REGIONAL COUNCIL MINUTES

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

The following are the minutes of the Regular Council meeting held at 7:10 p.m. in the Regional Council Chamber, 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario, with the following members present: Chair K. Seiling, J. Brewer, M. Connolly, D. Craig, K. Denouden, H. Epp, T. Galloway, J. Haalboom, R. Kelterborn, C. Millar, J. Mitchell, W. Roth, J. Smola*, B. Strauss, J. Wideman*, and C. Zehr.

DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

None declared.

CLOSED SESSION

MOVED by K. Denouden SECONDED by M. Connolly

That a closed meeting of Council be held on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 at 6:45 p.m. in accordance with Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001, for the purposes of considering the following subject matters:

a) a proposed or pending acquisition of land b) personal matters about an identifiable individual

CARRIED

MOVED by B. Strauss SECONDED by W. Roth

The Council reconvene in Open Session.

CARRIED

MOVED by B. Strauss SECONDED by J. Haalboom

That Council change the start time of the October 11, 2006 Council meeting to 3:00 p.m.

CARRIED

Council - 2 - 06/09/27

DELEGATIONS a) Waterloo West Side Development

i) Memo: Update on Wilmot Line Road Environmental Assessment and Associated Proposed Plans of Subdivision

Chair Seiling summarized the memo from staff advising a final decision will not be made by the Commissioner until all of the reviews are completed, including the road Environmental Assessment. Staff will continue with the technical review.

*J. Smola entered the meeting at 7:15 p.m.

ii) Dr. Emil Frind appeared before Council regarding the west side development, highlighting water issues, including water quality and quantity and the moraine as a reliable water source. A copy of his submission is appended to the original minutes.

iii) Tom Schneider appeared before Council and supported the comments made by Dr. Frind. He stated the current system for environmental reporting is likely to induce bias and he provided possible examples of bias found in the reports submitted in support of these subdivision applications. He displayed a map and outlined the infiltration and run off issues and the need for this area to be designated as significant recharge. He urged Council to take these issues seriously. A question was asked by Council regarding the monitoring pre and post development. T. Schneider clarified the issue is water infiltration rates from the run off and whether or not the run off has been quantified and included in the equation.

iv) Alex David appeared before Council to highlight roof run off contamination regarding the west side proposal. He quoted Provincial Policy Statements and expressed concern with creosote runoff and its effect on the area. A copy of his submission is appended to the original minutes.

v) Susan Smith appeared before Council and thanked staff for listening to the concerns and stated she is confident the concerns will be heard. She stated the Clair Creek and Vista HIlls lands are not appropriate for development and referenced adherence to the Ontario Municipal Board Order (OMB) from 1992. S. Smith noted the animal habitat in this area. She expressed concern with the size of the buffers and requested the Region to require the developer to pay for an independent study to determine what size of buffer is appropriate. She also referenced grading and cut and fill requirements and how this will affect the kettles and scenic vistas. Questions were raised regarding an inventory of scenic vistas and discussions about buffers with GRCA. S. Smith advised she is not aware of any documentation of the scenic vistas. She stated GRCA does not have control when areas are under 0.5 hectares.

*J. Wideman entered the meeting at 7:40 p.m.

vi) David Wellhauser appeared before Council as the spokesperson for Waterlooians.ca to identify policy inconsistencies with the City of Waterloo staff Report DS-06-16. He reviewed the various policies and the pro-development

314691 Council - 3 - 06/09/27

bias in a powerpoint presentation which is appended to the original minutes. D. Wellhauser also asked a number of questions and stated Council needs to take leadership on this matter.

vii) Ginny Quinn appeared before Council highlighting a session she attended with Professor John Cherry and the effects of the density of development on the aquifer and recharge areas. A copy of her submission is appended to the original minutes.

viii) Pauline Richards appeared before Council to urge them not to approve the plans of subdivision for the west side of Waterloo. She highlighted criteria for new urbanism and promoting walkability. She also expressed concern with the increased number of vehicles and only one access road to Columbia Street. A copy of her submission is appended to the original minutes. P. Richards was asked if she agrees housing can be located in this area. P. Richards replied housing could be built, but not high density and done per the OMB order of 1992. In response to another question, she advised the moraine is the biggest issue for this development. She stated ideally the Vista Hills area would not be developed, but the other 2 developments further south could potentially proceed.

ix) Deb Swidrovich appeared before Council, stating she lives on Wilmot Line. She expressed concern with traffic volume and the effect it will have on this area which has been designated as an Environmentally Sensitive Landscape. A copy of her submission is appended to the original minutes.

x) Louisette Lanteigne appeared before Council with respect to the Waterloo west side lands and urged Council to vote on this matter. She quoted Provincial Policy Statements related to authority that affects planning matters throughout Ontario. A copy of her submission is appended to the original minutes.

