommunications service in Clarington. 2.2 The overall intent of the update is to more clearly articulate the process to potential proponents and showcase our interest to potentially utilize Municipal infrastructure to house connectivity equipment. 3. Next Steps Official Plan Policy 3.1 Official Plan policy a) encourages the development of a telecommunications network throughout Clarington to contribute to our economic competitiveness and support access to information for residents and businesses, b) outlines considerations when siting proposed antennas and c) requires the review and update of any Protocols. Clarington’s Telecommunications Antenna Systems Protocol (Attachment 1) has been developed in accordance with Official Plan policy. Use of Municipally Owned Infrastructure and/or Land 3.2 The Municipality will initiate discussions with utility providers to consider opportunities for the enhancement and/or replacement of existing utilities as part of street construction improvements and maintenance. Page 52 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report CAO-019-23 3.3 The Secondary Plan program as well as the Official Plan Review provides further opportunities to facilitate improvements to connectivity throughout Clarington. Requiring a connectivity map to highlight service gaps, early in the development process will allow the Municipality to proactively anticipate connectivity needs as we navigate growth. 3.4 Should major gaps exist, staff will work with the proponents to discuss using Municipal infrastructure/land to facilitate connectivity efforts. It is important to note that the Municipality and likely the development applicants are not in the telecommunications business. As such, staff will develop a process to engage providers to fill these gaps. 3.5 Should larger infrastructure be required, staff will discuss the option of placing equipment within the municipal road right-of-way or, more generally, on municipal land. These negotiations will be a joint internal effort. Small Cell Technologies 3.6 Networks can be expanded using traditional cellular towers, but there are also small cell technologies available. Small cell technologies are much smaller and lower powered than traditional cell towers/antennas and typically involve mounting small cell box/antenna(s) onto an existing infrastructure (utility poles, streetlights). 3.7 The small cell units function separately from the streetlights and would not be a hindrance to the maintenance of Municipally-owned infrastructure. Therefore, from a maintenance point of view, the installation of small cells on Municipal poles, for example, will not have any impact on day-to-day operations of the light standards. 3.8 Small cell technology agreements could significantly improve wireless service within gap areas, generate new revenue and better position Clarington for future innovation opportunities and support for our businesses. Further, integrating small cell technology using existing Municipally-owned infrastructure could limit the need for traditional cellular towers. 3.9 As a next step, staff intend to reach out to mobile spectrum license holders operating in our community to solicit their interest to further expand their networks, with the option to lease Municipal infrastructure and/or land. These efforts will focus primarily on the installation of small cell technologies on Municipally-owned streetlight poles to address weak signals in certain locations, thereby improving network quality and capacity throughout the Municipality. Clarington would gain a new revenue source for the use of its infrastructure. 3.10 According to the most recent commercial mobile spectrum holding data that staff could find, 76% of it is controlled by Bell, Rogers, and Telus – all of whom have a presence in Clarington. Page 53 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report CAO-019-23 3.11 Staff intend to reach out to those companies. Given the complexity, there would be a joint approach between departments to negotiate with any potential private sector partner(s). 3.12 Companies have entered into small cell agreements with the Town of Aurora, City of Richmond Hill and Uxbridge, for example. The Town of Aurora’s existing agreement includes a set fee of $750 per year, per location, as well as a one-time application fee of $500 per location. Communications 3.13 Staff have developed a dedicated webpage that will be made live after this report is considered by Council. It would include an overview of who is responsible for what, our policy, the process for installation and management and the approach that we are taking by working directly with providers. This webpage would include appropriate FAQs, and an online application and payment. 4 Financial Considerations Not Applicable. 5 Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Services and the Deputy CAO/Solicitor who concur with the recommendations. 6 Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council endorse the new Protocol and direct staff to work directly with private sector telecommunications providers operating in Clarington to discuss using Municipal infrastructure and/or land to further expand their networks. Staff Contact: Justin MacLean, Manager – Strategic Initiatives, Jmaclean@Clarington.net or Lisa Backus, Manager – Community Planning, Lbackus@Clarington.net Attachments: Attachment 1 - Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol Attachment 2 - Policy PSD-DG008 (Antenna Systems) Page 54 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 1 of 25 Number: MD-00# Title: Attachment 1 to Report CAO-019-23 Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol.docx Type: Development Sub-type: General Owner: Planning and Infrastructure Services Development Review Division Approved By: CAO Approval Date: December 18, 2023 Effective Date: December 18, 2023 Revised Date: December 4, 2023 Applicable to: All Departments and Staff 1.Legislative or Administrative Authority: 1.1 Federal Jurisdiction Telecommunication Antenna/Tower Systems are exclusively regulated by Federal legislation under the Radiocommunication Act and administered by Innovation, Science and Economic Development (“ISED”) Canada, formally known as Industry Canada. Therefore, legislation such as the Planning Act, including zoning by-laws do not apply to these antenna systems. It is important to understand that ISED Canada, while requiring proponents to follow munic ipal consultation protocols, makes the final decision on whether or not an antenna system can be constructed. The Municipality of Clarington (the “Municipality”) can only provide comments to ISED Canada. The Municipality also does not have the authority to stop the construction of an antenna system. 1.2 Other Federal Jurisdiction As a Federal undertaking, antenna systems must adhere to all applicable Federal regulations and guidelines, including but not limited to: •ISED Canada’s Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Client Procedures Circular (CPC-2-0-03); •ISED Canada’s Conditions of Licence for Mandatory Roaming and Antenna Tower and Site Sharing and to Prohibit Exclusive Site Arrangements (CPC-2-0-17); Attachment 1 to Report CAO-019-23 Page 55 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 2 of 25 • Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 - Limits of human exposure to radio frequency Electomagnetic Fields in the Frequency Range from 3 KHZ to 300 GHZ; • National Building Code of Canada; • Canadian Environmental Assessment Act; and • Transport Canada’s painting and lighting requirements for aeronautical safety. 2. Purpose: 2.1. To maintain policies and procedures that are harmonized with ISED Canada procedures and protocols for the installation of antenna systems, which emphasize the following: • To outline the Municipality’s site selection, design guidelines and consultation process for the installation and modification of cell towers and other antenna installations covered by this protocol for telecommunications facilities.; • Encourage designs that integrate with existing and planned surrounding land use and public realm and minimize visual impacts; • To outline a municipal consultation process for the installation and modification of cell towers and other antenna installations covered by this protocol for telecommunications facilities; • Provide a straight-forward, objective process for the installation of antenna systems; and • To enable the development of a high calibre wireless telecommunications service in Clarington that ensure all residents are connected. Page 56 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 3 of 25 3. Scope: 3.1. This Protocol applies to anyone (referred to in this document as “the proponent”) who is planning to install or modify an antenna system, regardless of the type of antennae and the type of installation. This includes telecommunication carriers, businesses, governments, Crown agencies, and the public. Anyone who proposes to use or own an antenna system must follow this Protocol. The requirements also apply to those who install towers or antenna systems on behalf of others or for leasing purposes (“third party tower owners”). 4. Definitions: Amateur radio operator: is someone who uses equipment at an amateur radio station to engage in two-way personal communications with other amateur operators on radio frequencies assigned to the amateur radio service. Antenna System shall mean an exterior transmitting device – or group of devices – used to receive and/or to transmit radio frequency (RF) signals, microwave signals, or other federally-licenced communications energy transmitted from, or to be received by, other antennas. Antenna Systems include the antenna, and may include a supporting tower, mast or other supporting structure, and an equipment shelter. This protocol most commonly refers to the following two types of Antenna Systems: Freestanding Antenna System: a structure (e.g., tower or mast) built from the ground for the expressed purpose of hosting an Antenna System or Antenna Systems; Building/Structure-Mounted Antenna System: an Antenna System mounted on an existing structure, which could include a building wall or rooftop, a light standard, water tower, utility pole or other. Non-Tower Structures shall mean structures that camouflage or conceal the presence of antennas or towers such as flagpoles, water towers, church steeples, streetlights, artificial trees and other everyday features. Co-location shall mean the placement of antennas and equipment operated by one or more proponents on a telecommunications Antenna System operated by a different proponent, thereby creating a shared facility. Page 57 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 4 of 25 Equipment Shelter shall mean a structure containing equipment necessary to transmit and receive signals. Freestanding Antenna System shall mean a structure (tower, mast, etc.) built from the ground for the expressed purpose of hosting an Antenna System(s). Height shall mean the height of an antenna system measured from the lowest ground level at the base, including the foundation, to the tallest point of the antenna system. Depending on the particular installation, the tallest point may be an antenna, lightning rod, aviation obstruction lighting or some other appurtenance. Any attempt to artificially reduce the height (addition of soil, aggregate, etc.) will not be included in the calculation or measurement of the height of the antenna system. Tower Facility shall mean the support structure, antenna systems foundations, and fenced compound enclosing the antenna system. 5. Exclusions 5.1. Excluded Structures The following types of antenna system installations or modifications are excluded by ISED Canada from the requirement to consult with the public and the requirement to submit a formal antenna system proposal to the Municipality for review: a. New Antenna Systems: where the height is less than 15 metres above ground level. This exclusion does not apply to antenna systems to be used by broadcasting undertakings, telecommunications carriers or third-party tower owners; b. Existing Towers: modifications may be made, or the tower may be replaced, to facilitate sharing or the addition of antennas, provided that the total height increase is no greater than 25% of the height of the initial antenna system installation. Any modifications resulting in the maximum tower height exceeding 15m will no longer be considered exempt under Section 5.1. No increase in height may occur within one year of completion of the initial construction; c. Non-Tower Structures: antennas on buildings, water towers, lamp posts, etc. may be installed provided that the height of the structure is not increased by more than 25%; and Page 58 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 5 of 25 d. Temporary Antenna Systems: used for special events or emergency operations and must be removed three months after the start of the emergency or special event. e. No consultation is required prior to performing maintenance on an existing antenna system. Individual circumstances vary with each antenna system installation and modification, and the exclusion criteria should be applied in consideration of local circumstances. Consequently, it may be prudent for the proponent to consult even though the proposal meets an exclusion noted above. Therefore, when applying the criteria for exclusion, proponents should consider such things as: • the antenna system's physical dimensions, including the antenna, mast, and tower, compared to the local surroundings; • the location of the proposed antenna system on the property and its proximity to neighbouring residents; • Transport Canada’s marking and lighting requirements for the proposed structure. Proponents who are not certain if their proposals are excluded, or whether consultation may still be prudent, are advised to contact Planning and Infrastructure Services. 6. Siting on Municipally Owned Properties 6.1. Any request to install an antenna system on lands owned by the Municipality shall be made to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Services (or designate). If the proposed location is acceptable in principle, the Director (or designate) will ask the requestor to continue with the process in accordance with this Protocol. 6.2. Proponents must still submit a formal request to the Municipality of Clarington in accordance with this Protocol and follow the public consultation process in accordance with Section 9 of this Protocol, unless the proposal meets the exclusion criteria under Section 5 of this protocol. 6.3. Notwithstanding the public consultation requirements outlined in Section 9 of this Protocol, the Director (or designate) shall circulate the proposal for Page 59 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 6 of 25 information to the Mayor and Councillor(s) for the ward in question. Following that, broader public circulation and content of the notice may be required. 7. Site Selection for New Antenna Systems The location and design guidelines outlined in this section are established to encourage proponents to select sites that minimize the number of tower and antenna facilities erected in the Municipality and to ensure that selected sites minimize visual impacts on the surrounding area. 7.1. Co-location Before submitting a proposal for an Antenna System on a new site, the proponent must explore the following options: a. Consider sharing, modifying or replacing an existing Antenna System structure. b. Consider using any feasible existing infrastructure in the area, including but not limited to, rooftops, water towers, utility poles or light standards. Proponents shall demonstrate efforts made for co-location. 7.2. Preferred Locations Where co-location on an existing Antenna System or structure is not possible, proponents are encouraged to: a. Consider the use of Municipally-owned lands and/or facilities, where technically feasible, and acceptable to the Municipality. b. Select sites for new towers that are within industrial, commercial, or non - residential areas, and/or that maximize the distance from residential areas, listed and designated heritage buildings and sites, and sensitive uses, and that do not interfere with traffic flows. c. Provide new towers with co-location capabilities. Proponents should make all reasonable efforts to consider co-location in their proposal. d. On undeveloped sites, locate the structure and equipment shelter so as not to preclude future development opportunities for the site. Page 60 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 7 of 25 7.3. Discouraged Locations The Municipality discourages the installation of new antenna systems in the following locations: a. Residential areas except where located on high rise buildings or if needed for emergency service or municipal operations. b. On sites of topographical prominence or located in such a manner that would obscure public views and vistas. c. Within or adjacent to environmentally sensitive lands. d. On, or immediately adjacent to, Heritage Properties or within Heritage Conservation Districts. e. Where the future land use has not been determined or in locations that would preclude the development or redevelopment of the area. If no solution is available to meet service demands other than in a location discouraged by the Municipality, the proponent shall provide a detailed rationale for the necessity of the proposed location in the Site Selection/Justification Report submitted to the Municipality (as noted in Section 8.3). 7.4. Site Design and Layout 7.4.1. Antenna Systems Where a new antenna system must be constructed, proponents shall use the following design guidelines to ensure the facility is appropriately designed and sited to minimize visual impacts on the surrounding area. a. The design should accommodate for future co-location of additional carriers, where appropriate; b. Stealth techniques, such as flagpoles, clock towers, trees, light poles, etc., should be considered and used where appropriate and in harmony with the context of the surrounding area; c. Monopole towers with antennas shrouded or flush mounted are preferred, particularly when the tower is proposed in or near residential areas; Page 61 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 8 of 25 d. Equipment shelters should be designed and landscaped in a manner that is compatible and sensitive to the character of the surrounding area in order to mitigate the visual impact; e. Make best effort to preserve existing vegetation and/or provide planting of trees and shrubs around the perimeter fencing to mitigate the visual impact of the antenna system and equipment shelter; f. Towers should have non-reflective surfaces and be painted with neutral colours that blend with the surrounding landscape, unless Transport Canada requires the use of other materials or colours (e.g., for aeronautical safety purposes); g. Towers should not be illuminated, unless required by Transport Canada; h. Towers and their related components should have no adverse effects on natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features or areas prone to natural hazards, and proponents must adhere to the policies within the Municipality's Official Plan that pertain to the protection of the natural environment. i. Only signage directly related to an antenna system as required by ISED Canada shall be permitted. No third-party advertising or promotion is permitted on a tower facility, unless approved by the Municipality; and, j. Towers and antennas that are attached or adjacent to existing buildings, including rooftop installations, should be screened and/or designed to complement the architecture of the building with respect to form, materials and colour. Page 62 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 9 of 25 7.4.2. Structure/Building-mounted Antenna Systems Where a new antenna system must be constructed on rooftops or existing structures, proponents shall use the following design guidelines to ensure the facility is appropriately designed and sited to minimize visual impacts on the surrounding area. a. Wall mounted antenna on the side of a building are discouraged below the roof but may be permitted subject to appropriate design. Wall mounted antenna on penthouses and stairwells above the roof are preferred; b. Utilizing alternative tower structures; c. New antennas should have a maximum height of 6 metres above the highest point of the building or existing structure and it should be setback a minimum of 3 metres from the roof edge on a building; d. Equipment shelters on roof tops should be setback from the roof edge as appropriate with appropriate consideration of the structural design of the roof; e. The colour and architectural style of the antenna and equipment shelter shall blend in with the building or structure; f. If an equipment shelter is aboveground and related to a roof -top antenna then the architecture of the equipment shelter must reflect appropriate urban design considerations related to the area within which it is located (e.g. pitched roof, brick if in a residential area); and, g. Locations and heights that are in compliance with Transport Canada’s requirements relative to the Oshawa Executive Airport. 7.5. Amateur Radio Operators in Residential Areas The following location and design guidelines apply to amateur radio operators proposing the installation of new radiocommunication antenna systems in residential neighbourhoods. a. The antenna system should be located in the rear yards of properties. Avoid locating these systems in front or flankage side yards, or on environmentally sensitive lands, designated heritage sites and within a designated heritage conservation district. Page 63 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 10 of 25 b. The height of the antenna system should not exceed 15.0 metres above ground level and the width should not exceed 3.0 metres at any point. c. No part of the antenna system should be located within 1.2 metres of any lot line. d. When located on a roof of a building or structure, the antenna system should only be located on that part of the roof closest to the rear yard. e. Non-reflective surfaces and neutral colours that blend with the surrounding area should be used. f. No part of the antenna system shall include or be used for graphics, signage, flags, or lighting. 8. Pre-consultation with Municipality Proponents are required to have a preliminary consultation (known as a “Stage 1” pre- consultation) with the Planning and Infrastructure Services Department prior to submitting a formal request to install an antenna system unless it is an excluded structure in Section 5. This initial contact will allow the proponent to meet with staff to discuss the proposal, including the rationalization behind the site selection. During this meeting, Municipal staff will provide preliminary input and comments regarding the proposal such as, but not limited to, land use compatibility, potential impacts on high profile and sensitive areas, alternative sites, aesthetic or landscaping preferences and other agencies to be consulted. This meeting will also provide an opportunity for Municipal staff to inform the proponent of the formal consultation process outlined herein and to advise on the notification process for this proposal. The proponent is required to consult with adjacent municipalities that are located within 500 metres, measured from the tower base, or the outside perimeter of the supporting structure, whichever is greater. The proponent shall provide written confirmation of this consultation to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Services. Page 64 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 11 of 25 8.1. Pre-consultation Meeting Requirements The following information must be provided to the Planning and Infrastructure Services Department, to the attention of the Director (or designate) prior to scheduling a pre- consultation meeting: a. Cover letter describing the rationale for the proposed location and other potential sites; b. Aerial photos of the potential sites for the antenna system ; c. Draft site plan or survey plan of the subject property showing the location of the proposed antenna system in relation to the site and/or buildings on the property; d. Elevation drawings of the proposed antenna system, height and colour ; e. Photo Simulations showing the proposed antenna system structure in four different directions, and, f. Anticipated coverage and capacity (as a result of installation). 