M. Connolly thanked the delegations for their input and proposed a motion to have this matter brought back to Council for debate prior to staff making a decision on the development. There was discussion on the process and Chair Seiling advised staff have been requested to produce an information summary report addressing the issues raised by the delegations once their review is completed. At that point Council can decide if they are satisfied with staff’s response.

Councillors raised the following issues to be addressed during the technical review by staff:

· concern that not following density from 1992 OMB order; · need to look at cumulative impact of these subdivisions on the water supply; · recommend inventory for scenic vistas; · monitoring water levels pre and post development; · access and ingress/egress to developments; · new legislation; · regional growth management strategy; · address issues raised by delegations; · methods for peer reviews to mitigate perceived bias of consultant reports; · review of buffers in conjunction with GRCA; · consider naturalizing of watercourses; · positive and negative aspects in regards to the ESL; · review of broader transportation implications.

314691 Council - 4 - 06/09/27

It was noted that the staff reviews will not be completed for some time and this matter will not come back until early 2007. If a response is not brought forward in a timely matter the developer has the option of taking the matter to the OMB.

Further discussion was held about M. Connolly’s motion and a suggestion was made that a notice of motion that could be brought forward to be triggered when the report comes to Council. M. Connolly stated he will bring a notice of motion next week.

Rob Horne, Commissioner, Planning, Housing and Community Services stated staff will respond to the issues raised to the best extent that they can. He noted staff are completing and reviewing additional research. Mike Murray, Chief Administrative Officer reviewed the process and noted the new development of the road environmental assessment. He advised this project is not starting from scratch and staff have been involved for several years and will be building on the work already completed.

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

MOVED by J. Wideman SECONDED by C. Zehr

THAT the following Minutes be approved: a) Council – August 30, 2006 b) Planning & Works – September 19, 2006 c) Community Services – September 19, 2006 d) Administration & Finance – September 20, 2006

CARRIED

MOVED by K. Denouden SECONDED by J. Mitchell

THAT Council go into Committee of the Whole to consider reports.

CARRIED

FINANCE REPORTS

a) F-06-061, T2006-127, 250 Strasburg Road Security Fence, City of Kitchener

MOVED by J. Mitchell SECONDED by J. Haalboom

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept the tender of Ontario Parking Systems Limited for 250 Strasburg Road Security Fence, 250 Strasburg Road, Kitchener, Ontario at a total price of $117,319.74 including all applicable taxes.

CARRIED

314691 Council - 5 - 06/09/27

COMMITTEE REPORTS Planning & Works

The Summary of Recommendations of the Planning and Works Committee was presented by Jim Wideman, Chair of the Committee. J. Mitchell stated her appreciation for the extension of the trial period for the removal of the traffic control signals at Erb Street and Erbsville Court.

MOVED by J. Wideman SECONDED by B. Strauss

THAT the Summary of Recommendations of the Planning and Works Committee, dated September 19, 2006, Items 1 to 7, and 1 report from closed session, Item 8, be adopted as follows:

The Planning and Works Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo take no action regarding the request for the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Regional Road #6 (Highland Road) and Glasgow Street, in the City of Kitchener.

AND THAT a review of the traffic light warrant for the intersection be completed by June 2008.

2. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the use of the Waterloo Landfill Site by the University of Waterloo for the purpose of establishing a technical scale demonstration facility for the processing of organic waste, with all subsequent required agreements subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

3. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept P-06-089, Monthly Report for Development activity for July and August 2006, dated September 19, 2006.

4. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the changes to Route 74 RIM Park shown in Appendix 2, as described in Report P-06-091, dated September 19, 2006, to take effect on Monday October 2, 2006.

5. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve an amendment to Controlled Access By-law #58-87 for a right-in, right-out only access on the east side of Regional Road #58 (Fischer-Hallman Road) approximately 135 metres north of Regional Road #50 (Westmount Road) in the City of Kitchener subject to Site Plan approval by the City of Kitchener, as explained in Report P-06-092, dated September 19, 2006.

6. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a ten-year Agreement with Think Plastics Inc. of New Hamburg, Ontario for the collection and processing of white agricultural bale wrap, at no cost to the Region of Waterloo, and subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

7. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo extend the trial period as required for the removal of the traffic control signals from operation at the intersection of Erb Street

314691 Council - 6 - 06/09/27

(Regional Road #9) and Erbsville Court, City of Waterloo, until a report comes back from staff.

8. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo:

a) approve, enter into an Agreement for, and execute all documentation related to, the acquisition of lands described as Part Lot 154, German Company Tract, in the City of Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo from Tru-Villa Inc. for the sum of $19,500.00 and the acquisition of a permanent easement over lands described as Part Lot 154, German Company Tract for grading purposes for the sum of $2,500.00, plus associated costs as detailed in Report No. CR-RS-06-034 dated September 19, 2006, to the satisfaction of the Regional Solicitor; and

b) give the Regional Solicitor authority to execute and register, electronically or otherwise, any documentation required to give effect to the foregoing

CARRIED

Community Services

The Summary of Recommendations of the Community Services Committee was presented by Jane Brewer, Chair of the Committee. It was agreed to appoint councillors to the Emergency Medical Services Growth Management Working Group. J. Smola stated there were valid issues raised at the Community Services meeting on September 19th and he requested they be recorded in these minutes, including political representation on the development of master plans and hospital and fire service representation. M. Murray acknowledged these points and stated the next phase of the project will include these additional representatives.

MOVED by J. Brewer SECONDED by J. Mitchell

THAT the Summary of Recommendations of the Community Services Committee dated September 19, 2006, Items 1 to 4, be adopted as follows:

The Community Services Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo receive Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045, Update on the Region of Waterloo’s Affordable Housing Strategy, dated September 19, 2006, for information;

AND THAT the Region of Waterloo reiterate its request that the Provincial government provide sustainable supportive housing funding to the Region of Waterloo, including the proposed Sunnyside Supportive Housing Development.

2. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a purchase of service agreement, on a trial basis, for the provision of per diem for emergency and transitional shelter for prenatal and postnatal women (postnatal up to 90 days maximum) ages 16-25 from October 1, 2006 to December 31, 2007 with the following agencies:

a) Society of St. Vincent De Paul Kitchener Particular Council carrying on business (c.o.b.) as The Special Works Conference of St. Louise De Marillac (Marillac Place); and

314691 Council - 7 - 06/09/27

b) Cara’s Hope Maternity Home

as outlined in Report SS-06-052, dated September 19, 2006.

3. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Provincial Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP), as detailed in Report SS-06-053, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Grant pre-budget approval for the allocation of one-time grants for January 1 to December 31, 2007 to the following community agencies subject to 100% funding from the Province:

Cambridge Kiwanis Village Non-Profit Housing – Supportive Housing $ 51,453 Cambridge Shelter Corporation – Welcome Aboard Drop-in $ 15,000 House of Friendship – Supportive Housing $ 243,015 K-W YWCA – Supportive Housing $ 162,046 Lutherwood - Rent Bank and Eviction Prevention $ 65,500 Lutherwood – Families in Transition $ 47,786 Reaching our Outdoor Friends – Outreach and Direct Support $ 30,424 Total $ 615,224

b) Request an increase in the CHPP allocation in the 2007 provincial budget submission to reflect actual community program and implementation costs under the CHPP Program Guidelines and Performance Measures; and

c) Request the Province reconvene the original provincial CHPP data working group to review and further refine data collected under CHPP.

4. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem as outlined in Report SS-06-054, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Increase the per diem between June 1 and December 31, 2006 up to $45.00 subject to Domiciliary Hostel Program operators’ commitment to comply with the Domiciliary Hostel Program minimum standards and subject to 100% funding by the Province of Ontario;

b) Increase the 2006 Operating Budget for Income Support Programs by $298,809 gross and $0 net; and

Forward the 2007 Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem rate to Budget Committee of the Whole for consideration during the 2007 Operating Budget process.

CARRIED

MOVED by J. Brewer SECONDED by J. Mitchell

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo appoint Councillors Connolly, Galloway and Smola to the Emergency Medical Services Growth Management Working Group.

CARRIED

314691 Council - 8 - 06/09/27

Administration and Finance

The Summary of Recommendation of the Administration and Finance Committee was presented by T. Galloway, Chair of the Committee. A question was raised if it is necessary to pre-approve the purchase of all of the vehicles. Gary Sosnoski, Commissioner, Corporate Resources responded historically the purchase has been done this way and the timing will allow for any additional fitting required.