8.2. Pre-consultation Summary Following the pre-consultation meeting, the Director (or designate) will provide the proponent with a letter outlining the Municipality’s requirements and summarizing the results of the pre-consultation meeting. The summary letter will generally provide: a. The Municipality’s formal submission requirements as set out in Section 8.3; b. A list of plans and studies that may be required; c. A list of municipal departments and agencies to be consulted; d. An indication of the Municipality’s preferences regarding location and design guidelines for the site(s) under discussion; and, e. Confirmation of the notification requirements for the proposal, following consultation with the Mayor and Ward Councillors. Page 65 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 12 of 25 8.3. Formal Submission Requirements For the purposes of administration and processing, proponents will be required to complete an application for site plan approval. The proponent must submit the following materials to the Planning and Infrastructure Services to the attention of the Director (or designate) with the appropriate fees in addition to the materials outlined at the pre-consultation meeting and outlined in the summary notes. Such applications are not processed under Section 41 of the Planning Act. New Freestanding Antenna Systems All proposals for new Freestanding Antenna Systems, where consultation with the Municipality is required by ISED, will include the following information: a. A completed Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna System application form and applicable fees; b. A Site Selection/Justification Report prepared by a qualified professional, such as a land use planner or engineer. The report should identify all antenna systems within the vicinity of the proposed location. It should also include details with respect to the coverage and capacity of the existing antenna systems in the surrounding area and provide detailed evidence as to why co- location on an existing antenna system is not a viable alternative to the construction of a new tower facility and compliance with Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 shall be addressed in the justification; c. A site plan showing the subject property, including the existing property lines, and/or the leased area (as applicable), site grading, existing and proposed buildings, fences, buffering, existing and proposed landscaping, access, parking and type and height of the proposed Freestanding Antenna System; d. Pictures of the location and the proposed Freestanding Antenna System and associated facilities superimposed on the picture from four directions; north, south, east and west; e. Two sets of stamped engineered drawings to identify the Freestanding Antenna System design, this will be required to submit at time of entering into a Letter of Undertaking with the Municipality; Page 66 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 13 of 25 f. A map showing the horizontal distance between the Freestanding Antenna System installation and the nearest residential zone and/or residential dwelling; g. A public notification package (as per Section 9); h. A copy of the draft notice and the proposed date on which it will be distributed (no sooner than 14 days from the date of request being submitted), if applicable; i. A copy of the draft notice sign to be posted on the subject property, if applicable; j. Photo Simulations show the proposed antenna system structure in four different directions; and, k. Any required technical reports, background information and other supporting materials provided to the proponent during or after the pre-consultation meeting. Structure/Building-mounted Antenna Systems All proposals for Antenna Systems on structures and buildings, where consultation with the Municipality is required by ISED, will include the following information: a. A plan showing the location proposed Antenna System and associated facilities on the structure or building; b. Building permits to be submitted in accordance with the Ontario Building Code, and any relevant information that may be required by the Clarington Chief Building Official (or Designate) if necessary; and, c. Pictures of the structure or building with the proposed Antenna System and associated facilities superimposed on the picture from four directions; north, south, east and west. Page 67 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 14 of 25 Alterations to existing Antenna Systems Where modifications to an existing Antenna System are proposed that are not excluded from municipal consultation, amendment to the approved plans may be required and the corresponding fee must be remitted. 8.4. Determination of Complete or Incomplete Application Within 5 working days of the submission, a staff member will be assigned to the application and confirm receipt. The Director (or designate) will determine whether the required antenna system documentation is deemed complete or incomplete . If the required materials listed in Section 8.3 of this Protocol are not complete or provided to the satisfaction of the Director (or designate), the application will be deemed incomplete and the official commencement of the 120 day consultation process will not commence. The Director (or designate) will notify the proponent of the outstanding items to be addressed. When the application is deemed complete by the Director (or designate), the 120 day consultation process will officially commence, and the Director (or designate) will: a. notify the proponent that the application has been deemed complete and application the proponent to initiate the required public consultation process; b. notify the Mayor and Ward Councillors of the complete application; and, c. circulate the proposal to the applicable municipal departments and agencies for review and comment. 9. Public Consultation 9.1. Public Consultation Requirements Where a Antenna System Review Process is required , the proponent must carry out public consultation in accordance with this Protocol. The proponent must not initiate public notification or consultation for an antenna system proposal until a formal submission has been made to the Municipality and written confirmation from the Director (or designate) to proceed with public notification and consultation has been provided. Page 68 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 15 of 25 The proponent shall be responsible for all costs associated with public notification and consultation. 9.2. Public Notification Requirements The proponent is to distribute the public notification packages by mail to the following recipients: a. All property owners and resident associations within a radius of the following: i. Within an Urban Boundary: The greater of 150 metres or three times the tower height, measured from the tower base or the outside perimeter of the supporting structure. For the purpose of this requirement, the outside perimeter begins at the furthest point of the supporting mechanism, such as the outermost guy line, building edge, face of the self-supporting tower, etc. ii. Outside an Urban Boundary: 500 metres. For the purpose of this requirement, the outside perimeter begins at the furthest point of the supporting mechanism, such as the outermost guy line, building edge, face of the self-supporting tower, etc.; b. The Mayor and WardCouncillors in which the proposed antenna system is located; c. The Municipal Clerk (or designate); and, d. Adjacent municipalities within 500 metres of the proposed tower facility. e. Proponents are also required to send a copy of the public notification package to the Director (or designate). 9.3. Public Notification Package Requirements a. A location map, including the address, clearly indicating the exact location of the proposed antenna system in relation to the surrounding properties and streets; including a letter size (8.5” x 11”) copy of the site plan submitted with the application; b. A physical description of the proposed antenna system including the height, dimensions, tower type/design, any antenna(s) that may be mounted on the tower, colour and lighting; Page 69 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 16 of 25 c. An elevation plan of the proposed tower facility; d. Colour simulated images of the proposed tower facility; e. The proposed antenna system's purpose, the reasons why existing towers or other infrastructure cannot be used, a list of other structures that were considered unsuitable, and future sharing possibilities for the proposal; f. An attestation that the general public will be protected in compliance with Health Canada's Safety Code 6 including combined effects within the local radio environment at all times; g. Address, location (including a map) and timing of the public information centre, if applicable; h. Information on how to submit written public comments to the Applicant and the closing date for submission of written public comments; i. Reference to the Municipality of Clarington’s Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol and where it can be viewed (www.clarington.net); j. The following sentences regarding jurisdiction: “Telecommunication tower/antenna systems are regulated exclusively by Federal Legislation under the Federal Radiocommunication Act and administered by Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. Provincial legislation such as the Planning Act, including zoning by-laws, does not apply to these facilities. The Municipality of Clarington is participating in land-use consultation pursuant to Issue 5 of I Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s CPC 2-0-03. In the case of a dispute between the proponent and the Municipality, a final decision will be made by ISED”; k. Notice that general information relating to antenna systems is available on Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada's Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website ( www.ised-isde.canada.ca/); l. The name and telephone number of a contact person employed by the proponent and the municipal contact person; and , Page 70 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 17 of 25 m. Closing date for submission of written public comments. 9.4. Public Notice Sign Unless otherwise determined through pre-consultation, the proponent shall erect a sign on the property notifying the public of the proposal to establish an antenna system on the subject property. The sign shall be erected on the property so that it is clearly visible and legible from the street(s) - on all frontages. The sign shall be professionally prepared and its size shall be a minimum of 1.2 metres by 1.2 metres and located a minimum of 1.0 metre and a maximum of 1.8 metres from the ground. However, the size of the sign shall not exceed 2.4 metres in height by 1.2 metres in width unless otherwise specified through pre-consultation. The erection of the notice sign should be coordinated with the distribution of the public notification packages. Photographs showing the sign posted and the date on which it was erected on the subject property shall be submitted to the Director (or designate) within ten days after the sign has been erected. The sign shall remain on the subject property for the duration of the public consultation process. The proponent shall be responsible for removing the sign no later than 21 days after the completion of the consultation process. 9.5. Public Information Centre The Public Information Centre (PIC) shall be held no sooner that 30 days and no later than 45 days of the notice being mailed, or hand delivered. The format of the PIC may be determined by the proponent however the date, time and location for the PIC shall be agreed upon by the Municipality and the proponent. Staff from the Planning and Infrastructure Services Department shall attend the Public Information Centre for observation purposes only. The type of public meeting to be conducted (open house, drop-in, town hall or virtual format) is up to the discretion of the Proponent, however, the proponent shall adhere to the following requirements when organizing and convening a Public Information Centre: Page 71 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 18 of 25 a. The Public Information Centre shall be open and accessible to all members of the public and local stakeholders. b. An appropriate date, time and location for the Public Information Centre will be determined in consultation with the Municipality and the Proponent. c. The duration of the Public Information Centre shall be a minimum of 2 hours. d. Two display panels, at a minimum, containing a site plan drawing and colour photographs of the subject property with superimposed images of the proposed antenna system shall be displayed at the Public Information Centre. e. The proponent shall provide information regarding the tower proposal, including the purpose of the tower, general information relating to Health Canada's Safety Code 6 and a clear statement indicating that telecommunication tower/antenna facilities are exclusively regulated by Federal legislation under the Radiocommunication Act and administered by Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada; Provincial legislation such as the Planning Act, including zoning by-laws, does not apply to these facilities. The Municipality of Clarington is participating in land-use consultation pursuant to Issue 5 of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s CPC 2-0-03. f. Public notification packages including a public comment sheet shall be made available for attendees. g. Closing date for written public comment Industry s shall be clearly announced at the Public Information Centre. h. A record of all names, addresses, email addresses and phone numbers of the attendees shall be retained, subject to applicable privacy laws in respect of personal information. 9.6. Responding to the Public The proponent is to address all applicable concerns, make all efforts to resolve them in a mutually acceptable manner and must keep a record of all associated communications. If the public or Director (or designate) raises a question, comment or concern relating to the tower facility, as a result of the public consultation process, the proponent is required to: Page 72 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 19 of 25 a. Respond to the party in writing within 14 days by acknowledging receipt of the question, comment or concern and keep a record of the communication. b. Address, in writing, all applicable concerns within 30 days of receipt or explain why the question, comment or concern is not, in the view of the proponent, applicable and clearly indicate that the party has 21 days from the date of the correspondence to reply to the proponent's response. c. In the case where the party responds within 21 days, the proponent shall address all applicable concerns within 21 days, either in writing, by contacting the party by telephone or engaging the party in an informal meeting. 9.7. Closing Date for Written Public Comments The closing date for submission of written public comments shall not be less than: a. 14 days after the Public Information Centre, where a public information session is required; or b. 30 days where a Public Information Centre is not required. 10. Post Consultation 10.1. Consultation Summary Package The proponent shall provide to the Director (or designate) a package summarizing the results of the public consultation process which shall include the following information: a. Attendance list and contact information from the Public Information Centre (if applicable). b. All written public comments and/or concerns received regarding the proposal. c. The proponent's responses to the public comments and/or concerns, outlining how the concerns were or will be addressed, or alternatively, by clearly indicating why such concerns are not applicable. d. Details of any modifications to the proposal, including revised plans and drawings, if applicable. Page 73 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 20 of 25 A recirculation of the public notification packages will be required if the proposed antenna system has been relocated as a result of the initial public consultation process. 10.2. Municipal Comment Letter on Proposal The Director of Planning and Infrastructure Services will issue to ISED, the proponent and Mayor and Ward Councillor a letter outlining one of the following: a. Concurrence; b. concurrence with conditions; or c. non-concurrence. 10.3 Post-Consultation Construction Time Limit The construction of an antenna system must be completed within three years of the conclusion of consultation. After three years, previous consultations will no longer be valid. 10.4 Letter of Undertaking Letter of Undertaking is required in situations where: a. a new, non-excluded Antenna System is constructed; b. a new equipment shelter is to be constructed on a roof-top; and, c. a new equipment shelter is to be constructed to accommodate co -location on an existing Antenna System. When the Municipality is satisfied with the site location, layout and design, the proponent will provide a Letter of Undertaking, in the Municipality’s prescribed format, to address the following issues as they are applicable: a. Site Plan and Landscaping drawings; b. Building Permits; c. Entrance Permits from the road authority; Page 74 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 21 of 25 d. Sign Permits from the Municipality of Clarington; e. Security deposits for site works; f. Road widenings and easements; g. A commitment to remove an Antenna System within two years of it no longer being in use; h. A commitment to accommodate other future antennas on site where feasible; i. Provide two sets of stamped engineering drawings to identify the Antenna System and associated facilities on the structure or building and anything required by the Chief Building Official; and j. Other conditions as required. 11 Timeframes 11.3 Consultation Timeframes The consultation process and the decision from the Municipality of Clarington should be completed within 120 days from the date the municipality deems the application complete. Appendix 2 of this Protocol contains a flow chart of the consultation processes. 11.4 Supplementary Public Consultation Where the consultation process has not been concluded and 270 days have elapsed from the time of the public notification packages being sent, the proponent may be required to carry out a supplementary public consultation process, if requested by the Director (or designate). 11.5 Redundant Antenna Systems The Director (or designate) may issue a request to a network operator to clarify that a specific Antenna System is still required to support communication network activity. The network operator will respond within 30 days of receiving the request and will provide any available information on the future status or planned decommissioning of the Antenna System. Page 75 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 22 of 25 Where the network operator concurs that an Antenna System is redundant, the network operator and the Municipality will mutually agree on a timeframe to remove the system and all associated buildings and equipment from the site. Removal will occur no later than 2 years from when the Antenna System was deemed redundant. 12 Roles and Responsibilities: 12.3 Role of Municipality of Clarington The role of the Municipality of Clarington as the Land Use Authority (LUA) is to communicate to proponents the planning priorities and other characteristics of the Municipality that are relevant to the antenna system proposal. In addition, the Municipality advises the proponent on the public consultation requirements outlined in this protocol. A formal decision on a proposal shall be provided by Municipal Council. 12.4 Designated Official for Processing Antenna System Proposals For the purpose of this Protocol, the designated official for the Municipality of Clarington having the authority to administer this Protocol is the Director, Planning and Infrastructure Services (or designate). All correspondence and materials submitted as part of the consultation process shall be addressed to the attention of the Director (or designate). 13 Inquiries: All inquiries regarding Attachment 1 to Report CAO-019-23 Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems Protocol.docx should be sent to Planning@clarington.net. Page 76 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 23 of 25 13 Revision History: Date Description of Changes Approved By November 25, 2002 First Approved Council July 2, 2013 Advancement in the the wireless telecommunication technology landscape required adjustment - Report PSD-041-13 provides an overview of the changes Council Page 77 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 24 of 25 Appendix 1: Public Notice Sign Wording Public Notice - Cell Tower [Name of Proponent] is proposing to locate a telecommunication tower/antenna facility, being [#] metres ([#] feet) in height, on this property. (If applicable) A Public Information Centre is scheduled on [date of meeting] from [start time] to [end time] at [location of meeting]. Public comment is invited. The closing date for submission of written comments is [applicable closing date]. For further information, contact [Applicant's name, phone number and e -mail address]. Telecommunication tower/antenna systems are regulated exclusively by Federal Legislation under the Federal Radiocommunication Act and administered by ISED. Provincial legislation such as the Planning Act, including zoning by-laws, does not apply to these facilities. The Municipality of Clarington is participating in land-use consultation pursuant to Issue 5 of ISED CPC 2-0-03. In the case of a dispute between the proponent and the City, a final decision will be made by ISED [Municipal and ISED contact information] Page 78 Management Directive If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 25 of 25 Appendix 2: Antenna Systems Process Flowchart Page 79 Attachment 2 to Report CAO-019-23 PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENTAL POLICY SUBSECTION: DEVELOPMENT GENERAL PSD-DG008 APPROVED BY: Council INTRODUCTION: SUBJECT: ANTENNA SYSTEMS DATE APPROVED: REVISED: November 25, 2002 July 2, 2013 In order to keep pace with the demand for telecommunications service, there has been an increase in the number of telecommunications towers erected across the Municipality of Clarington and more are anticipated in the coming years. Industry Canada, the approval authority for regulating antenna systems, ensures that municipalities are consulted prior to the erection of towers and significant antenna structures unless the proposal falls within the exclusion criteria of the Industry Canada procedures. The role of the Municipality of Clarington is to provide comments with respect to land use compatibility and, where required, issue a letter of concurrence or non-concurrence regarding a specific proposal. The Municipality has no constitutional authority to regulate or prohibit telecommunications facilities. PURPOSE: To maintain policies and procedures that are harmonized with Industry Canada procedures and protocols for the installation of antenna systems, which emphasize the following: •Minimize the number of new antenna sites by encouraging co-location;•Encourage designs that integrate with existing and planned surrounding land use and public realm and minimize visual impacts; •Allow input from the public; and•Provide a straight-forward, objective process for the installation of antenna systems. POLICIES: 1.Definitions Antenna System shall mean an exterior transmitting device -or group of devices -used to receive and/or to transmit radio-frequency (RF) signals, microwave signals, or other federally-licenced comm unications energy transmitted from, or to be received by, other antennas. Antenna Systems include the antenna, and may include a supporting tower, mast or other supporting structure, and an equipment shelter. Alternative Tower Structures shall mean man-made support structures that camquflage or conceal the presence of antennas or towers such as flagpoles, clock towers, church steeples, street lights, artificial trees and other everyday features. Co-location shall mean the placement of antennas and equipment operated by one or more proponents on a telecommunications Antenna System operated by a different proponent, thereby creating a shared facility. Equipment Shelter shall mean a structure containing equipment necessary to transmit and receive signals. Freestanding Antenna System shall mean a structure (tower, mast, etc) built from the ground for the MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Page I Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: CAO-021-23 Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Green Fleet and Equipment Policy Recommendations: 1. That Report CAO-021-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Resolutions #C-066-20 and #C-022-22 be replaced with the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy (the “Policy”) attached to report CAO-021-23, as Attachment 1; 3. That Council approve the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy which will inform future replacement of Fleet and Equipment and inform asset management planning related to the electrification of Municipal Fleet and Equipment. Page 87 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CAO-021-23 Report Overview This Report provides an overview of the proposed Green Fleet and Equipment Policy and Decision-Making Framework (the Policy), which if approved will replace the motion to prioritize using low emissions vehicles in the municipal fleet (Resolution #C-066-20) and the Electric Vehicle Action Plan (EVAP) (Resolution #C-022-22). The Policy is a required course of action to guide staff on how to proactively plan for and prioritize low or zero-emissions Fleet and Equipment purchases to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the Municipality. A Decision-Making Framework (Attachment 2) has been developed for management and staff to guide asset acquisition based on key considerations, such as infrastructure needs and reliability of the technology. The Framework will be included as an appendix to the Policy. The Policy is a more flexible approach to support the Municipality’s goal to be net-zero GHG emissions by 2050 while balancing the need to be adaptable, cost efficient and responsive to a rapidly changing industry. 