MOVED by T. Galloway SECONDED by W. Roth

THAT the Summary of Recommendations of the Administration and Finance Committee dated September 20, 2006, Item 1, be adopted as follows:

The Administration and Finance Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the pre-budget expenditure of $3,004,000 for the purchase of 42 vehicles scheduled for procurement in 2007 as set out in the 2006 10 Year Capital Plans of various departments to be funded from the appropriate vehicle/equipment reserve funds

CARRIED

OTHER MATTERS UNDER COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

MOVED by B. Strauss SECONDED by C. Millar

THAT Committee of the Whole rise and Council resume.

CARRIED

MOVED by M. Connolly SECONDED by B. Strauss

THAT Council adopt the proceeding of the Committee of the Whole.

CARRIED

NOTICE OF MOTION

TAKE NOTICE THAT I, Councillor T. Galloway, hereby give notice that I intend to introduce the following motion at the Council Meeting on October 11, 2006:

Whereas Ontario municipalities have the responsibility for the collection and disposal of municipal waste,

And Whereas the Region of Waterloo responsibly handles its municipal waste within its own municipal borders,

314691 Council - 9 - 06/09/27

And Whereas some municipalities and most notably Toronto are using disposal sites outside their boundaries,

And Whereas this practice is understandably objected to by these receiving municipalities,

And Whereas this excessive transporting of municipal garbage creates unnecessary heavy truck traffic as well as needless health and safety risks on area highways,

And Whereas the need to use such external sites has been expedited in some cases by lack of planning and reduction efforts over a long period of time,

And Whereas the Province of Ontario has the regulatory authority to provide for various disposal options,

And Whereas new disposal options and expedited approval processes need to be adopted by the Province,

And Whereas waste reduction efforts and incentives at all points of production, use and disposal must be expanded,

Therefore Be It Resolved that the Council of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo ask the Province of Ontario to enact legislation to allow for new technologies for waste disposal, expediting of approval processes and redoubling of waste reduction initiatives;

And Further that the Council of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo informs the Province of Ontario that it objects to any consideration of permanent or temporary use of its public landfill site for external municipal waste and objects to any currently licensed or future licensed private landfill sites in our municipality receiving municipal waste from external municipalities;

And Further that this resolution be forwarded to all area municipalities in our Region for their consideration for adoption.

M. Connolly advised he will prepare and circulate a notice of motion related to the west side development in Waterloo.

OTHER BUSINESS

M. Connolly inquired when the second layer of asphalt will be laid on Westmount Road between University Avenue and Columbia Street as the drain catch basins are higher than the roadway. Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services will investigate and advise M. Connolly.

J. Wideman requested an update on the status of the proposed registry system in relation to the Pesticide By-law. G. Sosnoski replied staff have received the formal submissions and may need to do some additional consultation. A report is expected back before Council in November and the industry representatives will be advised of the date. Chair Seiling clarified that a registry system has not yet been approved, but was requested by the industry. In order to approve a registry system, the By-law will need to be opened up.

314691 Council - 10 - 06/09/27

ENACTMENT OF BY-LAWS – (FIRST, SECOND & THIRD READINGS)

MOVED by J. Mitchell SECONDED by B. Strauss a) That a By-law to Amend the Region's Controlled Access By-law #58-87, to Include an Access to Regional Road #58 (Fischer-Hallman Road), City of Kitchener be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-057 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal b) That a By-law to A By-law to Delegate Authority to the Outgoing Council to Pass By-laws to Authorize the Issue of Debentures be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-058 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal c) That a By-law to Confirm the Actions of Council of September 27, 2006 be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-059 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal

CARRIED

ADJOURN

MOVED by J. Brewer SECONDED by M. Connolly

THAT the meeting adjourn.

CARRIED

REGIONAL CHAIR, K. Seiling

REGIONAL CLERK, K. Fletcher

314691 MEDIA RELEASE: IMMEDIATE

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO CONSOLIDATED COUNCIL AGENDA

Wednesday, September 27, 2006 Closed Session 6:45 p.m. WATERLOO COUNTY ROOM Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. REGIONAL COUNCIL CHAMBER 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, ON

(*) Denotes Item(s) Not Part of Original Agenda

1. MOMENT OF SILENCE

2. ROLL CALL

3. MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION

That a closed meeting of Council be held on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 at 6:45 p.m. in accordance with Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001, for the purposes of considering the following subject matters:

a) a proposed or pending acquisition of land b) personal matters about an identifiable individual

4. MOTION TO RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION

5. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

6. PRESENTATIONS

7. PETITIONS

8. DELEGATIONS

a) Waterloo West Side Development

* i) Memo: Update on Wilmot Line Environmental Assessment and A Associated Proposed Plans of Subdivision

ii) Dr. Emil Frind (* Submission attached) B iii) Tom Schneider iv) Alex David v) Susan Smith vi) David Wellhauser vii) Ginny Quinn viii) Pauline Richards ix) Deb Swidrovich * x) Louisette Lanteigne

9. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

Council Agenda - 2 - 06/09/27 a) Council – August 30, 2006 b) Planning & Works – September 19, 2006 c) Community Services – September 19, 2006 d) Administration & Finance – September 20, 2006

10. COMMUNICATIONS

11. MOTION TO GO INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO CONSIDER REPORTS

12. REPORTS Finance Reports

a) F-06-061, T2006-127, 250 Strasburg Road Security Fence, City of Kitchener 1

Committee Reports

a) Planning & Works - attached & marked PS-060919 3

b) Community Services - attached & marked SS-060919 5

c) Administration & Finance - attached & marked FS-060920 7

Chief Administrative Officer Regional Chair Regional Clerk 13. OTHER MATTERS UNDER COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

14. MOTION FOR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO RISE AND COUNCIL RESUME

15. MOTION TO ADOPT PROCEEDINGS OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

16. MOTIONS

17. NOTICE OF MOTION

18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

19. OTHER BUSINESS

20. QUESTIONS

21. ENACTMENT OF BY-LAWS – FIRST, SECOND & THIRD READINGS

a) A By-law to Amend the Region's Controlled Access By-law #58-87, to Include an Access to Regional Road #58 (Fischer-Hallman Road), City of Kitchener

b) A By-law to Delegate Authority to the Outgoing Council to Pass By-laws to Authorize the Issue of Debentures

c) A By-law to Confirm the Actions of Council – September 27, 2006

22. ADJOURN

314668

PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Commissioner’s Office

Date: September 27, 2006

MEMORANDUM

To: Chair Ken Seiling and Members of Regional Council

From: Rob Horne, Commissioner Planning, Housing and Community Services

Subject: UPDATE ON WILMOT LINE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED PROPOSED PLANS OF SUBDIVISION ______

The Region of Waterloo has received three proposed plans of subdivision from the City of Waterloo. The City of Waterloo is recommending that the Region grant draft plan approval to the Vista Hills, Greyerbiehl and Clair Creek Meadows subdivisions. In addition, the City of Waterloo, as the proponent, is in the process of completing a Class Environmental Assessment (EA )for Wilmot Line (as it abuts these proposed developments), and including the Wilmot Line/Erb Street intersection. The Regional Official Policies Plan provides guidance that development be considered in conjunction with related EA.

At its meeting of September 25, 2006, City of Waterloo Council augmented the scope of work required to complete the EA for Wilmot Line. Additional time is now required for further data collection and analysis, as well as further examination of alternatives, and project reclassification from a Schedule B to a Schedule C undertaking. Consequently, the road EA is now expected to be completed and tabled with City of Waterloo Council early in 2007 for public review. Given the additional scope of work, and the fact that Erb Street is a Regional Road, the Region of Waterloo is also contributing $15,000 toward the additional costs of the EA from approved budget funds.

The requirement for additional work on the road EA also has timing implications relating to the consideration of adjacent subdivisions for draft plan approval by the Region of Waterloo. Until the EA work progresses to an appropriate stage, and with the need to review a number of additional submissions received over the past few months from the public, it is my professional opinion that consideration of the proposed plans of subdivision for approval is premature, and should not occur, at a minimum, until the Wilmot Line EA final report is tabled and accepted by the Project Team.

As an associated update, Regional staff has met twice with residents and other interested parties respecting their concerns about the proposed plans of subdivision. A number of written submissions have also been received. Regional staff is reviewing these submissions as part of the overall technical review, and delegations have already registered for Regional Council’s September 27, 2006 meeting.

Regional staff will continue to keep Council apprised regarding both the Wilmot Line Road EA and the technical review of the adjacent subdivisions.

I trust this update is of assistance.

318582 Presentation to Regional Council, September 27, 2006 Review of Water Issues at the Waterloo Westside

E.O. Frind, Ph.D., P.Eng. 519-885-4415, [email protected]

The three proposed developments on the Wilmot Line, collectively referred to as the Waterloo Westside Developments, have become a source of some controversy in the community. One reason for the concerns is that the developments are located on the Waterloo Moraine, the source of much of our drinking water.