1. Background Context 1.1 The 2018 corporate GHG emissions inventory showed that Municipal Fleet vehicles were responsible for 13.8 per cent of the Municipality’s GHG emissions. 1.2 The Electric Vehicle Action Plan (EVAP) (PDS-001-22) was created to guide the Municipality’s corporate transition to EVs over five years (2022 to 2026). The EVAP maps out the Municipality’s annual EV purchases and infrastructure needs and makes recommendations for the timing and locations for EV charging sta tions. 1.3 Based on the targets set in the EVAP, the Municipality should have 19 EVs in the Fleet, as well as installed 22 EV charging stations available for Fleet use and 25 charging stations for public use. To date, the Municipality has purchased 10 EVs and one hybrid vehicle and installed 25 EV charging stations for both public and Fleet use. To date, challenges have been experienced with availability and delivery of vehicles, which has resulted in a backlog of EV requirements. 1.4 As the Municipality continues to electrify its fleet and equipment, sufficient charging infrastructure will be required to put electric fleet and equipment into operational use. This will require an enhanced level of inter-departmental coordination to ensure all departments and divisions are appropriately engaged. Page 88 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CAO-021-23 Previous Decisions 1.5 Since 2016, the Municipality of Clarington staff have participated in the Durham Community Energy Plan (DCEP) and the Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan (DCCAP) with the Durham Region, other local area municipalities and local utilities. The DCCAP and DCEP contain actions to help the community prepare for climate change, reduce community GHG emissions and increase energy independence while promoting local economic development. Council endorsed the DCEP in 2019 (Report CAO-014- 19). 1.6 In February 2020, Council passed a motion to prioritize using low emissions vehicles in the municipal fleet, reducing corporate GHG emissions contributing to climate change. (Resolution: C-066-20). 1.7 On March 2, 2020, the Municipality declared a climate em ergency, highlighting its commitment to protecting the community and ecosystems from climate change by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are causing climate change (Resolution: GG-083-20). 1.8 In March 2021, Council endorsed the Clarington Corporate Climate Action Plan (PSD- 018-21). The CCCAP sets a target to reduce corporate greenhouse gas emissions to 35% below 2018 baseline levels by 2030 and to achieve net zero emissions b y 2050. The CCCAP calls for the creation of a plan to electrify the corporate fleet. 1.9 On January 24, 2022, Council approved Resolution #C-022-22, endorsing the 5-year Corporate Electric Vehicle Action Plan (EVAP) to guide the electrification of the Municipal fleet and installation of electric vehicle (EV) charge stations on Municipal properties. Staff were directed to consult the EVAP to inform budget recommendations related to fleet electrification and EV charger installation. 2. Transitioning to the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy Present Status 2.1 In the implementation of the Electric Vehicle Action Plan (EVAP), certain limitations were affecting the ability of staff to successfully carry out the Plan:  Projected Vehicle Costs: The Projected MSRP for the EV purchases did not account for market changes, inflation, or other contingency costs. This created problems when budgeting for EV purchases.  Operational Needs: The locations selected for Fleet EV Chargers in the EVAP do not adequately address the needs of operational needs of different departments and would cause operational inefficiencies. Page 89 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report CAO-021-23  Timelines: The timelines for purchasing EVs did not account for supply chain disruptions, high demand or other factors that affect vehicle availability. This can lead to delays and increased costs, ultimately affecting the success of the plan.  Coordination: the roles and responsibilities of staff in the implementation of the EVAP were not clearly identified. Further, EV purchases are now included as part of the 20-year Asset Management Plan (AMP) which creates a need for more flexibility. Development of the Policy and Framework 2.2 The original EVAP was prescriptive and limited staff scope in looking for opportunities to support a move to EV’s. The recommendation to move to this Policy structure, if approved, will incorporate more flexibility for staff to plan the transition of the Municipality’s Fleet and Equipment. 2.3 To further support the electrification of our Fleet, staff reviewed the current method of planning for and replacing Fleet. As a result, the Management of Fleet was centralized in September. This allows for a more streamlined process of EV planning as well as all vehicle acquisitions. Public Works, Fleet is now responsible for the oversight and management of corporate fleet. The Climate Change Response Coordinator will support the plan and identify new trends to the team to inform opportunities. 2.4 Staff completed benchmarking of other municipalities, specifically the City of Mississauga, had a robust and proactive policy to address this issue. The Policy as presented took that benchmarking into consideration . 2.5 In consultation with Public Works, Planning and Infrastructure Services, Financial Services and Community Services, the Policy was adjusted to reflect the needs of the Municipality, the operations, and to confirm the roles and responsibilities of staff. 2.6 A Decision-Making Framework also is proposed to guide staff in the planning, identification, and acquisition of EVs. With an evolving industry, new technologies are regularly introduced. This decision framework provides the basis for staff to ensure opportunities to procure EVs versus traditional fossil fuel powered vehicles and equipment are not overlooked, while ensuring considerations are given to the infrastructure and budget requirements. 2.7 Staff will implement a Management Directive (MD) (to be approved by the CAO as per the Clarington Policy System (CP-001)). This MD will support the implementation of the Policy by clearly defining the responsibilities of staff and the process to ensure accountability and implementation of the transition of the Municipal Fleet and Equipment. Page 90 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report CAO-021-23 Benefits of a Flexible Approach 2.8 The Policy is a more flexible and proactive approach, which will allow for greater adoption of EVs in the Municipality for the following reasons: a. Changing Circumstances: The Policy allows for more adaptability in changing times, such as technology advancements, market fluctuations and evolving regulatory requirements. b. Risk Mitigation: Unforeseen challenges can arise during the implementation of an EV transition plan. This Policy will help mitigate risks by allowing for alternative solutions and strategies when roadblocks are encountered. c. Expansion to Equipment: The Policy is also expanded to Equipment that consume fossil fuels in its operations. Electric/battery-operated Equipment is coming to market and will help the Municipality meet its net-zero goals. 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 There are no specific financial impacts resulting from the Recommendations in this report. The policy acts as a framework for decision making on conversion of Fleet and Equipment. Any premiums associated with alternate Fleet and Equipment will be captured through regular capital and operating budget requests and will become part of the Asset Management Plan (AMP). 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Public Works, the Deputy CAO/Treasurer, and the Director of Community Services who concur with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council approve the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy, as well as the Decision-Making Framework. The Policy provides staff with a proactive and flexible approach to evaluate the availability of new technology to ensure the Municipality remains adaptable, cost efficient and responsive to a rapidly evolving industry. With Council’s approval, the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy will demonstrate the Municipality’s commitment to reducing Corporate GHG emissions and will help the Municipality achieve its climate change goals and targets. Page 91 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report CAO-021-23 Staff Contact: Natalie Ratnasingam, Climate Change Response Coordinator, or nratnasingam@clarington.net or Lee-Ann Reck, Manager, Corporate Performance lreck@claringinton.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Green Fleet and Equipment Policy Attachment 2 – Decision-Making Framework Interested Parties: There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision. Page 92 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 1 of 6 Number: CP-00# Title: Green Fleet and Equipment Policy Sub-type: Click or tap here to enter text. Owner: Office of the CAO Corporate Performance Approved By: Council Approval Date: Click or tap to enter a date. Effective Date: Click or tap to enter a date. Revised Date: Click or tap to enter a date. Applicable to: All Staff, Department or Division 1.Legislative or Administrative Authority: 1.1. Direction from Council 1.1.1. On March 2, 2020, Council approved Resolution #GG-083-20, declaring a climate emergency, stressing the need to respond to the threats that climate change presents to the Municipality. 1.1.2. On March 1, 2021, Council endorsed the Clarington Corporate Climate Action Plan (CCCAP), setting targets for the Municipality to reduce corporate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 35 per cent by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050, based on 2018 levels. The CCCAP calls for the creation of a plan to electrify the corporate fleet. Alignment with the Region of Durham 1.1.3. Fleet electrification is further supported by the Durham Community Energy Plan (DCEP), which was endorsed by Durham Region Council on April 24, 2019. The DCEP was endorsed by Clarington Council on December 9, 2019, through Resolution #GG-551-19 as part of a recommendation of Report CAO-014-19. The DCEP sets goals to support the transition of the transportation sector to electric in Durham. Attachment 1 to Report CAO-021-23 Page 93 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 2 of 6 2. Purpose: 2.1. This policy: 2.1.1. Reinforces the Municipality’s commitment to climate action and expands the objective of the Electric Vehicle Action Plan (EVAP) to include municipally owned equipment. 2.1.2. Provides direction to management and staff to prioritize investment in low or zero-emission municipal fleet and equipment and reduce GHG emissions. 2.1.3. Identifies the roles and responsibilities of staff for the electrification of the Municipality’s Fleet and Equipment and the associated infrastructure. 3. Scope: 3.1. This policy applies to all departments and to all Municipally owned Fleet and Equipment that produce GHG emissions. 4. Definitions: 4.1. Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) – a type of Equipment that provides energy for functions other than propulsion to provide electrical, hydraulic, heating, and air- conditioning functions while a vehicle is stationary. 4.2. Electric Vehicle (EV) – An electric vehicle is powered solely by a large internal battery and electric motor. They can use wall plugs to charge or use fast charging infrastructure to replenish the battery faster. These are also referred to as battery electric vehicles or BEVs. 4.3. Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Station – equipment that connects an EV to a source of electricity to charge the battery. 4.4. Equipment – Includes all municipally owned units including, but not limited to, non-licensed off-road and hand-held equipment (e.g., trimmers, chain saws), riding and push lawn mowers, forklifts, backhoes/loaders, snow blowers, generators, Auxiliary Power Units, and other auxiliary equipment (e.g., pumps, woodchippers, generators, hand tools). Page 94 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 3 of 6 4.5. Fleet – includes all municipally owned or operated on-road licensed light, medium and heavy-duty vehicles, including but not limited to cars, trucks, and fire vehicles. 4.6. Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) – a set of gases created by burning fossil fuels that stop heat energy from escaping Earth’s atmosphere, resulting in global warming. Water vapour, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, and ozone are the primary GHGs in the Earth’s atmosphere. 4.7. Infrastructure – items required to support low, or zero-emissions Fleet and/or Equipment, including vehicle charging stations, electrical infrastructure, information technology (IT) infrastructure, networks and management software, or other charging devices. 4.8. Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) – an engine that is powered solely by the burning of gasoline, diesel, or other fossil fuels. 4.9. Low Emissions Vehicle (LEV) – a vehicle that emits relatively low amounts of tailpipe emissions, including mild hybrid vehicles (with no plug-in capabilities) and alternative fuel vehicles which have combustion engines that run on lower emission fuels, such as compressed natural gas or biodiesel. 4.10. Municipality – the Municipality of Clarington. 4.11. Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) – a vehicle that has the potential to produce no greenhouse gas emissions during its operation. Battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are considered to be zero-emissions vehicles. Page 95 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 4 of 6 5. Policy Requirements: Guiding Principles 5.1. The Municipality’s guiding principles for the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy are to: 5.1.1. Work towards becoming a leader in climate action, with the long-term goal of being a net-zero corporation. 5.1.2. Coordinate decision-making across departments to meet operational goals while reducing emissions from Fleet and Equipment. 5.1.3. Ensure decisions are made within a consistent framework and are informed through discussion with all relevant internal stakeholders. Objectives 5.2. The following objectives support the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy: 5.2.1. Reduce GHGs by investing in low-carbon and fuel-efficient Fleet, Equipment, and Infrastructure. 5.2.2. Prioritize and optimize the electrification of all Municipal Fleet and Equipment, ensuring it is sustainable, market-ready and meets operational requirements. 5.2.3. Fully transition to zero and low-emission Fleet and Equipment. 5.2.4. Establish roles and responsibilities of staff to support the electrification of Fleet and Equipment. 5.2.5. Document decision-making and outline implications of deferral or items where choosing conventional technology is the only option, on the corporate climate targets. Page 96 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 5 of 6 6. Roles and Responsibilities: 6.1. Council is responsible for: 6.1.1. Approving the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy and the supporting Decision-Making Framework. 6.1.2. Ensuring the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy is supported through approval of the appropriate budget and resources. 6.2. Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) is responsible for: 6.2.1. Ensuring applicable staff in leadership positions are aware of, and trained on, this policy and any related policies including subsequent revisions, and ensuring departments are complying with this policy. 6.3. Directors / Managers are responsible for the following within their scope of authority: 6.3.1. Ensuring applicable Managers/Supervisors are aware of, and trained on, this policy and related Directives including subsequent revisions. 6.3.2. Fostering and supporting the objectives of this policy wherever possible. 6.3.3. Facilitating decision-making that favours electrification opportunities for the Municipality’s Fleet and Equipment. 6.3.4. Ensuring resource and budget requirements for electrification of the municipal fleet are included in the multi-year budget preparation for consideration. 6.3.5. Ensuring resources and budgets are available to support the implementation of this policy and implementation of planned projects on schedule. Page 97 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 6 of 6 6.4. All Staff are responsible for: 6.4.1. Identifying opportunities for GHG reduction during day-to-day operations (i.e., route optimization, anti-idling, etc.) and/or when planning for procurement and following the process outlined in the associated Directive. 7. Related Documents: 7.1. The Green Fleet and Equipment Decision-Making Framework is attached as Appendix A. 8. Inquiries: 8.1. Climate Change Response Coordinator. 9. Revision History: Date Description of Changes Approved By Page 98 Appendix A: Green Fleet and Equipment Decision-Making Framework Attachment 2 to Report CAO-021-23 Page 99 Purpose: To support the Green Fleet and Equipment Policy, a framework has been developed to guide decision-making through asset acquisition. In collaboration with the identified stakeholders, EV strategy meetings will be held to determine the feasibility of the electric alternative based on the considerations below. It should be noted that only certain items will trigger the purchase of ICE Fleet/Equipment (i.e., where no proven reliable technology exists). Acquisition Considerations Guidelines Trigger • A need to purchase new or replacement Fleet or Equipment (i.e., there is no existing, suitable vehicle within the Fleet that can be moved or shared). • A funding opportunity has arisen for Fleet, Equipment, or Infrastructure. Examples include: - Life cycle replacement - New purchases to meet service needs Step 1: Technology Readiness • Is the zero-emissions technology currently available on the market? • Is the technology proven reliable and/or tested for its intended use and meets applicable standards? o If not, what is the level of risk that the technology will not be able to achieve the standards of reliability and operability? If the risk is within a tolerable level, management and leadership can still adopt pre- maturity technology. If the level of risk is considered too high at the present time, can the replacement be deferred until technology becomes available? Example: Technology does not currently exist but will likely become available on the market in 1-2 years. o If not, is there an opportunity for demonstration or pilot project to test technology? Example: Technology is available and meets applicable standards but has not been tested by users/municipalities. There may be an opportunity for a small-scale pilot project and grants. Page 100 Acquisition Considerations Guidelines • Is there vendor support for the new technology? • Are there parts available on the market or easily acquirable? Step 2: Infrastructure Availability • Is there infrastructure available to support low or zero emissions technology? o If not, can the Municipality install the infrastructure in the required location? o If not, what are the timing considerations of installing the appropriate infrastructure? o If not, can procurement be deferred until infrastructure is ready? • Is the infrastructure owned/operated by the Municipality? If not, what are the risk considerations of relying on charging that is owned by third party against the Municipality’s ability to install the necessary infrastructure? Step 3: Infrastructure Readiness • What impact will the new Fleet and/or Equipment have on energy load and electrical infrastructure on site? Are there options to distribute the new load requirements to other locations and to favourable time-of-day? • Does the charging technology have the ability to monitor usage/consumption? • What IT infrastructure is available/needed on site? Step 4: Operational Requirements • What are the Fleet or Equipment specifications, and do the low or zero-emissions technologies meet operational requirements when compared to conventional technology? • What changes would be needed to operate and maintain the low or zero-emissions technology and the associated infrastructure? • Is additional training required to operate and/or maintain the Fleet or Equipment? Step 5: Total Life Cycle Cost/Benefit Analysis • What are the capital costs impacts (including soft costs) of the zero or low emissions technology and its associated infrastructure when compared to conventional technology? • What are the annual operating cost impacts – in terms of increases and savings (including resourcing, utility, maintenance and licensing) of the low or zero emissions Page 101 Acquisition Considerations Guidelines technology and its associated infrastructure (e.g., annual subscription fees) compared to conventional technology? • What are the training and/or operational adjustment costs (if applicable) or staff resource implications when compared to the conventional technology? • Will there be a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions due to the new technology? • Are there any other associated benefits of the new technology (e.g., improved air quality, reduced noise, publicly-available)? • What is the total lifecycle cost (e.g., total cost of ownership) of the low or zero-emission Fleet or Equipment when compared to the conventional technology? Step 6: Funding • Has the budget been secured for purchasing the new low or zero-emission Fleet or Equipment? • If infrastructure is not currently available, are there budgeted funds secured for the required infrastructure (including operating costs)? o If not, are there alternative funding opportunities available (e.g., grants, rebates)? o If not, have additional operating expenses been considered (e.g., keeping an asset in use beyond its useful life)? Page 102 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: LGS-033-23 Submitted By: Rob Maciver, Deputy CAO/Solicitor Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: L2010-08-57 By-law Number: Report Subject: OPG Trail Licence Agreement Recommendations: 1. That Report LGS-033-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That the Deputy CAO/Solicitor be authorized to execute a Licence Amend ing Agreement with Ontario Power Generation on terms and conditions substantially consistent with the contents of Report LGS-033-23; 3. That the Deputy CAO/Solicitor be authorized to execute any future amendments to the trail Licence Agreement required to accommodate the operational needs of either Ontario Power Generation or the Municipality; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report LGS-033-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 103 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report LGS-033-23 Report Overview This report provides background on an existing Licence Agreement between Ontario Power Generation and the Municipality for the establishment of a recreational trail and provides recommendations pertaining to a requested amendment to that agreement. 1. Background 1.1 In 1995, the Municipality and Ontario Power Generation (“OPG”) entered into a 21-year Licence Agreement for the use of a portion of the OPG Darlington Nuclear Facility property for the purposes of a recreational trail (the “Original Licence”). 1.2 The Original Licence expired in 2016, however at that time a new Licence Agreement was signed to allow for the continued use of the trail. The new Licence Agreement has a term expiring in 2024. 