Our drinking water sources are being managed well by the Region. Water management practices have improved in recent years so that problems such as Greenbrook will hopefully not recur. A salt reduction program is now in place. Nevertheless, trying to balance the demands of rapid growth with the protection of our water sources remains to be a challenge.

I have here briefly reviewed some aspects of the proposed development in an attempt to throw some light on relevant water issues. I do not claim that this review is comprehensive.

Water Quantity

The Laurel Creek Watershed Study adopted as a guiding principle for development within the watershed that post-development recharge should be no less than pre-development recharge.

In the three proposed subdivisions comprising the Waterloo Westside, most of the area lies within the catchment area of the north branch of Clair Creek. The recharge entering this catchment area under pre-development conditions flows in the shallow aquifer to form the baseflow in the creek. As the creek crosses the sandy area (a window in the aquitard) located at the neck of ESPA 19, the water drains to the deep aquifer. Flow in Clair Creek downstream of the window occurs only during spring runoff and periods of high precipitation. This means that the baseflow in the creek upstream of the sandy window, plus probably some of the runoff, actually recharges the deep aquifer. Therefore, the entire catchment area of the north branch of Clair Creek is a recharge area for the deep aquifer.

Under post-development conditions, roof runoff and foundation drainage is collected via a Clean Water Collection system (CWC), also known as a “Third Pipe” system. This pipe is perforated to allow infiltration, and it terminates at the stormwater management pond where it allows the water to infiltrate through the sandy material into the deep aquifer. The clean water is estimated to be about 20% more in volume than the recharge under pre-development conditions. The actual amount infiltrated depends on the capacity of the pipe, and any excess will become storm runoff. Because of the 70% impervious coverage of the site, the water balance relies heavily on the third pipe.

My concern is with the long-term performance of the third pipe system. As far as I am aware, reports of long-term performance for this type of system are not available. Problems due to clogging (e.g. silting, tree roots) are to be expected. Although the system is designed for regular maintenance,

1 there is no guarantee that it will always function as intended. So, although we have a surplus of water infiltrating into the system compared to pre-development conditions, we may have a deficit of deep aquifer recharge. If so, this deficit will not be made up by more recharge elsewhere.

The Clair Creek north branch catchment area amounts to about 1 km2 or 77% of the development lands, all of which contributes to deep aquifer recharge. Compared to the total Moraine recharge area, this is still not large, but neither is it negligible. But if we add up all similar areas on the Moraine that have been or will be developed, the overall area becomes significant. If some of the recharge is converted to storm runoff at one development, the individual impact may be tolerable, but the cumulative impact from all similar developments could be problematic. This is why the principle is important. We need to have assurance that the recharge is preserved everywhere.

On regional maps, the proposed development area is still shown as not being a recharge area on the basis of the till cover. We need to recognize that most of this area is an important recharge area, and we need to provide some assurance that the overall water balance in the Moraine aquifer is maintained by preserving the recharge. Thus, instead of relying entirely on the third pipe, it would be prudent to preserve as much of the natural flow system as possible.

Water Quality

I will here consider only contamination by road salt, which is a problem in all urbanized areas. Considerable amounts of chloride from road salt are already in the system, and each new development adds to this load. At the Westside, the drinking water aquifer is protected by a clayey till cap of variable thickness. The subdivision plan calls for major grading of the hilly topography which will result in the thinning of the till by 8-9 m in places. As a result, the till thickness is reduced to zero or near-zero in several locations. The grading will be necessary to accommodate the approximately 1600 residential units in the three proposed subdivisions. Compromises were made in the subdivision layout between steep hills requiring extensive salting and more gentle hills requiring more grading. This thinning compromises the protective capacity of the till layer, thus raising the risk of contamination of the underlying aquifer.

According to Prof. J. Cherry of the University of Waterloo, a world-renowned expert on till aquitards, clayey till tends to form fractures within the upper 5 m. The fractures may be microscopic in thickness and thus difficult to detect, but they nevertheless offer conduits for contaminant transport. The consultant’s report finds that the conductivity of the upper weathered zone of the till is higher than that of the unweathered zone by about one to two orders of magnitude, which could be due to root holes but would also support the presence of fractures. The fractures reduce the protective capability of the till.

The grading of the site will expose deeper till to weathering and thus new fractures will be formed in the residual till. According to Prof. Cherry, the weathering process will be fast. Thus the real potential exists that within a few years, the clay till in areas less than 5 m thick will be fractured. This means that the protective capacity of the till will be further compromised. Although matrix diffusion in the till offers some extra protection, it merely slows down contaminant transport through the till.

The development plans call for clay blankets to be placed under boulevards and cul-de-sacs in areas

2 where the till has become too thin. Again, as with any engineered system, the long-term integrity of these clay blankets may be uncertain; for example, fracturing due to freeze/thaw cycles or tree root penetration may be possible. Bypassing of the blanket by salt-laden water is also a possibility. The net effect may be to slow down the salt, but there is no guarantee that contaminants will be kept out of the aquifer over the longer term.

A precedent for road salt contamination exists at the Greenbrook well field (now defunct) where chloride concentrations have increased steadily over the last 30 years, reaching the 250 mg/L drinking water limit by the year 2000. The pumped aquifer there is protected by two till aquitards, but chloride from road salt reached the wells in only 50 years or less. Windows or thin areas in the aquitard were believed to have played a role in the chloride transport. This case provides a typical time scale for contaminant transport in the Moraine system.

To sum up, it would be in the interest of groundwater quality to retain as much of the original clay cap as possible. This could be achieved by reducing the housing density of the development and making more of an effort to work with the natural contours of the land as far as possible.

The Big Picture

The Moraine, with its many interconnected layers of porous materials, is a robust and reliable water source, and it stores a huge amount of water. Only a portion of that water is presently used. This source has served us well in the past and will continue to serve us well into the future. But we need to treat our water source with respect and caution.

The Westside Development by itself will have a small impact on the Moraine, and by itself it is not likely to imperil the source. But instead of relying on the Moraine’s resilience, it would be wise to strictly preserve the recharge function as well as the protective function of the system. We also have other developments on the Moraine, existing, in progress, and planned, and each will contribute its own impact. Taken together, all these impacts may eventually add up to a significant impact that may degrade our water. That’s why it is important to fully understand the impact of the stresses we are imposing on the Moraine. The example of Greenbrook shows that things can go wrong.

I would also caution against counting on a Great Lakes pipeline being in place by 2035. The 30 years until then may be highly unpredictable due to climate change, which seems to be happening faster than anyone has anticipated. Interbasin water transfers are not allowed, which rules out Georgian Bay. This leaves only Lake Erie, an international body of water, as a possible source. Dropping water levels as a result of climate change may make large-scale withdrawals, which will require international approval, an uncertain proposition. In view of these uncertainties, I feel that we need to do our utmost to protect the water we have, and to avoid unnecessary risks, not just over the next 30 years, but over the long term. Fortunately, our groundwater system still has considerable unused capacity left.

At the Waterloo Westside, water is not the only issue. There are other pressing and more visible questions, such as whether the development constitutes Smart Growth. In my view, it does not. A development where each of the proposed 1600 residential units requires 2-3 cars to function cannot be Smart Growth. There are smarter options available for making this development work and protecting the environment at the same time. But I will leave this for others to discuss.

3

Groundwater Protection or Residential Development

Response to Waterloo City Council’s approval of Staff Report DS-06-16

Presentation to Regional Council Wednesday September 27, 2006 By David Wellhauser HBA, MA, MPA, Bed Grand River Watershed Waterlooians.ca Spokesperson Member of Citizens for the Protection of the Waterloo Moraine (CPWM) Policy Inconsistency

Does not conform to all necessary Regional, Ontario Municipal Board, or Provincial policy and legislation • Regional Policy • 1992 Ontario Municipal Board ruling • Planning Act and March 2005 Provincial Policy Statement

Therefore, Waterloo City Staff Report DS-06-16 appears to represent bad planning. Pro-development bias trumps community health considerations • Policy failure demonstrates institutional barriers to sustainable planning.

• Bias has lead to the approval of subdivision report DS-06-16 which violates Regional and Provincial policy and will adversely affect Regional water quality and quantity. ESPA 19 – northwest corner of Waterloo Degradation to ESPA 19

• Region of Waterloo CL1 designation: These are preservation areas intended to preserve, enhance and protect important environmental features from land use impacts that would detrimentally alter of impair their size, physical form, ecological functions and/or quality. Traditional urban development is not permitted within CL1 areas or their associated buffers, with the exception of public services. (DS-06-16, pg. 34).

• City of Waterloo Key District Plan Objectives: Retention of ESPA 19 (Forested Hills) and significant environmental features (DS-06-16, pg. 18) Effects of development on ESPA 19 • “The ecologist is of the opinion that the proposed buffers will protect and maintain ESPA 19 post development, recognizing that the forest is transitioning [degrading] to an urban woodlot and some sensitive urban sensitive species will be lost” (DS-06-16, pg. 37).