1.3 The trail that exists on the OPG property is part of the Clarington segment of the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail that runs along the northern boundary of the OP G property and south of Energy Drive. 1.4 Due to the OPG New Nuclear Project to build and operate four small modular reactors on the site, OPG requires the closure of a portion of the trail as it would interfere with the project. 1.5 The portion of the trail that is required to be closed is illustrated in Attachment 1. 1.6 As a result of the trail closure, the Waterfront Trail has been rerouted to follow Energy Drive between Maple Grove Road and Holt Road. This change is already reflected on the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail website. The balance of the trail situated on the OPG property will continue unimpeded. 1.7 OPG has indicated that the trail closure is temporary, however the timing is uncertain for trail reopening. 2. Next Steps 2.1 The Licence Agreement that was signed in 2016 already provides that OPG may rescind permission for the trail at any time should they require the land for its business purposes. 2.2 The Municipality does not pay any licence fee to OPG for the use of the lands, although the Municipality is responsible for trail maintenance. Page 104 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report LGS-033-23 2.3 OPG has provided a draft Licence Amending Agreement to formalize the trail closure, which has already been reviewed and deemed acceptable by the Deputy CAO/Solicitor. 2.4 Upon Council approval, the parties will execute the Licence Amending Agreement to conclude this issue. This report is recommending to delegate authority to the Deputy CAO/Solicitor to sign any future such amending agreements to simply administration. 3. Financial Considerations Not Applicable. 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Public Works who concurs with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council authorize the Deputy CAO/Solicitor to enter into a Licence Amending Agreement for the closure of a portion of the Waterfront Trail situated on OPG property. Staff Contact: Robert Maciver, Deputy CAO/Solicitor, 905-623-3379 ext. 2013 or rmaciver@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Illustration of Trail Closure Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: Nick Bryan, Sr. Real Estate Associate, Ontario Power Generation Izsak Dewar, Real Estate Associate, Ontario Power Generation Page 105 681600 681600 682000 682000 682400 682400 682800 682800 683200 683200 683600 683600 684000 684000 684400 684400485960048600004860400486080048612004861600 : 0 150 300 450 60075Meters drawing nu m b er sh eet revision RealEstateServices requ ested b y coordinate system zone horizonal / vertical datu m scale units client grou p designed b y 1:10,000 2023/10/25 Meters N. BR YAN NAD 1983 CSR S UTM 17N NA 1983 CSR S / CGVD28 001 of 1 DISCLAIMER:© Ontario Power Generation Inc. 2023. Th is m ap h as been produ ced and distribu ted for OntarioPower Generation Inc. pu rposes only. No part of th is m ap m ay be reprodu ced, pu blish ed,converted, or stored in any data retrieval system , or transm itted in any form or by any m eans(electronic, m ech anical, ph otocopying, recording, or oth erwise) with ou t th e prior writtenperm ission of OPG. Th e inform ation on th is m ap m ay not be accu rate or u p to date. OPG m akes norepresentations or warranties, eith er express or im plied, regarding th is m ap. Any th ird party relieson th e inform ation in th is m ap at its own risk and neith er OPG nor any agent acting on OPG’s b eh alfassu m es any liability with respect to th e u se b y a th ird party of th is map. Th is m ap m ay contain dataand oth er inform ation sou rced from Ontario Ministry of Natu ral R esou rces & Forestry and ESR I. Th isinform ation is greatly acknowledged. N/A COR P R E DNGS_ClaringtonTrailLandsLicence_v00_2023-10-25.pdf date 01 00 revno date particu lars dwn chkd desig ned verified approved Drafting Engineering SCHEDULE "A" Legend OPG Darlington Site Th e "Trail Lands" Th e "Trail Lands Closu re" R oad PARK RD CRAGO RD ENERGY DR HWY 401 H O L T R D Attachment 1 to Report LGS-033-23 Page 106 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: LGS-034-23 Submitted By: Rob Maciver, Deputy CAO/Solicitor Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Review of Notice By-law and Proposal of New Notice Policy Recommendations: 1. That Report LGS-034-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Council approve the draft “Public Notice Policy”, Attachment 1 to Report LGS- 034-23, to be effective upon the repeal of By-law 2005-022; 3. That the By-law attached to Report LGS-034-23, as Attachment 2, repealing By-law 2005-022, “Notice By-law”, be approved, effective January 1, 2024; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report LGS-034-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 107 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report LGS-034-23 Report Overview This report recommends repealing the Notice By-law and proposes it be replaced by a new Notice Policy. 1. Background Legislative Background 1.1 Clarington’s current “Notice By-law”, By-law 2005-022, was passed arising out of recommendations from Report CLD-04-05. 1.2 The current by-law was passed under the former Section 251 of the Municipal Act which required the municipality to give notice in the manner required under the Municipality’s notice provisions. Section 251 has since been repealed and ostensibly replaced by Section 270(1)(4): A municipality shall adopt and maintain policies with respect to the circumstances in which the municipality shall provide notice to the public and, if notice is to be provided, the form, manner and times notice shall be given. 1.3 Notice to the public is required under several different Acts including, but not limited to, the Municipal Act, the Planning Act, the Development Charges Act, 1992 and the Ontario Heritage Act. These Acts (and/or associated regulations) generally outline the circumstances where such notice will be given and often prescribes the form and content of such notice. 1.4 Sections 26(4) and 39.1(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act state when a municipality is required by Part IV and Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act to publish a notice in a newspaper having general circulation in the municipality. However, notice given in accordance with a policy adopted by a municipality under Section 270 of the Municipal Act is deemed to satisfy this requirement. Therefore, the Municipality’s Notice By-law would satisfy the Ontario Heritage Act. 1.5 Typical Notices published under Parts IV and V of the Ontario Heritage Act may include:  Intention to Designate a Property;  Passing, amending or repealing a Designation By-law;  Creation of a Heritage Study Area; or,  Designation of a Heritage Conservation District and District Plan. Page 108 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report LGS-034-23 Reason for Current Review 1.6 With Metroland’s recent decision to cease publication of Clarington This Week, Staff have reviewed the legislative requirements and deemed it necessary to recommend changes to the Notice Policy. 1.7 Additionally, changes arising out of the Strong Mayors Act render some sections of the Notice By-law unnecessary or not applicable. At present it is out of touch with modern forms of communication and legislative changes. 2. Review of Current By-law 2.1 The current by-law outlines minimum notice requirements for:  Notice of intention to pass a by-law, or notice of a public meeting  Adoption of Annual Budget  Improvements to Services  Financial Statements 2.2 Staff have reviewed Notice Policies of other municipalities and have modeled the attached policy based on the review, with input from the Senior Leader ship Team. 2.3 The current by-law is very specific in identifying situations where public notice is required. These situations are limited in range, arbitrary, and in some cases no longer reference legislation correctly. Additionally, there are a number of Municipal policies and procedures that require public notice which aren’t reflected in this policy. 2.4 The current by-law doesn’t account for common legislative public notice requirements such as those found in the Planning Act and other provincial legislation. 2.5 The current by-law refers to notice regarding budget and budget amendments, which has effectively been changed as a result of the changes to the Municipal Act arising from the Strong Mayors Act. 2.6 Most glaringly, the by-law requires notice to be printed in local newspapers as the primary method of giving notice, which alone is not effective at reaching the broader public compared to other contemporary forms of communications, including the municipal website and social media platforms. Page 109 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report LGS-034-23 3. Proposed Public Notice Policy 3.1 The review identified a number of areas for improvement, including:  Change the authority section  Change from a By-law to a Policy  Remove references to notice for Financial Statements  Added a reference to accommodate circumstances where the legislation may require notice in newspapers, but no newspapers exist 3.2 The proposed policy (Attachment 1) establishes criteria to be applied when determining if public notice is required. For example, when determining whether a matter is of sufficient public interest to warrant the giving of public notice, the policy requires Staff to consider:  the number of people affected by the matter;  the financial implications of the matter for the municipality;  the time period or duration for which the matter is applicable; and  the extent of any geographic area affected. 3.3 By applying these criteria, public notice can be issued for a wider range of matters, and in a more consistent manner across the organization. T his policy also establishes minimum requirements for the form, manner, and time for giving notice. The form describes the content that all public notices should contain, including:  The authority and/or legislation under which the notice is being given;  A description of the matter, and any decisions to be made in relation to it;  A map or description of any lands affected by the matter;  The date, time, and location of any meeting at which the matter may be considered;  A description of how comments and/or questions regarding the matter may be submitted; Page 110 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report LGS-034-23  Contact information of the employee, person, or organization responsible for the matter;  How to exercise any applicable rights of appeal; and  Any other information deemed necessary by the Municipality. 3.4 The “manner” specifies how public notice is to be published or distributed. The existing policy typically only specifies publication in a local newspaper and direct mail -outs to affected parties. Under the revised policy, all public notices will be posted electronically on the municipal website in a dedicated location designated for the giving of public notice, and provided directly by mail or email to affected parties identified by the Municipality, where appropriate. Notice may also be posted in other print or online media but is not a requirement. 3.5 The “time” refers to how far in advance public notice should be provided. As a baseline, the new policy requires public notice to be posted a minimum of 14 days in advance. Nothing in the policy prevents Staff from exceeding any of these minimum standards where deemed appropriate to do so. The policy also acknowledges that, wherever legislation requires the giving of public notice, the requirements of the legislation will apply and supersede the policy where applicable. If legislation requires that public notice be given but does not provide any guidance on the form, manner , or time for doing so, the policy provides a minimum standard to be followed by staff. 3.6 The new policy also reconciles differences with Clarington’s previous notice provisions (i.e. in other policies and by-laws) with the new policy. 3.7 Another addition to the policy is the ability for Staff to waive notice provisions, where it is deemed necessary, and under certain circumstances. 3.8 Since the policy could aff ect all departments, the CAO is responsible for the review and updating of this policy. 4. Financial Considerations Not Applicable. 5. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Senior Leadership Team who concur with the recommendations. Page 111 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report LGS-034-23 6. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council repeal the current Notice By-law 2005-022 and replace it with the attached proposed Public Notice Policy. Staff Contact: June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk, 905-623-3379 ext. 2102 or jgallagher@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Draft Public Notice Policy Attachment 2 – Repealing By-law Interested Parties: There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision. Page 112 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 1 of 6 Number: CP-00# Title: Public Notice Policy Type: Legal Services Sub-type: Public Notice Owner: Legislative Services Clerk’s Division Approved By: Council Approval Date: Click or tap to enter a date. Effective Date: Click or tap to enter a date. Revised Date: Click or tap to enter a date. Applicable to: All Staff 1.Legislative or Administrative Authority: This policy is to satisfy the requirements of Subsection 270(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended. 2.Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to establish the form, manner, and times that public notice shall be given when the Municipality is required to give public notice in circumstances of its own initiative, or as prescribed by other levels of government. 3.Scope: This policy is applicable to all matters for which the Municipality has determined that the giving of public notice is warranted. Where the requirements of this policy conflict with the notice requirements in any other Municipal policy, by-law, or any other applicable legislation, the more expansive notice requirements shall apply. 4.Definitions: Not Applicable. Attachment 1 to Report LGS-034-23 Page 113 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 2 of 6 5. Policy Requirements: Circumstances 5.1. The Municipality shall give public notice under the following circumstances. • Where the giving of public notice is required by the provincial or federal statue, or regulation; • Where directed pursuant to a municipal Council policy, by-law, management directive, standard operating procedure or work instruction that requires the giving of public notice; or • Where, in the opinion of Staff, the matter is of sufficient public interest to warrant the giving of public notice. 5.2. When determining whether a small matter is of sufficient public interest to warrant the giving of public notice, staff shall consider: • The number of people affected by the matter; • The financial implications of the matter for the municipality; • The time-period, or duration, for which the matter is applicable; and • The extent of any geographic area affected. Form 5.3. Where public notice is deemed to be required, the notice shall contain, at minimum, the following information: • The authority and/or legislation under which the notice is being given, if applicable; • A description of the matter, and any decision to be made in relation to it; • A map, or description, of any lands affected by the matter, if pertinent; Page 114 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 3 of 6 • The date, time, and location of any meeting at which the matter may be considered; • A description of how comments and/or questions regarding the matter may be submitted; • Contact information of the employee, person, or organization responsible for the matter; • How to exercise any applicable rights of appeal; and • Any other information deemed necessary by Staff or as directed by Council. 5.4. Wherever possible, notices shall be written in plain language and feature an accessible, and easily legible, design in accordance with Clarington’s Branding Guidelines and Accessible Document Guidelines. Manner 5.5. Notice shall be posted electronically on the Municipality of Clarington’s website on a webpage dedicated for the purpose of giving public notice. Notice shall also be provided by regular letter mail or email to every party that has requested in writing to be updated with respect to the matter, and has provided contact information, or where otherwise deemed by Staff to be appropriate in the circumstances. Notice may also be published in additional print, or online media, at the discretion of Staff. Time 5.6. Public notices shall be posted and/or distributed a minimum of 14 calendar days prior to the matter being considered, or prior to any referenced action coming into effect (whichever is applicable in the circumstances). 5.7. In calculating the notice period, the day of giving notice is excluded, and the day on which the relevant action to be taken is included. Page 115 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 4 of 6 5.8. Notwithstanding the above section regarding “time”, if a matter specified in a public notice does not occur at the specified time and is rescheduled, additional notice shall be provided to the public to advise when the matter has been rescheduled to be considered. Where the time to give public notice is not legislated, any subsequent public notice shall not be required to adhere to the minimum time requirements above. Exceeding Minimum Notice 5.9. Nothing shall prevent the Municipality, acting reasonably, from exceeding the minimum notice requirements established in this policy at its discretion. 6. Administration Requirements by Statute or Regulations 6.1. Where satisfying a statutory requirement is an impossibility (for example, where legislation requires notice in a ‘newspaper having generation circulation in the municipality”, where no such newspaper exists), the Municipality shall make reasonable efforts to satisfy the legislative intent through other means. Where the giving of notice is required by legislation but the form, manner and/or time of giving notice is not specified by the applicable legislation, the Municipality shall give notice to the public in accordance with above sections regarding form, manner, and time. 6.2. Failure to conform to the standards of this policy shall not invalidate the matter, or any decision made regarding the matter, absent any strict legislative requirement to the contrary. 7. Roles and Responsibilities: 7.1. Council is responsible for: 7.1.1. Setting the policy on the form, manner, and time of notice. 7.1.2. Providing the financial and administrative resources to meet the requirements of the Public Notice Policy. Page 116 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 5 of 6 7.2. Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) is responsible for deciding on situations where: 7.2.1. Since the policy could affect all departments, the CAO is responsible for the review and updating of this policy. 7.2.2. If a matter arises which, in the opinion of the Chief Administrative Officer: • is considered to be urgent or of a time sensitive nature; • could affect the health or well-being of the residents of the Municipality; or • is likely to result in a State of Emergency being declared by the Province of Ontario or the Municipality; any, or all, of the public notice provisions established in this policy may be waived, and the Municipality shall make its best effort to provide as much notice as is reasonable under the circumstances, provided that the waiving of giving public notice does not contravene provincial or federal statutes or regulations. 7.3. Directors / Managers are responsible for the following within their scope of authority: 7.3.1. Ensuring that Staff are aware of the Public Notice Policy. 7.3.2. Ensuring that Staff comply with the Public Notice Policy. 7.3.3. Obtaining approval, from the CAO, for the waiving of any of the provisions of the Public Notice Policy, where necessary (as defined above). 7.3.4. Working with the Communications Division to ensure that appropriate notice is given. Page 117 Council Policy If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Page 6 of 6 7.4. All Staff are responsible for: 7.4.1. Ensuring that the public notices are created and distributed in accordance with the Public Notice Policy. 7.4.2. Notifying the Director of any problems with meeting the Public Notice Policy requirements. 7.4.3. Working with the Communications Division to ensure that appropriate notice is given. 8. Related Documents: Not Applicable. 9. Inquiries: If further information is required please contact the CAO. 10. Revision History: Date Description of Changes Approved By Page 118 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2023-XXX Being a by-law to repeal By-law 2005-022, the Notice By-law. Whereas, arising out of Report LGS-034-23, Council approved the recommendation to replace the existing Notice By-law with a new Public Notice Policy; Now therefore the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1.That By-law 2005-022, the Notice By-law, be repealed. 2.That this by-law shall come into force and effect on January 1, 2024. Passed in Open Council this XX day of MMMM, 2023. _____________________________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor _____________________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Attachment 2 to Report LGS-034-23 Page 119 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: LGS-035-23 Submitted By: Rob Maciver, Deputy CAO/Solicitor Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Lakeview Cemetery – Transfer to Municipality Recommendations: 1. That Report LGS-035-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That, subject to the approval of the Ministry of Consumer Services (through the Bereavement Authority of Ontario), the Municipality assume all responsibility and assets related to the Lakeview Cemetery located at 4449 Hill St, Newtonville, from the Lakeview Cemetery Board of Directors, effective January 1, 2024; 3. That Staff be authorized to execute, on behalf of the Municipality, all documents and instruments necessary to give effect to the cemetery transfer, to the satisfaction of the Deputy CAO/Solicitor; 4. That the By-law attached to Report LGS-035-23 attachment 1, to amend the Cemetery By-law, By-law 2022-055, to add Lakeview Cemetery, be approved; and 5. That all interested parties listed in Report LGS-035-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 120 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report LGS-035-23 Report Overview This report provides background and recommendations to assume ownership and control of the Lakeview Cemetery to the Municipality of Clarington due to the dissolution of the existing cemetery board. 1. Background 1.1 The Municipality of Clarington is currently responsible for five active cemeteries and 33 abandoned cemeteries. 1.2 Lakeview Cemetery (a.k.a. Newtonville Cemetery) is located at 4449 Hill St, Newtonville. Lakeview Cemetery is not to be confused with Newtonville Presbyterian Cemetery. 1.3 In late October 2023, the existing Secretary-Treasurer and Interim Chair of the Lakeview Cemetery Board approached the Municipality to advise of their retirement and ask about the process to transfer the Lakeview Cemetery (located in Newtonville) to the Municipality. No one else is interested in taking on the role of Secretary-Treasurer or Chair. At this stage the only viable alternative is for the Municipality to assume control. If the cemetery were to become abandoned, the Municipality would be the party with de facto responsibility, and transitioning ownership now with the existing Board is a more efficient process. 1.4 The existing Board is private in nature and does not currently depend on Municipal oversight. Staff have been in contact with the Board and have reviewed the steps required to take over the cemetery, following a similar process to that of the Orono Cemetery transfer which occurred in 2019. 1.5 At their November 8, 2023, meeting, the Lakeview Cemetery Board of Trustees unanimously passed the following resolution: Whereas the work and responsibility of Board of Trustees of the Lakeview Cemetery to manage the Lakeview Cemetery, Newtonville, is significant and beyond that of the Trustees; Now therefore be it resolved: a) That the Board of Trustees of the Lakeview Cemetery transfer the ownership, management, operations, license, documentation, funds, and assets of the Lakeview Cemetery to the Municipality of Clarington Staff, effective January 1, 2024; and Page 121 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report LGS-035-23 b) That the Board of Trustees of the Lakeview Cemetery be dissolved as part of the transfer process. 1.6 Grass-cutting services have been contracted out which represents a sizable portion of their operating expenses, with very little revenue (as there are very few graves left to be sold and interment rates are low). 1.7 Staff from the Public Works Department, Financial Services Department and Legislative Services Department met with the representatives of the Board and determined that all documentation is in order, but that it is available in hard copy format only. 2. History of Lakeview Cemetery 2.1 The land has been a cemetery as far back as the 1830’s, with the bulk of the property (two separate pieces), coming from William Laing. There are grave markers still present in Lakeview Cemetery that date back to this period. 2.2 The most recent land portion was transferred on August 15, 1952, and the land registration notes that the property is always to be used for cemetery purposes. 2.3 Lakeview Cemetery is currently laid out with approximately 988 graves, of which 30 remain unsold. In addition, there is a columbarium that contains 100 niches, of which 85 remain unsold. 2.4 In 2018, the Lakeview Cemetery was a stop on Doors Open Clarington. 2.5 Decoration Day is held annually on the second Sunday in August at the cemetery. 3. Legislation Clarington’s Cemetery By-law 3.1 By-law 2022-055 is Clarington’s Cemetery By-law and governs our active and abandoned cemeteries. Any changes to the Cemetery By-law (other than changes to schedules) need to follow the BAO’s requirements for notice and be approved by the BAO. Page 122 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report LGS-035-23 The Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act 3.2 The responsibilities under the FBCS Act include but are not limited to, maintenance of the cemetery grounds, obligations in compliance with the Act, and detailed record keeping. 3.3 As indicated above, the Municipality doesn’t automatically have to take over a cemetery, but this will eventually become a legal requirement when the cemetery is abandoned. 3.4 When referring to abandoned cemeteries, the legislation is not only speaking to inactive cemeteries but active cemeteries as well. The status of “active” or “inactive” is not a formal designation within the FBCS – those statuses have been used more as an internal note as to whether, or not, interments have occurred within the past 15 -20 years. Therefore, whether Lakeview Cemetery is active, or not, does not play into whether it meets the definition of an abandoned cemetery: 101.1 (1) A person set out in subsection (2) may apply to have a judge of the Superior Court of Justice declare a cemetery abandoned if the owner of the cemetery, (a) cannot be found or is unknown; (b) is unable to maintain it; or (c) is not a licensed operator and there is no licensed operator for the cemetery. 3.5 Ontario Regulation 30/11, Section 170 on Neglected or Abandoned Cemeteries and the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 starting at Section 101.1 referring to Abandoned Cemeteries explains the abandoned cemetery process further. The Bereavement Authority of Ontario (BAO) 3.6 The BAO administers provisions of the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services (FBCS) Act, which is consumer protection legislation respecting funerals, burials, cremations, and related services within the Province of Ontario. 3.7 The BAO advises that “the abandonment process can be costly, so it is beneficial to all parties if an agreement can be made – it is important to know that, if the site is not declared legally abandoned by the courts, the fees for the process will be borne by the operator, if declared abandoned those costs will instead be borne by the municipality. These costs can be substantial and may be in the range of $10,000 to $20,000. If the Municipality and the cemetery operator/owner can come to an amenable agreement regarding the transfer it is usually the best way forward. It ensures the continuous care Page 123 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report LGS-035-23 & maintenance of the cemetery and therefore assists in maintaining the cemetery’s history.” 3.8 In terms of options for the cemetery, the BAO also notes that “an agreement doesn’t have to be an immediate change from one party to the other but can include both parties working together for a couple of years to ensure a smooth transition. There is also the option of trying to sell the cemetery or locate a nearby operator who is willing to take it on.” These other options tend not to be successful. 3.9 The BAO adds that, even if the cemetery was inactive, existing interment rights must be honoured as the change in status does not negate the cemetery’s obligations. 4. Impact on Municipal Resources Administrative Impact 4.1 Based on the information about the operation of Lakeview Cemetery as they are understood, and given the Staff expertise in this area, the additional administrative demand for sales, transfers and record keeping should be able to be absorbed with minimal impact. That said, there will be either staff overtime (and/or temporary contract to backfill) required to input the Clarington database with the Lakeview Cemetery data. No additional training will be required for staff. The ongoing impact of service demands on the Clerk’s Division Staff will be monitored. Maintenance Impact 4.2 However, the maintenance portion may have a slightly larger impact, on an ongoing basis. To keep maintenance levels consistent, the current grass-cutting contractor will be discontinued, and Clarington Staff will include this cemetery as part of their grass- cutting routine. 5. Next Steps 5.1 It is recommended that the Municipality assume the ownership and control of the Lakeview Cemetery. Should Council approve the recommendations contained in this report, the Ministry will ultimately need to approve the transfer which it is anticipated they would do. 5.2 When the main transfer documents have been completed, Staff will work with the Communications Division to notify the public (i.e., advertisement in the Orono Times; new sign at the cemetery; changes to the website; a nd social media announcements). Additionally, all funeral homes and monument companies will be notified of the changes. Page 124 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report LGS-035-23 6. Financial Considerations 6.1 Staff have identified the following financial impacts:  Slightly increased revenue (but not much – there are not a lot of sales/year).  There is a $20,000 endowment that results in approximately $150-$400 dividends per year. The use of the funds is restricted to pay for flowers on three particular graves.  Care and Maintenance Fund will be transferred over.  There is currently a discrepancy between the cemetery rates in Lakeview and the rest of the Clarington active cemeteries (with Clarington being substantially higher). See Attachment 2 for a rate comparison. The User Fee By-law governs all cemeteries – once Lakeview Cemetery is added to the Cemetery By-law, the new rates will take effect. Staff do not anticipate much public concern as there are few plots to be sold and few interred each year. This increase in fees will ensure that there are some funds to provide for the consistent maintenance that the Municipality can offer.  Increased maintenance work (i.e., grass cutting, and snow clearing).  Increased interment activity/work. There will be improved customer service because the previous board was not able to provide winter burials, whereas the Municipality does.  Staff do not anticipate that there will be software vendor costs to create a software map for the plots as the software contract allows for three acres to be added per year. However, there may be a need to backfill the Vital Statistics Clerk during the transition to allow for the inputting of the information into the cemetery software system. Temporary resources may be required and will be funded from existing budgets.  Financial Services Administrative - time it will take for accounting Staff to review the records and make necessary updates in our systems.  There should be minimal, if any, increases in insurance costs. Page 125 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report LGS-035-23 7. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Public Works who concurs with the recommendations. 8. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that the Municipality of Clarington assume responsibility for the maintenance and operations of the Lakeview Cemetery. Staff Contact: June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk, jgallagher@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Draft By-law to Amend the Cemetery By-law Attachment 2 – Rate Comparison Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: Jamie Traynor, Licensing Officer, Bereavement Authority of Ontario Lakeview Cemetery Board of Trustees Page 126 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2023-XXX Being a by-law to amend the Cemetery By-law, By-law 2022-055, to add Lakeview Cemetery to the list of active cemeteries. Whereas Council approved Report LGS-xxx-23 recommending the transfer of Lakeview Cemetery to the Municipality from the Board of Trustees; Now therefore the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That Schedule A of the Cemetery By-law, By-law 2022-055, be amended to add the following to the end of the list of Active Cemeteries: “Lakeview Cemetery, located at 4449 Hill Street, Newtonville” 2. That this by-law come into effect on January 1, 2024. Passed in Open Council this XX day of MMMM, 2023. _____________________________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor _____________________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 127 Attachment 2 To Report LGS-035-23 Comparison of Cemetery Fees Fee Schedule Effective July 1, 2023. All fees subject to applicable taxes. 1NOTE: 40% of total fee for sales of plots, niches, and monuments goes to care and maintenance fund. Sale of Plots1 Clarington Total Fee Lakeview Total Fee Single (3’ x 9’) $2,149.00 $1,400.00 Double Lot N/A $2,800.00 Infant (1.5’ x 3’) No charge N/A Cremation (2’ x 2’) 716.00 N/A Sale of Cremation Niches1 Clarington Total Fee Lakeview Total Fee Niche (including plaque) $2,454.00 $1,500.00 Interment Clarington Fee Lakeview Fee Adult – Single Depth $1,133.00 $1,200.00 Adult – Double Depth 1,410.00 N/A Cremation 433.00 $600.00 Niche 217.00 N/A Infant No charge N/A Disinternment Clarington Fee Lakeview Fee Adult – Single Depth $1,865.00 $375.00 Adult – Double Depth 2,243.00 N/A Cremation 511.00 N/A Niche 217.00 N/A Infant 511.00 N/A Interments Clarington Fee Lakeview Fee Saturday Plot Interments $266.00 $300.00 Saturday Cremation/Niche Interments No additional charge N/A Sunday & Stat Holidays Plot Interments 627.00 $300.00 Sunday & Stat Holidays Cremation/Niche Interments 228.00 N/A Rental for lowering device, set up and dressing 144.00 N/A Provincial Licence Fee (Legislated – no tax) $30 Same Page 128 Attachment 2 To Report LGS-035-23 Comparison of Cemetery Fees Additional Labour Clarington Fee Lakeview Fee Groundskeeping/Casual Labour N/A $20/hour Groundskeeping/Casual Labour (Weekend/Holiday Rate) N/A $25/hour Monument Foundation or Marker Setting1 Notes Clarington Total Fee Lakeview Total Fee Monument $677.00 N/A Flat Marker – Regular Maximum height 24.5” x 18.5” 400.00 N/A Flat Marker – Cremation Maximum size 22” x 16” 233.00 N/A Flat Marker – Block IBL Maximum size 16.5” x 10.5” 133.00 N/A Foot Marker Maximum size 16” x 10” 133.00 150.00 Removal of Monuments 94.00 N/A 4 Corner Stones N/A 250.00 Page 129 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: FSD-041-23 Submitted By: Trevor Pinn, Deputy CAO/Treasurer Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: RFP2023-6 By-law Number: Report Subject: Engineering Services DHRC Dehumidification Replacement Recommendations: 1. That Report FSD-041-23, be received; 2. That the proposal received from CIMA Canada Inc., being the most responsive bidder meeting all terms and conditions and specifications of RFP2023-6 be awarded the contract for Engineering/Design for the replacement of the Dehumidification Unit at Diane Hamre Recreation Complex (DHRC). The scope of work will include full design/engineering, assistance in preparing tender ready specifications, drawings, and contract administration; 3. That the total funds required for this project in the amount of $91,769.20 (Net HST Rebate) be funded from the approved budget; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-041-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 130 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report FSD-041-23 Report Overview To request authorization from Council to award Request for Proposal RFP2023-6 for the replacement of the dehumidification unit at Diane Hamre Recreation Complex (DHRC). The scope or work will include full design/engineering, assistance in preparing tender ready specifications, drawings, and contract administration. 1. Background 1.1 The Municipality requires the assistance of a qualified firm to complete the engineering/design, tender ready specifications, drawings, and contract administration for the replacement of the dehumidification unit at the DHRC. The Terms of Reference were provided by the Community Services Department. 1.2 RFP2023-6 was issued by the Purchasing Services Division and advertised electronically on the Municipality of Clarington’s (the Municipality) website. The RFP was structured on a two-envelope system with price being an evaluated factor. 2. Analysis 2.1 The RFP closed September 7, 2023. 2.2 The RFP stipulated, among other things, that the proponents were to provide a description of the Firm/Consulting team, key qualifications, firm profile, highlights of past service and experience of team members with projects of similar size, nature and complexity, and demonstrate an understanding of the Municipality’s requir ements. 2.3 Eleven companies downloaded the document. Three proposals were received (refer to Attachment 1) by the stipulated closing date and time. One proposal was deemed non- compliant and did not proceed to the evaluation stage. Two proposals received complied with Phase 1 - Mandatory submission requirements and were distributed to the evaluation committee for review, evaluation and scoring. 2.4 The technical proposals were evaluated and scored independently by the members of the evaluation committee, in accordance with the established criteria as outlined in the RFP. The evaluation committee was comprised of three staff members from the Community Services Department. 2.5 The evaluation committee met to review and agree upon the overall scores for each proposal. Some of the areas on which the submissions were evaluated were as follows:  The Proponent’s understanding of the Municipality’s requirements; Page 131 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report FSD-041-23  Highlights of services provided performing similar work on projects of comparable nature, size and scope, in a municipality of similar population size;  A methodology describing the Proponent’s project management approach, work plan, goals, objectives and methods of communications to be utilized to meet the requested deadlines; and  A proposed solution including a detailed work plan indicating the project method, schedule, Gantt chart, tasks and deliverables showing an estimated overall timeline of the project. 2.6 Upon completion of the evaluation, one submission met the established threshold of 80 percent for Phase 2 – Technical Submission and moved forward to Phase 3 - Pricing. It was determined by the evaluation committee, that a presentation from the short -listed proponents would not be required. 2.7 The pricing envelope was opened and evaluated as prescribed in the RFP document. 2.8 Upon completion of the evaluation scoring, the recommendation is to award a contract for the noted work to the highest ranked proponent, CIMA Canada Inc. 2.9 CIMA Canada Inc. has provided services to the Municipality in the past with satisfactory results. 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 The funding required for this project is $91,769.20 (Net HST Rebate) and is in the approved budget allocation as provided and will be funded from the following account: Description Account Number Amount 2021 DHRC – Building Improvements 110-42-421-84244-7401 $47,000 2023 DHRC – Building Improvements 110-42-421-84244-7401 44,769 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Community Services who concurs with the recommendations. Page 132 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report FSD-041-23 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that CIMA Canada Inc., be awarded the contract for the provision of Engineering/Design Services as per the terms and conditions of RFP2023- 6. Staff Contact: David Ferguson, Purchasing Manager, 905-623-3379 ext. 2209 or dferguson@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Summary of Bid Results Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 133 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report FSD-041-23 Attachment 1 to Report FSD-041-23 - Bid Summary Municipality of Clarington RFP2023-6 – Engineering Services DHRC Dehumidification Replacement Bid Summary Bidder CIMA Canada Inc. * Moon-Matz Ltd I.B. Storey Inc. Note: * Denotes Proponents who were shortlisted. Page 134 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: FSD-042-23 Submitted By: Trevor Pinn, Deputy CAO/Treasurer Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: CL2023-37 By-law Number: Report Subject: Supply and Delivery of One Grader Recommendations: 1. That Report FSD-042-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Toromont Cat with a bid amount of $546,746.30 (Net HST Rebate) being the lowest bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of CL202 3-37 be awarded the contract for the Supply and Delivery of One Grader; 3. That the total estimated funds required for this project in the amount of $549,750 (Net HST Rebate) include $546,746.30 (Net HST Rebate) for the grader and other costs such as radios, GPS units, Clarington decal lettering and striping in the amount of $3,000 (Net HST Rebate) be funded by the Municipality as follows: Description Account Number Amount Fleet Replacement Roads - (2023) 110-36-388-83642-7401 $549,750 4. That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-042-23 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 135 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report FSD-042-23 Report Overview To request authorization from Council to award CL2023-37 for the supply and delivery of one Grader. 1. Background 1.1 Tender specifications for the Supply and Delivery of One Grader were prepared by the Public Works Department and provided to the Purchasing Services Division. 1.2 Tender CL2023-37 was issued by the Purchasing Services Division and advertised electronically on the Municipality’s website. 2. Analysis 2.1 Six plan takers downloaded the tender document. 2.2 The tender closed on October 13, 2023. 2.3 Three bids were received in response to the tender call. 2.4 Of the three companies that downloaded the tender document but chose not to submit pricing:  One company did not manufacture or supply the commodity;  Two companies did not respond to our request for information. 2.5 The bids were reviewed and tabulated by the Purchasing Services Division (see Attachment 1) and one bid was deemed non-compliant. The results were forwarded to the Public Works Department for their review and consideration. 2.6 After review and analysis by the Public Works Department and the Purchasing Services Division, it was mutually agreed that the low, compliant bidder, Toromont Cat be recommended for award of tender CL2023-37 2.7 Toromont Cat has satisfactorily supplied similar equipment to the Municipality of Clarington in the past and references did not need to be checked. 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 The total estimated cost for the grader and other associated costs is within the allocated budget. The bid included a trade-in credit in the amount of $111,936 (Net HST Rebate). Page 136 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report FSD-042-23 3.2 The total funds required for this vehicle in the amount of $549,750 (Net HST Rebate) include $546,746.30 (Net HST Rebate) for the grader and other costs such as radios, GPS units, Clarington decal lettering and striping in the amount of $3,000 (Net HST Rebate) is within the approved budget allocation and will be funded by the Municipality as follows: Description Account Number Amount Fleet Replacement Roads - (2023) 110-36-388-83642-7401 $549,750 3.3 Queries with respect to the department needs should be referred to the Director of Public Works. 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Public Works who concurs with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Toromont Cat being the lowest compliant bidder be awarded the contract for the Supply and Delivery of One Grader per the terms and conditions of Tender CL2023-37. Staff Contact: David Ferguson, Purchasing Manager, (905) 623-3379 x2209 or dferguson@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Summary of Bid Results Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 137 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report FSD-042-23 Attachment 1 to Report FSD-042-23 Municipality of Clarington Summary of Bid Results Tender CL2023-37 Supply and Delivery of One Grader Bidder Total Bid (Net HST Rebate) Toromont Cat $546,746.30 Designcon International* 563,628.29 Brandt Tractor Ltd. 734,707.20 *Non-compliant Page 138 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: FSD-043-23 Submitted By: Trevor Pinn, Deputy CAO/Treasurer Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: CL2023-38 By-law Number: Report Subject: Supply and Delivery of One Rescue Truck Recommendations: 1. That Report FSD-043-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Dependable Truck and Tank Limited with a bid amount of $1,015,844.64 (Net HST Rebate) being the lowest bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of CL2023-38 be awarded the contract for the Supply and Delivery of One Rescue Truck; 3. That the total estimated funds required for this project in the amount of $1,018,850 (Net HST Rebate) include $1,015,844.64 (Net HST Rebate) for the rescue truck and other costs such as radios, GPS units, Clarington decal lettering and striping in the amount of $3,000 (Net HST Rebate) be funded by the Municipality as follows: Description Account Number Amount Utility Truck 110-28-388-82814-7401 $1,000,000 DC Reserve Fund 110-28-388-82814-7401 18,850 4. That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-043-23 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 139 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report FSD-043-23 Report Overview To request authorization from Council to award CL2023-38 for the supply and delivery of one Rescue Truck. 1. Background 1.1 Tender specifications for the Supply and Delivery of One Rescue Truck were prepared by the Emergency and Fire Services Department and provided to the Purchasing Services Division. 1.2 Tender CL2023-38 was issued by the Purchasing Services Division and advertised electronically on the Municipality’s website. 2. Analysis 2.1 Nine plan takers downloaded the tender document. 2.2 The tender closed on November 3, 2023. 2.3 Four bids were received in response to the tender call. 2.4 Of the five companies that downloaded the tender document but chose not to submit pricing:  One company did not manufacture or supply the commodity;  One company is a subcontractor;  Three companies did not respond to our request for information. 2.5 The bids were reviewed and tabulated by the Purchasing Services Division (see Attachment 1) and were deemed compliant. The results were forwarded to the Emergency and Fire Services Department for their review and consideration. 2.6 After review and analysis by the Emergency and Fire Services Department and the Purchasing Services Division, it was mutually agreed that the low, compliant bidder, Dependable Truck and Tank Limited be recommended for award of tender CL2023 -38. 2.7 Dependable Truck and Tank Limited has satisfactorily supplied similar emergency vehicles to the Municipality of Clarington in the past and references did not need to be checked. Page 140 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report FSD-043-23 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 The cost of the rescue truck exceeds the allocated budget by $18,850 (Net HST Rebate). The additional funds required to complete this project will be funded from the DC Reserve Fund. 3.2 The total funds required for this project in the amount of $1,018,850 (Net HST Rebate) include $1,015,844.64 (Net HST Rebate) for the rescue truck and other costs such as radios, GPS units, Clarington decal lettering and striping in the amount of $3,000 (Net HST Rebate) is within the approved budget allocation and will be funded by the Municipality as follows: Description Account Number Amount Utility Truck 110-28-388-82814-7401 $1,000,000 DC Reserve Fund 110-28-388-82814-7401 18,850 3.3 Queries with respect to the department needs should be referred to the Director of Emergency and Fire Services. 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Emergency and Fire Services who concurs with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Dependable Truck and Tank Limited being the lowest compliant bidder be awarded the contract for the Supply and Delivery of One Rescue Truck per the terms and conditions of Tender CL2023 -38. Staff Contact: David Ferguson, Purchasing Manager, (905) 623-3379 x2209 or dferguson@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Summary of Bid Results Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 141 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report FSD-043-23 Attachment 1 to Report FSD-043-23 Municipality of Clarington Summary of Bid Results Tender CL2023-38 Supply and Delivery of One Rescue Truck Bidder Total Bid (Net HST Rebate) Dependable Truck & Tank Limited $1,015,844.64 Fort Garry Fire Trucks 1,062,341.84 DARCH FIRE INC. 1,138,694.40 Commercial Emergency Equipment 1,407,261.43 Page 142 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: FSD-045-23 Submitted By: Trevor Pinn, Deputy CAO/Treasurer Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: RFP2023-8 By-law Number: Report Subject: Consulting Services for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Pathway Feasibility Study. Recommendations: 1. That Report FSD-045-23, and any related communication items, be received; 2. That the proposal received from Sustainable Projects Group being the most responsive bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of RFP2023 -8 be awarded the contract for the provision of Consulting Services for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Pathway Feasibility Study, as required by the Chief Administrative Officer’s Office; 3. That the funds required for this project in the amount of $158,521.73 (Net HST Rebate) is in the approved budget allocation as provided and will be funded from the following account: Description Account Number Amount Climate Change Professional Fees 100-13-180-10519-7161 $158,522 4. That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-045-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 143 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report FSD-045-23 Report Overview To request approval to award RFP2023-8 to the most responsive proponent to complete a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction pathway feasibility study considering GHG reduction measures and capital investment timing. 1. Background 1.1 The Municipality requires the assistance of a qualified firm to complete a GHG reduction pathway feasibility study considering GHG reduction measures and capital investment timing. This study will compare at least two GHG reduction pathway scenarios, with the recommendation of once scenario as the primary pathway for implementation. 1.2 A Request for Proposal (RFP) was drafted to allow the Municipality to select a qualified Consultant with the skills, resources, and experience necessary to complete the Feasibility Study of the GHG Reduction Pathway in accordance with the terms of reference provided by the Chief Administrative Officer’s (CAO) Office. 1.3 RFP2023-8 was issued by the Purchasing Services Division and advertised electronically on the Municipality of Clarington’s (the Municipality) website. The RFP was structured on a two-envelope system with price being an evaluated factor. 2. Analysis 2.1 The RFP closed October 5, 2023. 2.2 The RFP stipulated, among other things, that the proponents were to provide a description of the Firm/Consulting team, key qualifications, firm profile, highlights of past service and experience of team members with projects of similar size, nature and complexity, and demonstrate an understanding of the Municipality’s requirements. 2.3 Twenty-three companies downloaded the document. Five proposals were received (refer to Attachment 1) by the stipulated closing date and time. All proposals received complied with Phase 1 - Mandatory submission requirements and were distributed to the evaluation committee for review, evaluation and scoring. 2.4 The technical proposals were evaluated and scored independently by the members of the evaluation committee, in accordance with the established criteria as outlined in the RFP. The evaluation committee was comprised of staff from the CAO’s Office, Planning and Community Services Department. Page 144 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report FSD-045-23 2.5 The evaluation committee met to review and agree upon the overall scores for each proposal. Some of the areas on which the submissions were evaluated were as follows:  The Proponent’s understanding of the Municipality’s requirements;  Highlights of services provided performing similar work on projects of comparable nature, size and scope in a municipality of similar population size;  A methodology describing the Proponent’s project management approach, work plan, goals, objectives and methods of communications to be utilized to meet the requested deadlines; and  A proposed solution including a detailed work plan indicating the project method, schedule, Gantt chart, tasks and deliverables showing an estimated overall timeline of the project. 2.6 Upon completion of the evaluation, three submissions met the established threshold of 80 percent for Phase 2 – Technical Submission and moved forward to Phase 3 - Pricing. It was determined by the evaluation committee, that a presentation from the short-listed proponents would not be required. 2.7 The pricing envelopes were opened and evaluated as stipulated in the RFP document. 2.8 Upon completion of the evaluation scoring, the recommendation is to award a contract for the noted work to the highest ranked proponent, Sustainable Projects Group. 2.9 Sustainable Projects Group. has not provided services to the Municipality in the past; references were checked with satisfactory results. 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 The Municipality has applied to receive a grant of $160,000 as part of the Community Building Retrofit Initiative from FCM. Up to eighty percent of eligible expense are allowed to be claimed under this grant program. 3.2 The funding required for this project is $158,521.73 (Net HST Rebate) and is in the approved budget allocation as provided and will be funded from the following account: Description Account Number Amount Climate Change Professional Fees 100-13-180-10519-7161 $158,522 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director of Community Services who concur with the recommendation. Page 145 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report FSD-045-23 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Sustainable Projects Group be awarded the contract for the provision of GHG Reduction Pathway Feasibility Study as per the terms and conditions of RFP2023-8. Staff Contact: David Ferguson, Purchasing Manager, 305-623-3379 ext. 2209 or dferguson@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Summary of Proposals Received Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 146 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report FSD-045-23 Attachment 1 – Summary of Proposals Received Municipality of Clarington RFP2023-8 – GHG Reduction Pathway Feasibility Study Proposals Received Bidder CIMA Canada * HH Angus & Associates Ltd. IBI Storey Inc. J. L. Richards & Associates Ltd. * Sustainable Projects Group * Note: * Denotes Proponents who were shortlisted. Page 147 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: PWD-011-23 Submitted By: Stephen Brake, Director of Public Works Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Proposed Amendments to Traffic By-law 2014-059 Recommendations: 1. That Report PWD-011-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That the amending By-law provided with Report PWD-011-23, as attachment 1, be approved; and 3. That all interested parties listed in Report PWD-011-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 148 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PWD-011-23 Report Overview The purpose of this report is to amend the Traffic and Parking By-law 2014-051. The recommended amendments will allow for the installation of All Way STOP traffic controls at seven additional locations to help improve intersection operation and to adapt to evolving traffic conditions. The recommendations also include an amendment to reverse the right of way control at one location along Lake Road due to its’ recent extension and the changes in traffic operation on local area roads. The report further proposes improvement changes to the seasonal weight restrictions program. 1. Background 1.1 The Traffic and Parking By-law 2014-051 serves to compliment the Ontario Highway Traffic Act and provides a set of rules to help control traffic and parking in Clarington. As a legislative requirement, STOP and other select signs must be included in the by-law to be enforceable. During the ongoing review process, staff have identified seven locations where All Way STOP controls are recommended due to the various reasons explained below. Additional recommendations also include a reversal of right of way due to the extension of a new road, and improvement changes to the seasonal weight restrictions. 2. Recommended New All Way STOP Intersections 2.1 Aspen Springs Drive and West Side Drive Aspen Spring Drive is a major road that connects Green Road to Bowmanville Avenue. West Side Drive is a collector type road that connects Baseline Road to Aspen Springs Drive. There is a school crossing at this intersection, which serves the south and west legs of the intersection. The steady growth in medium density residential properties in the area has resulted in higher volumes and a busier movement operation both for pedestrians and drivers, including entering from West Side Drive and from the condominium driveway on the north side. Adding to the configuration is the curvature along Aspen Springs Drive, directly at the intersection. The future GO Transit hub will also contribute further to the challenges at this location. The most recent traffic analysis from April 2023 has significantly surpassed both the requirements of combined traffic volume and the volume entering from the minor street. The split of traffic is only one point below the required minimum, however, the implementation of an All Way STOP will most likely adjust the traffic patterns in the correct direction. The proposed traffic control will also provide a crossing point along the corridor, which will carry additional benefits to the community. 2.2 Bons Avenue and Gimblett Street Page 149 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PWD-011-23 Bons Avenue is a collector type roadway with free-flow operation from Scugog Steet to Liberty Street. There is a school crossing at Wyse Gate, directly in front of Charles Bowman Public School. As a result of the expanding development and road infrastructure to the north, Gimblett Street now connects directly to Northglen Boulevard at Concession Road 3. This has altered traffic patterns which results in increased flow onto Bons Avenue via Gimblett Street. All Way STOP justification warrants are typically based on the combined intersection volume and on the minor street entering volumes including pedestrians. Although the latest traffic analysis from September 2021 shows volumes of 86% and 71% respectively, since then, the additional residential developments in the area and increases in school enrollment have increased the overall traffic and pedestrian volumes to justify the installation of an All Way STOP. The addition of this traffic control device will also provide a crossing opportunity for the local and school community, as well as an interruption to the free flowing traffic on Bons Avenue. 2.3 Mearns Avenue and Longworth Avenue This intersection is at an area, which is not yet fully developed. However, the required All Way STOP justification warrant thresholds have already been exceeded. Due to the location being close to the limits of the Bowmanville urban boundaries, traffic tends not to have fully transitioned from rural to urban conditions. As a result, some of the elevated speeds may be affecting the operation of turning vehicles and pedestrians crossing from the east. With the proposed traffic control device, right of way distribution should be improved, including a crosswalk opportunity for pedestrians and reduced speeds along the corridor. 2.4 Rhonda Boulevard and Lawrence Gate This location is the site of a former school crossing, which served the now relocated separate elementary school. Since the closure of the school, many local residents continue to regularly use this crossing point. In addition, the new pathway through Rhonda Park provides a new pedestrian connection to Bowmanville Avenue. The many summer activities at Rhonda Park also results in parking being a significant issue impacting the safe operation of this intersection. An additional concern which staff attempted to resolve is the Elexicon switchgear box on the west side of the road, that is obstructing pedestrian visibility and has been a source of many complaints. Unfortunately, after many discussions it was determined that the relocation of the switchgear box is financially not feasible. The latest traffic analysis shows that while the overall traffic volume is at 65%, the side street entering volume is at 115%. For the above reasons, staff recommend an All Way STOP at this intersection. 2.5 Sandringham Drive and Strathallan Drive Page 150 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PWD-011-23 The recent and ongoing expansion of the retail centre at Trulls Road and Highway 2 ha s contributed to changes in traffic patterns in the imm ediate and surrounding area of the subject intersection. As a result, the latest traffic analysis from May 2023 placed the intersection of Sandringham Drive and Strathallan Drive at 91% and 94% of the required traffic volume thresholds, with the traffic split at an acceptable range. Staff support the installation of an All Way STOP at this intersection. 2.6 Sandringham Drive and Glenabbey Drive This intersection of two collector roads functions by providing connectivity for all types of area traffic, including school transportation and Durham Transit. Staff have been monitoring this intersection and have observed that the traffic entering from Glenabbey Drive is reaching the required threshold for the minor road, which is at 98%. Since this intersection connects two collector roadways of very similar function and other design characteristics, and with the existing condition of a curvature on the north side of Sandringham Drive at this intersection, staff recommend the installation of an All Way STOP. 2.7 Trulls Road and George Reynolds Drive This intersection was the subject of several studies, with the most recent one conducted in May 2023. The data confirmed that the required levels are at 173% and 126% of the justification threshold. With the newly built daycare centre on the south-west corner of Trulls Road and George Reynolds Drive and with the local population using this location as one of the crossing points along the Trulls Road corridor, staff recommend the installation of an All-Way STOP. 3. STOP Right of Way Reversal 3.1 Lake Road at Lambs Road/South Service Road The most recent extension of Lake Road has resulted in a direct connection between Liberty Street and Bennet Road. As intended, the road carries mostly commercial traffic, with a fractional proportion of residential traffic from Lambs Road. Given that Lake Road was built in several stages, the existing STOP condition is assigned to Lake Road, giving Lambs Road and the now obsolete South Service Road the right of way. Since the former South Service Road was terminated at the east limit due to the extension of Lake Road to Bennet Road, it now carries no traffic and is planned to be fully decommissioned in the future. In conjunction with the very low traffic from Lambs Road, the intersection does not warrant an All-Way STOP. The proposed amendment will allow for the proper reversal of right of way control, as per the Ontario Traffic Manual procedures, which will remove the STOP condition from Lake Road and assign it to Lambs Road and South Service Road respectively. Page 151 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PWD-011-23 4. Changes to the Seasonal Weight Restrictions 4.1 The seasonal weight restrictions are regulated by the Highway Traffic Act, and local By- laws. The purpose is for the road authority to have control over the road network du ring the Spring thaw. The process involves the posting of regulatory signs reducing the axle loads on trucks to 5 tonnes. This takes place along roads that are not built to withstand fully loaded heavy trucks during the Spring thaw conditions. The regulation helps minimize road damage from heavy vehicles, extend road and culvert life and improve safety due to reduced shoulder deterioration, to name a few. It is worth noting that this is not a heavy truck prohibition but rather a seasonal prevention method. 4.2 Due to the changing climate and localized conditions, an amendment to The Highway Traffic Act passed several years ago, removed the set d ates of March 1 to April 30 from the seasonal weight restrictions regulation. The former effective dates are still part of Clarington’s Traffic and Parking By-law, which pose a challenge when coordinating with the Region of Durham and our neighbouring municipalities, who already have such flexibility. Staff strongly advise that the reference to the set dates is removed from the By-law and that the amendment will allow the Municipality to post the seasonal weight restrictions as needed. The change will have several benefits, such as targeting areas or roads that may exhibit prolonged Spring thaw conditions, coordinating dates with the Region of Durham and our neighbouring municipalities, and adapting to development growth and changes in heavy traffic patterns areas. 4.3 Ontario Street and Queen Street are currently exempt from the above seasonal weight restrictions. This was a historical decision, that stemmed solely from the former Goodyear plant requiring very infrequent, but legally compliant year-round access for their material shipments. Since the plant closure, the roadside environment has changed thanks to the construction of the senior living complex, and the new Viola Leger Public School. The senior residence is already significant in size, with expansion plans for phase 2, that will provide even more space for independent and assisted senior living. It has been observed that many heavy trucks avoid other major routes in favor of this corridor. This means that fully loaded trucks are permitted to travel along these roads year-round. With the substandard lane width on Queen Street, and the older road base and changes in the surrounding roadside environment, the current status of allowing trucks along this corridor is no longer acceptable. Staff recommend removing Ontario Street and Queen Street from the list of roads that are exempted from the seasonal weight restrictions. Page 152 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PWD-011-23 5. Financial Considerations All costs associated with the above recommendations will be covered by the annual operating budget for sign and pavement marking maintenance programs. 6. Concurrence Not Applicable. 7. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that the above traffic control modifications be approved so that the Traffic and Parking By-law 2014-051 can be amended and the changes can be implemented as soon as weather and site conditions allow. Staff Contact: Slav Potrykus, Traffic Engineering Supervisor, 905-623-3379 extension 2315 or spotrykus@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – By-law Amendment Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: There are no interested parties to be notified. Page 153 Attachment 1 to Report PWD-011-23 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2023-XXX Being a by-law to amend By-law 2014-059 entitled “a By-law to Regulate Traffic and Parking on Highways, Private Property and Municipal Property”. Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend by-law 2014-059; Now therefore the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows : 1. Schedule 9 of Clarington By-law 2014-059 is amended by adding the following lines: Aspen Springs Drive, East limit of Green Road, West limit of West Side Drive Aspen Springs Drive, East limit of West Side Drive, West limit of Durham Region Road 57 Bons Avenue, East limit of Scugog Street, West limit of Gimblett Street Bons Avenue, East limit of Gimblett Street, West limit of Durham Region Road 14 Lake Road, West limit of Bennett Road, East limit of Durham Region Road 14 Mearns Avenue, North limit of King Street East, South limit of Concession Street East Mearns Avenue, North limit of Concession Street East, South limit of Apple Blossom Boulevard Mearns Avenue, North limit of Apple Blossom Boulevard, South limit of Longworth Avenue Mearns Avenue, North limit of Longworth Avenue, South limit of Concession Road 3 Rhonda Boulevard and Kings Hill Lane (in combination), North limit of Lawrence Gate, East limit of Chapel Street Rhonda Boulevard, South limit of Lawrence Gate, West limit of Waverley Road Sandringham Drive, South limit of Durham Region Highway 2, North limit of Page 154 Attachment 1 to Report PWD-011-23 Strathallan Drive Sandringham Drive, South limit of Strathallan Drive, North limit of Claret Road Sandringham Drive, South limit of Claret Road, West limit of Glenabbey Drive Sandringham Drive, East limit of Glenabbey Drive, West limit of Trulls Road Trulls Road, North limit of Durham Region Highway 2, South limit of George Reynolds Drive Trulls Road, North limit of George Reynolds Drive, South limit of Pebblestone Road 2. Schedule 9 of Clarington By-law 2014-059 is amended by removing the following lines: South Service Road, North limit of South Service Road, South limit of South Service Road Aspen Springs Drive, East limit of Green Road, West limit of Durham Region Road 57 Bons Avenue, East limit of Scugog Street, West limit of Durham Region Road 14 Lake Road, East limit of Durham Region Road 14, West limit of Lambs Road Lake Road, West limit of Bennett Road, East limit of Lambs Road Mearns Avenue, North limit of King Street East, South limit of Concession Road 3 Rhonda Boulevard and Kings Hill Lane (in combination), West limit of Waverley Road, East limit of Chapel Street Sandringham Drive, South limit of Durham Region Highway 2, North limit of Claret Road Sandringham Drive, South limit of Claret Road, West limit of Trulls Road Trulls Road, North limit of Durham Region Highway 2, South limit of Pebblestone Road Page 155 Attachment 1 to Report PWD-011-23 3. Schedule 10 of Clarington By-law 2014-059 is amended by adding the following lines: Aspen Springs Drive and West Side Drive (all-way stop), Northbound on West Side Drive, Westbound and Eastbound on Aspen Springs Drive Bons Avenue and Gimblett St/ Honeyman Drive (all-way stop), Eastbound and Westbound on Bons Avenue, Northbound on Honeyman Drive, Southbound on Gimblett Street Mearns Avenue and Longworth Avenue (all-way stop), Eastbound and Westbound on Longworth Avenue, Northbound and Southbound on Mearns Avenue Rhonda Boulevard and Lawrence Gate (all-way stop), Northbound and Southbound on Rhonda Boulevard, Westbound on Lawrence Gate Sandringham Drive and Strathallan Drive (all-way stop), Northbound and Southbound on Sandringham Drive, Westbound on Strathallan Drive Sandringham Drive and Glenabbey Drive (all-way stop), Westbound and Eastbound on Sandringham Drive, Northbound on Glenabbey Drive Trulls Road and George Reynolds Drive (all-way stop), Northbound and Southbound on Trulls Road, Westbound and Eastbound on George Reynolds Drive 4. Section 43 of Clarington By-law 2014-059 is amended by removing the following: For the purposes of subsections 122(1), (2) and (3) of the HTA, the reduced load period shall commence on March 1st of each year and end on April 30th of each year And replaced with the following: For the purposes of subsection 122(7) of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, The Director may designate temporary effective dates, and may erect official signs to that effect. 5. Schedule 14 of Clarington By-law 2014-059 is amended by removing the following lines: Ontario Street, West limit of Regional Road 14, South limit of King Street East Queen Street and Scugog Street in combination, East limit of Ontario Street, South limit of King Street West. 6. That this By-law come into effect on the date it is enacted. Page 156 Attachment 1 to Report PWD-011-23 Passed in Open Council this XX day of MMMM, 2023. _____________________________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor _____________________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 157 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: CSD-004-23 Submitted By: George Acorn, Director of Community Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: West Beach Cottages Recommendations: 1. That Report CSD-004-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Council authorize staff to commence with the demolition of the two recently vacated cottages (#16 and #32 West Beach Road, Bowmanville); and 3. That the necessary funds be drawn from Account #100-50-130-10543-7520 Land Acquisition Maintenance – Non-Capital. Page 158 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CSD-004-23 Report Overview The report will inform Council of the findings in recent inspections of these two seasonal cottages, by our Building Department and Fire Prevention Division. Based on the results of these inspections, staff are seeking authorization to commence with the demolition of the two cottages. 1. Background 1.1 In September 2009, the Municipality expropriated the land, formerly owned by the Port Darlington Harbour Company, on which the West Beach cottages were situated for the purposes of establishing a district park. At the time of the acquisition, there were 3 all- season cottages, 7 seasonal cottages and 13 dilapidated buildings on the expropriated lands. 1.2 In May 2010, two of the all-season cottages and all 13 of the dilapidated buildings were demolished. Subsequently in 2015, the remaining all-season cottage was also demolished. At the end of the 2018 cottage season, another seasonal cottage was vacated and demolished. Currently there remain 6 seasonal cottages on the previously expropriated lands. 1.3 At the Council meeting of June 12, 2023, Council considered a motion to extend leases for 4 existing tenancy agreements and grant new leases to the relatives of original tenants for the remain two cottages.al cottages. Ultimately this matter was referred to the June 26, 2023, Council meeting, where Council approved the expiration of the existing leases for the 16 West Beach Road and 32 West Beach Road cottages. 1.4 Following this decision, staff communicates with the tenants of the two cottages to arrange the vacating of the premises and the turning over of the keys for the property. Facility Services then arranged inspections of the two cottages by our Building Division and Fire Prevention staff. The purpose was to assess the current condition of the two cottages and consider potential use as municipal assets. 2. Assessment of the Cottages 2.1 On November 21, 2023, we received a memo from the Deputy Chief Building Official (Attachment #1), outlining the findings of their inspections and those of fire prevention. The major findings of these inspection identified concerns with the building foundations; floor support framing; load bearing walls and roof support; electrical wiring concerns; uncertain supply of potable water; and uncertain sewage system. Page 159 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CSD-004-23 2.2 The report concluded the cottages are deemed unsafe for occupancy and substantial repair work would be required to make them safe. Preliminary assessment of the work required indicates almost a total rebuild of the cottages. No budget estimates of th e work were completed as staff do not support their re-use as municipal assets. 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 It is recommended that all costs associated with the disconnection of services, demolition restoration of the land be funded from Account #100-50-130-10543-7520 Land Acquisition Maintenance – Non-Capital. 4. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Deputy CAO/Solicitor, Deputy CAO/Treasurer, and the Director of Planning and Infrastructure who concur with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council approve the recommendations in this report and staff commence the demolition of these two cottages. Staff will communicate directly with the former tenants to ensure all personal belongings have been removed prior to demolition. Staff Contact: George Acorn, Director of Community Services, 905-623-3379 ext. 2502 or gacorn@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Building Division Memo – West Beach Road Cottages Interested Parties: There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision. Page 160 MEMO On November 8, 2023, the Building Division attended the properties on West Beach Road, Cottage 16 and 32, as requested by Community Services Division. The purpose of the visit was to perform an analysis of the existing buildings for the potential reuse as Municipal assets. The findings of the Building Division are as follows. Cottage #16 1. The foundation is a mix of 4x4 wood posts embedded into the ground and concrete masonry blocks added in some areas, for additional support. The existing foundation throughout the cottage is in very poor condition and at risk of imminent failure. 2.The floor framing members are compromised at the entrance and other areas through the cottage. The entrance to the cottage has failed and will not support any significant weight or normal floor loads. There is a serious risk of injury entering this cottage. 3. Interior load bearing walls have had the sheathing removed, as well as some of the roofs structure collar ties. Loading from the roof is causing outward pressures on the load bearing walls. Without the collar ties and wall sheathing to support the roof and load bearing walls, the roof structure is at risk of failure and has the potential of causing serious injury. 4. Electrical wires exposed through the cottage and at the electrical panel. Holes in the exterior of the building allowing the ingress of precipitation pose a serious risk of electrocution and/or fire. 5.Entrance door to the cottage does not meet the required door height per the Ontario Building Code. With the failure of the floor at the entrance and the door not meeting minimum height requirements, this poses a serious risk of injury in the event of an emergency. 6.Unable to confirm if potable water is available. As required by the Ontario Building Code. 7. Unable to determine if there is a sewage system available. Durham Region Health Department permit would be required. 8. There are several areas in the building envelope that have holes directly to the outside. Repairs are required to prevent the ingress and damage of precipitation and wildlife. Cottage #32 1.The foundation is stacked concrete masonry blocks placed directly on the ground. In some areas, additional blocks and/or shims have been added to areas of the foundation that has sunk over time. The existing foundation throughout the cottage is in very poor condition and at risk of imminent failure. 2.The floor framing members throughout the cottage may be undersized and/or compromised, as there is significant bounce when walking. The floor may not support To: Development Application Coordinator From: Building Division Date: November 21, 2023 Subject: West Beach Road – Cottages Attachment 1 to Report CSD-004-23 Page 161 MEMO any significant weight or normal floor loads. The floor system is at risk of failure and had the potential to cause serious injury. 3. The back kitchen area and washroom have significant slope and the floor appears to be compromised. The floor may not support any significant weight or normal floor loads. This section of the cottage is at serious risk of failure. 4. The roof structure shows significant sagging, this is also shown in the areas of the foundation and exterior walls that has sunk over time. The roof system is at risk of failure with the potential to cause serious injury. 5. Electrical wires exposed through the cottage and at the electrical panel. Holes in the exterior of the building allowing the ingress of precipitation pose a serious risk of electrocution and/or fire. 6. Unable to confirm if potable water is available. As required by the Ontario Building Code. 7. Unable to determine if there is a sewage system available. Durham Region Health Department permit would be required. 8. There are several areas in the building envelope that have holes directly to the outside. Repairs are required to prevent the ingress and damage of precipitation and wildlife. 9. Several areas of the cottage show water damage and rot. There also appears to be mold in the exposed roof framing members. These conditions could pose a serious health risk. In the assessment of the cottages by the Building Division, these cottages are deemed unsafe for occupancy without substantial repairs. Name Brendan Grigg Job Title Deputy Chief Building Official Page 162 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEES MEETING RESOLUTION # DATE: December 4, 2023 MOVED BY Councillor Zwart SECONDED BY Councillor Woo Amendment: That the foregoing Resolution [regarding Report CSD-004-23] be amended by adding the following paragraph after the second paragraph: That, prior to demolition, Staff make a digital photographic record of the existing cottages, to be kept for reference, so that the historical legacy of West Beach is not lost, and the potential exists for recreating the West Beech character in any future development of a waterfront park; That “for demolition” be added to recommendation 3 of Report CSD-004-23 after “funds”, so the paragraph reads: That the necessary funds for demolition be drawn from Account #100-50- 130-10543-7520 Land Acquisition Maintenance – Non-Capital. Page 163 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: PDS-068-23 Submitted By: Carlos Salazar, Director of Planning and Infrastructure Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Land Division Process - Recommendation Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-068-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That the By-law attached to Report PDS-068-23, as Attachment 1, to delegate the authority to grant consents to the Committee of Adjustment and to revise the Committee of Adjustment establishing By-law 2021-009 effective January 1st, 2024, be approved; 3. That the By-law attached to Report PDS-068-23, as Attachment 2, to amend Schedule ‘E’ of the Fee By-law 2023-044 to introduce applicable consent applications fees effective January 1st, 2024, be approved; 4. That Brad Whittle be appointed to the Committee of Adjustment effective January 1st, 2024, for a term ending December 31st, 2026 or until a successor is appointed; 5. That the Committee of Adjustment compensation be increased from $53.66 to $100.00 per hearing, effective January 1 st, 2024; and, 6. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-068-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 164 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PDS-068-23 Report Overview On September 5th, 2023, at the Region’s Planning and Economic Development Committee Meeting, Regional Staff brought forth a recommendation to transfer the approval authority for consent (land division) applications to the Region’s area municipalities effective January 1 st, 2024 (Report #2023-P-22). As proposed, the Municipality of Clarington will be taking on the responsibility of consent granting authority with its existing financial and staff resources. On October 23rd, 2023, at the Municipality of Clarington’s Planning and Development Committee Meeting, Staff brought forth an information report that introduced and summarized the basis for the transition of land division and provided preliminary considerations for Council’s review (Report #PDS-058-23). The transition of consent granting authority to the Municipality of Clarington will strengthen decision-making in the local context as it relates to land division and will provide opportunities for efficiency when processing consent applications. The purpose of this report is to recommend the delegation of consent granting authority to the Committee of Adjustment and introduce the necessary by-laws to facilitate the Municipality exercising its consent granting authority effective January 1 st, 2024. 1. Background 1.1 For clarity, “consent” is the term used in the Planning Act when referring to the creation of new lots (i.e., severances), lot line adjustments, easements, rights -of-way, and permission for mortgaging or leasing parts of lots for more than 21 years. A proposal to create a limited number of new lots (generally three new lots or less) may proceed by way of a consent application, whereas proposals to create more than three new lots may require an application for a draft plan of subdivision. 1.2 Currently, the Regional Land Division Committee has the delegated authority for the granting of consents. Durham is unique within the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) whereby Land Division responsibilities are assumed by the Regional Land Division Committee, with area municipalities simply commenting on applications. In other jurisdictions in the GTHA, consent responsibilities are assumed by local Committee of Adjustments (CofAs), with minor variances and related consent applications considered concurrently. 1.3 Under Bill 23, the Region of Durham and six other regional governments were defined as “Upper-Tier Municipalities without Planning Responsibilities”. One aspect of this change relates to local municipalities having approval authority over subdivisions, condominiums, land divisions, and part lot control exemptions. Until proclamation has occurred (at a date still to be determined), the Region’s planning function generally remains unchanged. In anticipation of this change, the Region of Durham has Page 165 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PDS-068-23 recommended the transfer of the approval authority for consent (land division) applications to the Region’s area municipalities effective January 1, 2024. 1.4 The Municipality currently has a commenting role in the land division process and strictly provides an assessment of the applications conformity with local policy, to assist the Committee in making its decision, imposes any necessary conditions of approval and prepares a Section 53 agreement, as needed. Taking on the consent granting authority at the municipal level will result in increased workload for existing Legal, Planning and Infrastructure and CofA resources. 1.5 Taking on the consent granting authority at the municipal level will also allow for land division to be considered in the local context, strengthening local government decision - making. As proposed, the CofA can expect an average of two (2) consent applications per month, the vast majority (92% based on a three-year review) of which are severance applications to facilitate lot creation. 2. Staff Considerations Committee of Adjustment Accommodations 2.1 In order to ensure knowledge transfer from the Region’s Land Division Committee to the CofA, Staff recommend that Brad Whittle, a Clarington resident and Clarington- appointed member of the Region’s Land Division Committee , be appointed to the CofA. Mr. Whittle has expressed an interest in joining the CofA. 2.2 In order to ensure the CofA members are compensated for the additional work associated with reviewing an average of two (2) consent applications per month, Staff recommend an increase in the remuneration from the existing $53.66 to $100.00 per meeting, effective January 1st, 2024. The Municipality of Clarington has historically paid its CofA less than other municipalities in the Region of Durham and has only increased the compensation annually based on a percentage equivalent to the increases in the CUPE Collective Agreement. The proposed increase is representative of other municipalities in the Region of Durham and the GTHA beyond. Following th e proposed increase, beginning January 1st, 2025, the compensation will be increased annually based on a percentage equivalent to the increases in the CUPE Collective Agreement. Application Fees 2.3 The Planning Act allows a Municipality to pass a by-law setting out a fee schedule for processing of planning applications. The fees collected are intended to recover the “anticipated cost” to the Municipality for processing development applications. The current fee schedule for Clarington does not consider the direct and indirect cost of processing consent applications. Page 166 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PDS-068-23 2.4 The Municipality has retained Hemson Consulting Ltd. to assist the Municipality to conduct a comprehensive planning application fees review, in conjunction with the required 5-year Building Permit fees review. The scope of the comprehensive planning Fee By-law review will consider the process changes as presented in this report, pending Council’s approval. 2.5 Until such time as the comprehensive planning application fee review is complete, Staff recommend an application fee of $3,175.00 with additional discretionary fees of $310.00 (pre-application meeting, as required), $310.00 (tabling of an application), $750.00 (for any additional circulation) and $520.00 (for any additional CofA hearing). Given that the proposed fees will take effect January 1st, 2024, each of the proposed fees has been inflated by + / - 3% to account for inflationary increase that will also occur on January 1st, 2024. 2.6 The application fee of $3,175.00 consists of rounding up Clarington’s existing review fee ($730.00 + 3%) and the Region of Durhams former application fee ($1,350.00 + 3%) and stamping fee ($1,000.00 +3%). 2.7 The foregoing does not include the existing Land Division ‘Preparation of Section 53 Agreement’ fee or review fees from external agencies (i.e., conservation authorities, the Region of Durham, etc.). Transition 2.8 The Region of Durham has delegated authority to the Councils of the area municipalities effective January 1st, 2024. Accordingly, the recommendations of Staff contained herein are proposed to be effective January 1st, 2024. 2.9 The Region will continue to be responsible for administering clearances and certificates for all consent applications approved by the Durham Region Land Division Committee prior to or in 2023. 2.10 Staff and the existing and proposed new CofA members are undergoing training with the Region of Durham and other area municipalities in anticipation of January 1 st, 2024. 2.11 Staff are working towards having process updates, application materials, fees and other pertinent information updated to the new ‘Land Division’ webpage (replacing the former severances webpage) for public review and use by the end of December 2023. 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 Throughout the proposed transition, Staff will continue to monitor whether additional financial or Staff resources are required to support the additional workload allocated to Legal Staff, Planning and Infrastructure Staff and CofA. Page 167 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PDS-068-23 3.2 The proposed amendment to Schedule ‘E’ of By-law 2023-044 will permit the Municipality to collect application fees to facilitate the review and processing of consent applications. 3.3 The proposed increase to the compensation of the CofA members from $53.66 to $100.00 per meeting to account for the increased type and number of applications they have the delegated authority to approve and to be consistent with other area municipalities. 4. Concurrence 4.1 This report has been reviewed by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure and Deputy CAO/Treasurer, who concur with the recommendations. 5. Conclusion 5.1 It is respectfully recommended that Council approve the proposed amendments in order to facilitate the transition of consent granting au thority to the CofA and implement the necessary changes that will allow the Municipality to begin processing consent applications effective January 1st, 2024. Staff Contact: Lucy Pronk, Principal Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2314 or lpronk@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Delegation and amendment to By-law 2021-009 Attachment 2 – Amendment to Schedule ‘E’ Fee By-law 2023-044 Interested Parties: Committee of Adjustment Members Page 168 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-068-23 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2023-XXX Being a by-law to amend By-law 2021-009 to expand the responsibilities of the Committee of Adjustment to include consent granting authority pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended. Whereas subsection 54(2) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, cP.13, as amended, authorizes where authority is delegated to a council under subsection (1), such council may, in turn, by by-law, delegate the authority or any part of such authority, to a committee of council, to an appointed officer identified in the by-law by name or position occupied or to a committee of adjustment; And whereas Council deems it appropriate to expand the responsibilities of the Committee of Adjustment to include the authority for the giving of consents under Section 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, cP.13, as amended, as described in PDS- 068-23; And whereas Council deems it appropriate to appoint an additional member to the Committee of Adjustment as described in PDS-068-23. Now Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That Section 2 of By-law 2021-009 be amended by deleting the following words: “The Committee of Adjustment shall be composed of six (6) persons appointed by Council.” And replacing them with the following words: “The Committee of Adjustment shall be comprised of seven (7) persons appointed by Council.” 2. That the following be added to the beginning of Section 5 of By-law 2021-009: “In accordance with Section 44(5) of the Planning Act,” 3. That the following be added to By-law 2021-009 as Section 11.1: “That the Committee of Adjustment be delegated the functions of Council pursuant to subsection 54(2) with respect to applications made for the giving of consents under Section (53) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, cP13, as amended.” Page 169 4. That this By-law shall come into force and effect on January 1st, 2024. By-law passed in open session this ____ day of ________, 2023. ___________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor ________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 170 Attachment 2 to Report PDS-068-23 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2023-XX Being a by-law to amend Schedule E of the Fee By-law 2023-044. Whereas Subsection 69(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.12, as amended, provides that by-laws may be passed by the council of a municipality to establish a tariff of fees for the processing of applications made in respect of planning matters; and Whereas Subsection 391(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended, authorizes a municipality to impose fees or charges for services or activities provided or done by or on behalf of it. Now therefore the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That the review fee in the land division section of Schedule ‘E’ to By-law 2023 be deleted and the following fees be added: Land Division Fee Unit Application Fee $3,175.00 Pre-application Meeting 310.00 Tabling of Application 310.00 Re-circulation 750.00 Per additional circulation Additional Committee of Adjustment Hearing 520.00 Per additional Committee of Adjustment Hearing 2. That this By-law shall come into force and effect on January 1st, 2024. Page 171 By-law passed in open session this ____ day of ________, 2023. ___________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor ________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 172 102 Bales Drive East, P.O. Box 93089, Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 8K3 Tel: 905-898-4889 Fax: 905-898-2822 November 15, 2023 Re: D2021 – 43 – Request for Extension of Noise bylaw Exemption To Clerk, Please note Technicore would like to submit this letter in order request an extension on this noise bylaw exemption that was previously approved on October 30th until December 31st, 2023 for Durham Project # D2021-43 along Trulls Road. Technicore began the initial noise bylaw exemption request process at end of July for which an end date of December 31st was provided without the forethought/knowledge of processes required and that this request would be approved late October. Upon receiving the initial noise bylaw exemption approval from Durham, Technicore began working double shift on November 1st & have continued since. In line with our original request (attachment #2), we are projecting to finish the first stretch of tunnel work in 4-5 weeks. We are mobilizing to the second location (Shaft 17), approximately 900m north of the first location, this week to prepare for the work entailed for double shift. We hope to be able to start double shift at this location mid December and continue until mid/late February 2024. Ultimately, I’d like to request that this noise bylaw exemption be extended to March 17th, 2024 with the understanding that the due to the later start than anticipated, we would like to continue working two shifts to reduce the project’s construction timelines. Regards, Borislav Pelev Project Manager C.416-358-8397 102 Bales Drive East, P.O. Box 93089 Newmarket, On., L3Y 8K3 Page 173 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 1-800-563-1195 | Local: 905-623-3379 | info@clarington.net | www.clarington.net If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 October 31, 2023 Ben McWade, P.Eng, Acting Manager Construction Management Services The Regional Municipality of Durham Via Email: Ben.McWade@durham.ca To Ben McWade: Re: Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption File Number: PG.25.06 At a meeting held on October 30, 2023, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington approved the following Resolution #GG-171-23: That the request for Noise By-law Exemption, from Ben McWade, P. Eng, Acting Manager, Construction Management Services, Region of Durham, for the timeline of July 24, 2023, to December 31, 2023, be approved. Yours truly, _________________________ John Paul Newman Deputy Clerk JPN/lh c: K. Bergeron, Temporary Manager of Municipal Law Enforcement S. Brake, Director of Public Works T. Ricciardi, Manager of Infrastructure R. Brezina, Capital Works Engineer K. Heathcote, Capital Works Supervisor Page 174 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: General Government Committee Date of Meeting: December 4, 2023 Report Number: CSD-003-23 Submitted By: George Acorn, Director of Community Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO Resolution#: File Number: By-law Number: Report Subject: Rodenticide Use in Municipal Facilities Recommendations: 1. That Report CSD-003-23, and any related delegations or communication items, be received. 2. That Council authorize staff to initiate a trial at Courtice Community Complex, replacing rodenticides (interior and exterior) with rodent traps, catch tin traps, and snap exterior traps; 3. That staff continue to investigate the feasibility of a future ban of rodenticides for all municipal buildings; 4. That staff report back prior to 2024 summer recess with the results of the trial program and to make further recommendations on the longer-term use of rodenticides in municipal buildings; and 5. That all interested parties listed in Report CSD-003-23, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 175 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report CSD-003-23 Report Overview This report, in response to direction by Council, provides the results of a preliminary investigation by staff on the feasibility of implementing a ban on the use of rodenticides at all municipal buildings. Following the preliminary work, staff are recommending a trial be undertaken at one community centre, replacing bait traps with snap traps. Further, staff will continue to research the matter, and report back to Council in June 2024 on the results of the trial program and possible next steps for Council to consider. 1. Background 1.1 At the October 16, 2023, General Government Committee meeting, arising from the delegations of Janice Freund and Allison Hansen, the following Resolution #GG-160-23 was referred to Staff to report back at the December 4, 2023 General Government Committee meeting: Whereas council acknowledges that rodenticide products are unreasonably dangerous, inhumane, and ineffective. And whereas rodenticides are highly toxic, persistent and bio accumulative compounds used to eliminate rodent populations by causing death by preventing normal blood clotting, causing internal hemorrhaging, or disturbing nervous system functions. And whereas rodenticides pose serious threats to Ontario’s wildlife (including raptors, songbirds, coyotes, snakes, and racoons) and the environment (including aquatic ecosystems) through primary and secondary poisoning of non -target species, and further threaten children and pets. And whereas predators and scavengers are at a particularly high risk of secondary poisoning because of their dependence on rodents as a food source, with countless cases of poisoning across Ontario in the past decade. And whereas rodenticides are an ineffective and counterproductive means of controlling long-term rodent populations because they fail to address the root of infestation problems (i.e., access to food, shelter, and other attractants), and kill predators that serve as natural and chemical-free methods of pest control (e.g., a single owl eats around 1,000 rats per year). And whereas the existing risk mitigation measures implemented by the federal and provincial government are incapable of adequately addressing the threats that rodenticides pose to the environment, wildlife, and human health; and And whereas preventative measures are the best method of vector control. Page 176 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report CSD-003-23 And whereas eliminating non-essential use of rodenticides is consistent with the precautionary principle. And whereas Council wishes to enact a policy prohibiting the use of inhumane vector control products to address public concern for the environmental wellbeing of the community, and the health, safety, and well-being of its inhabitants. And whereas: Council deems it desirable and in the public interest to enact an Animal Poison Prevention Policy for protecting wildlife, pets, and people from unreasonable adverse effects caused by rodenticide use for the purpose of:  Eliminating inhumane methods of pest control.  Regulating and controlling the use, purchase, and sale of rodenticides.  Sustaining a healthy natural environment by protecting biodiversity.  Protecting significant and sensitive natural areas.  Protecting human health.  Maintaining water quality; and  Protecting fish habitat as defined in the Fisheries Act, Revised Statute of Canada 1985. Therefore, be it resolved that Council adopts a policy banning the use of rodenticides on all municipally owned properties, with immediate effect. That Council directs Staff to communicate this policy direction to residents and businesses including information on the harmful impacts of rodenticides and the availability of humane, ecologically sustainable alternatives; and That Council incorporates humane practices regarding pest control on all municipal properties. 1.2 Following the direction provided by Council, staff initiated an investigation into the concern with the use of rodenticides and the potential secondary impact it may have on domestic animals and other wildlife. This included reaching out to other communities as well as discussions with our current pest control contractor. W e have maintained contact with Allison Hansen and have received valuable information from her on this topic and we will continue to communicate as we do further investigation. 1.3 We have also been working with our Animal Shelter Supervisor, who has recent experience coming from the City of Toronto. Her assistance will help inform our analysis and any subsequent recommendations we may bring forward. Page 177 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report CSD-003-23 2. Rodenticide Use in the Municipality 2.1 Rodenticides are currently used in different applications throughout the interior and exterior of municipal buildings in tamper-resistant bait stations for vector control. The Municipality currently is under contract with Well Done pest control who are governed under the Ministry of Environment, which uses 2 nd generation rodenticide to control rodent infestation(s) in/around municipal buildings. Although rodenticides can be effective, they are felt to be dangerous, inhumane, and pose a threat to wildlife, pets, and children through primary and secondary poisoning. 2.2 First-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (FGARs) like warfarin, chlorophacinone, and diphacinone are still legal for use. These products are an older, slower-acting, and less potent product compared to SGARs – but rodents still suffer the same effects. Rodents can also develop resistance to the product. 2.3 Second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) are substantially more potent than the first-generation compounds, and a lethal dose can be ingested in a single feeding. Included in this class of rodenticides are the compounds difenacoum, brodifacoum, bromadiolone and difethialone. 2.4 SGARs can also pose a serious risk to people, pets, and wildlife thro ugh direct and secondary poisoning. The risk of secondary poisoning for wildlife by SGARs is higher than first-generation products because the active ingredients stay in animal tissue for a long time after feeding. 3. Rodenticide Use in Other Municipalities 3.1 Following direction provided in June 2023, City of Pickering staff are currently preparing a report for their Executive Committee’s December 4th agenda. Our discussions with staff have indicated the City may be recommending a ban on rodenticide use for municipal buildings. 3.2 City of Toronto staff are currently investigating this issue and indications are there will be a report going forward for consideration early in 2024. Our staff will remain connected as they work toward that report. 3.3 The Township of Minden Hills is also in the fact-finding stage of rodenticides and alternative methods. Currently, staff are not aware of the timing on any future reports. 3.4 There are also examples in Western Canada, including the City of Port Moody, where municipalities have approved the ban on the use of rodenticides for municipal buildings. Staff are reviewing these policies to better inform us when making any future recommendations. Page 178 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report CSD-003-23 4. Trial Program at Courtice Community Complex 4.1 Staff are proposing a rodenticide-free trial program from January to May at this location. In conjunction with our pest control contractor, staff will arrange for the removal of all rodenticide bait traps in and around the facility. They will be replaced with rodent traps, catch tin traps, and snap exterior traps. 4.2 Data will be collected during this period, and the results of this trial will be reported back to Council prior to the 2024 summer recess. The results of this trial will help inform any future recommendations regarding a more widespread ban. 5. Financial Considerations 5.1 It is expected any costs related to the trial period at Courtice Community Complex can be covered in the proposed 2024 operating budget. Pending the results of this trial and any further recommendations being reported back to Council, staff will include any financial impacts at that time. 6. Concurrence 6.1 This report has been reviewed by the Deputy CAO/Treasurer, who concurs with the recommendations. 7. Conclusion 7.1 It is respectfully recommended that Council approve this report and direct staff to complete the rodenticide-free trial program at Courtice Community Complex, and report back on those findings, with additional recommendations for a long-term plan, prior to the 2024 summer recess. Staff Contact: Ken Ferguson, Manager of Facilities, 905-623-3379 ext. 2504 or kferguson@clarington.net. Attachments: Not Applicable Interested Parties: Allison Hansen Janice Freund Page 179 THE DEFEND THEM ALL FOUNDATION December 1,2023 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville,ON L1C 3A6 Re:Rodenticide use in Clarington Dear Honourable Mayor and Council: We are writing to express concern regarding the use and sale of rodenticides in Clarington,and the recommendations proposed by Staff in Report Number CSD-003-23. Defend Them All (DTA)is a nonprofit organization dedicated to securing a better future for animals and their habitats through community advocacy,education,and legal guidance.In furtherance of this aim,DTA supports and collaborates with advocates striving to make a difference in their community.The organization is independent and non-partisan.It receives no money,either directly or indirectly,from any government. As an international organization focused on issues at the intersection of animal and environmental law and policy,Defend Them All is part of the growing movement to reduce the harm caused to animals and the environment as a result of rodenticides.As such,we are excited to see a growing awareness of this issue and a clear shift towards better solutions. We aim to offer constructive feedback on the plan proposed by Staff in its report as well as provide background information to supplement documents and delegations by Allison Hansen and Janice Freund.We are optimistic that with more information and support,Clarington will take the opportunity to emerge as a leader on rodenticide policy in Ontario by taking more aggressive action.Such leadership is consistent with this Council's commitment to the environmental wellbeing of the Corporation,and the health,safety and well-being of its inhabitants. Risks posed by rodenticides are significant and undisputed. Rodenticides are inhumane, pose serious threats to animals including family pets and wildlife species,the environment,and to human health -these are well-documented facts based on long accepted science,not theories as language in the Report seems to suggest1. As correctly pointed out in the Report,chemicals classified as rodenticides vary in their active ingredients,but generally aim to kill unwanted pests by preventing normal blood clotting, 1See Report section 1.2 -“potential,”section 2.1 -“felt,”section 2.4 “can” www.defendthemall.org Page 180 THE DEFEND THEM ALL FOUNDATION causing internal hemorrhaging,or disturbing nervous system functions.Both first and second generation rodenticides are inherently dangerous poisons designed to kill.Animals that ingest these products and/or poisoned prey experience great pain and suffering over a period of days or weeks,most often leading to death.This means that animals can continue to feed on the baits,thus accumulating a significant level of rodenticides in their livers before they finally die. High levels of these poisons can remain in the livers of carcasses for months. Many of Ontario's native and at-risk species face high risks of rodenticide poisoning.In addition to mice,small animals including songbirds,shrews,voles,and other non-target mammals and invertebrates are known to access bait boxes containing these poisons.This direct feeding is contaminating the food-chain and wider ecosystem:coyotes,bobcats,foxes,skunks and other mammalian predators that feed on small animals have been found to have rodenticides in their systems.Owls and other raptors are at a particularly high risk of secondary poisoning because of their dependence on rodents as a food source. In addition to ecosystemic impacts,rodenticides are known to bioaccumulate and persist in the environment posing human health risks.Recently,researchers in the United States have even measured traceable levels of ingestible rodenticides in the milk supply.The American Association of Poison Control Centers receives approximately 10,000 reports of rodenticide exposures in children annually in the U.S. Rodenticides are not an effective method of controlling rodent populations over the long term. The use of poisons is counter-productive,evidenced by the fact that pest control companies remain on contracts to supply poisons for indefinite durations of time.Consistent with these facts,a majority of surveyed pest control professionals believe that while poisoning is the easiest and cheapest method of controlling rats,this strategy fails to provide a long-term solution because it fails to deal with the factors promoting and sustaining infestations. Rodents are drawn to areas where they have access to food and shelter;therefore,structural access points to these resources must be addressed to permanently remove rodents.By eliminating resident rodents,rodenticides simply clear the way for a new population to move in. Alternative approaches to poisons do exist,and a transition to chemical-free methods could be done with relative ease and would prove cost-effective for Clarington in the long run.The primary step that sustainability-oriented pest management companies recommend is “rat-proofing”the premises of buildings by addressing the active and potential access-points in the structures.In some cases,traps may be temporarily necessary if mice have made it indoors and present an immediate threat.However,as rodents are known to not stay indoors, companies that provide humane solutions use one-way doors to clear and permanently seal the structure. www.defendthemall.org Page 181 THE DEFEND THEM ALL FOUNDATION Food and other resources that attract rodents must also be secured or eliminated.It is in the economic interest of pest control companies that use poisons to ignore these steps,as permitting such conditions to persist invites new populations of rats to invade,thus giving rise to continued business. Expecting to obtain information sufficient to inform future action on rodenticides by trapping rodents in and around a building surrounded by natural areas is irresponsible and illogical. That being said,it is important to understand what proactive measures will be taken to exclude rodents and eliminate attractants at Courtice Community Complex -or will this simply be an act of ineffective and unsustainable trapping.What proactive and preventative measures has Well Done Pest Control completed at the properties they service?If proactive measures will be taken,the cost of these measures should have been included in the Staff Report. Replacing rodenticides with snap traps will not effectively assess the need or effectiveness of Clarington’s current poison subscription plan with Well Done Pest Control. Furthermore,continuing to allow the use of rodenticide in and around other municipal properties in Clarington despite Council’s October 16,2023 acknowledgment of the unreasonable risks these products pose is irresponsible and unjustifiable. Recognizing the risks rodenticides pose to human health and the environment,in 2013 Health Canada enacted risk mitigation measures for several commercial class rodenticides.However, recent research in Ontario,and across Canada,demonstrates that these measures are ineffective and merely symbolic.Restricting the most toxic rodenticides to indoor use and requiring these products to be kept in tamper-proof bait boxes fails to consider the documented fact that rodents do not die inside these boxes,but rather disperse into the surrounding natural habitats. Clarington must take the lead on pesticides by enacting legislation to prohibit rodenticides. The Pesticides Act (Section 7.1 (5))renders inoperable municipal by-laws addressing the use, sale,offer for sale or transfer of a pesticide that may be used for a cosmetic purpose.However, it does not preclude municipalities from enacting policies deemed desirable and in the public interest for protecting wildlife,pets,and people from unreasonable adverse effects caused by rodenticides and other inhumane pest management methods.While it is now widely understood that rodenticides are unnecessary and ineffective over the long-term,rodenticides were clearly not contemplated as a part of sweeping reform related to lawn and garden products in the early 2000s. www.defendthemall.org Page 182 THE DEFEND THEM ALL FOUNDATION If rodenticides were an effective solution,businesses,farmers,and municipalities would not have ongoing contracts with pest control companies for indefinite rodenticide application.The extensive data before us evidences that mere restrictions are not enough.Rodenticides need to be a thing of the past,and as stewards of the environment,local governments must protect wildlife and future generations against the devastating harms they pose. We appreciate your time and attention to this important issue and sincerely hope the materials we have provided are helpful.Please feel free to reach out with questions that arise as you review.We would be pleased to serve as a resource as you consider next steps forward. Respectfully submitted, Lindsey Zehel,Esq.,LL.M. Executive Director |Defend Them All Foundation Phone:567-203-7220 www.defendthemall.org Page 183 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE MEETING RESOLUTION # DATE: December 4, 2023 MOVED BY Councillor Zwart SECONDED BY Whereas the Exotic Pet By-law 2012-045 does not allow for raising chickens on non-agriculturally zoned lands; And whereas Committee deems it advisable to consider allowing Clarington residents in rural hamlets, rural clusters, and the Village of Orono, to keep backyard chickens, for the purpose of egg laying, on non-agriculturally zoned lands; Now therefore be it resolved: 1. That Staff in the Legislative Services Department be directed to prepare a report regarding the keeping of backyard chickens for the purpose of egg laying which would include: a. a review of past reports and memos, delegations, stakeholder consultations, and other municipalities regarding the keeping of backyard chickens; b. input from the Agricultural Advisory Committee, Climate Change Response Coordinator, and Planning & Infrastructure Services Department; and c. options for general frameworks/approaches to allow for the keeping of backyard chickens for the purpose of egg laying. Page 184 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEES MEETING RESOLUTION # DATE: December 4, 2023 MOVED BY Councillor Elhajjeh SECONDED BY Councillor Whereas Clarington, like many towns and municipalities throughout Ontario and Canada is experiencing challenges in attracting and retaining volunteer firefighters; And whereas Clarington depends upon volunteer firefighters to respond to remote, rural areas of the municipality; And whereas the Income Tax Act currently allows volunteer firefighters to claim a $3,000 tax credit if 200 hours of volunteer services were completed in a calendar year; And whereas increasing this tax credit may attract and retain more volunteer firefighters in Clarington, Now therefore be it resolved: 1. That the Council of the Municipality of Clarington calls upon the Government of Canada to support Bill C-310 and enact amendments to subsections 118.06(2) and 118.07(2) of the Income Tax Act in order to increase the amount of the tax credits for volunteer firefighting from $3,000 to $10,000; and 2. That this resolution be forwarded to the Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada; Honourable Marie-Claude Bibeau, the Minister of National Revenue; the private member who introduced Bill C-310, Gord Johns, MP; local MPs: Honourable Philip Lawrence, P.C., M.P., Northumberland—Peterborough South and the constituency office for the Durham riding; and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO). Page 185 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEES MEETING RESOLUTION # DATE: December 4, 2023 MOVED BY Councillor Traill SECONDED BY Councillor Whereas over 22% of Canadians have a disability and this number is expected to grow as the population ages; And whereas the National Building Code does not mandate that housing be accessible; And whereas Canadians are unable to age in place due to inaccessible housing; And whereas Canadians should have access to housing that allows people to live independently with dignity and respect; Now therefore be it resolved: 1. That the Council of the Municipality of Clarington calls upon the Government of Canada to amend the National Building code (NBC) to make Universal Design mandatory in all new multi-unit housing developments under the jurisdiction of the Government of Canada, consistent with current legislation and conventions; and 2. That the Canadian Table for Harmonized Construction Codes Policy, Canadian Board for Harmonized Construction Code and the CMHC collaborate on defining and illustrating in the NBC what is visitable, adaptable, accessible, barrier-free, and universal design, and 3. That this resolution be forwarded to the Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada; Honourable Sean Fraser, the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities; Honourable Kamal Khera, Minister of Diversity, Inclusion and Persons with Disabilities; the private member who supports the accessible housing petition (e-4543) Mike Morris, MP; Local MPs: Honourable Philip Lawrence, P.C., M.P., Northumberland—Peterborough South and the constituency office for the Durham riding; and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO). Page 186