• “However, some urban-sensitive species residing in the forest may be displaced as it transitions [degrades] to an urban woodlot. For example, some sensitive bird species have declined in the ESPA neck and lobe in recent years as the adjacent lands developed” (DS-06- 16, pg. 37). Ontario Municipal Board (1992)

• The 1992 OMB decision on these disputed lands places several constraints on the proposed developments. It must: * work with the existing topography * not adversely affect natural ecological functions, e.g. water recharge, quality, and flow. Ontario Municipal Board (1992)

What DS-06-16 says:

“Cut and till is typically in the order of 1-4 metres, however up to 9 metres of cut and 7 metres of fill will be required on some portions of land” (DS-06-16, pg. 75) Provincial Policy Statement (2005)

• According to Minister of Public Infrastructure and Renewal David Caplan lower tier governments are required to abide by the PPS, specifically section 2.2 Water (August 25, 2006).

• DS-06-16 does not address or conform to section 2.2 of the PPS. Questions

• Who is liable for the destruction of our groundwater supply resulting from these subdivisions if they are approved? • Why given the political nature of these subdivisions is Region Council not voting on this matter? • How does this committee respond to the policy inconsistency of these proposed subdivisions? • Will Regional Council vote on the approval of DS-06-16? Conclusion

• The subdivisions as presented in Waterloo City Staff Report DS-06-16, can not be approved as the plan of subdivision does not comply with Regional and Provincial policy. References

• August 25, 2006 letter from Minister David Caplan

• City of Waterloo Staff Report DS-06-16

• Ontario Provincial Policy Statement March 2005. Online: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/userfiles/HTML/nts_1 _23137_1.html#2.2

• Ontario Planning Act

Chairman Seiling, Councillors.

Slide 1 I’m here today to urge council to not approve the plans of subdivision for the West Side of Waterloo. I appreciate the fact that you do not see yourselves as the policemen of the municipalities you represent. However, since plans of subdivision do come to this level for final approval, you do have a role to play when mistakes have been made and I think that these plans of subdivision are a mistake.

These subdivisions have been planned under the premise of New Urbanist Design. These are the criteria for a New Urbanist Development: Slide 2

The proposed plans of subdivision are on a “green” field site – virgin, undeveloped land. So scratch the first point.

There’s plenty of green space and park land. However, as you can tell from the delegations here this evening there’s some serious concern regarding environmental protection, especially the way this subdivision is putting the squeeze on the neck of ESPA 19 where Clair Creek loses most of its water into ground. Apparently, the roads are designed to funnel all run-off into the creek. And one of the main sandy re-charge areas is going to become a SWM pond. There are many delegations here tonight to talk about the water issue, so I'll leave that to them.

Walkability – getting people out of their cars. In order for a community to be considered walkable, there must be somewhere to walk to. Slide 3 There are only 3 possible sites for businesses in Vista Hills, none in Greyer Beihl and a small strip mall planned for the corner of Columbia and Wilmot Line. Let me see…within the recommended 5-6 minutes walk we have a corner store, maybe a hairdresser, perhaps a dentist. There will be upwards of 4000 people living here. Where’s the bakery, the book store, the café, the pub, the flower shop, the card shop, the doctor, the lawyer, the massage therapist, the music teacher? Where are the majority of these people going to work? There’s no 1 job per household here. Residents are going to have to leave, and they’re going to have to get into their cars to do it.

There is a transit route planned, but staff will tell you that it’ll be years before a bus finally meanders its way into the bowels of Vista Hills.

The Columbia Forest subdivision already built on the west side was supposedly designed to New Urbanist principles, but the residents there will tell you it doesn’t work. Columbia Forest is a colossal failure. Not because New Urbanism is a failure. There are vibrant, workable New Urbanist neighbourhoods flourishing across North America. Columbia Forest is a failure because it does not meet all of the criteria of New Urbanist design. It is not walkable. The mixed use, commercial, retail component has not materialized. Transit is non-existent. There’s no community centre or library. The proposed new library on the west side will not be within walking distance of the residents of Columbia Forest.

I was at the public sessions regarding Columbia Forest years ago. We were given the impression that little mostly self-contained villages were being created where there would be no need for people to even own a second car. The lots were allowed to be built with room for only one car. But since the promised amenities and transit were not forthcoming, the residents were forced to resort to buying second and third vehicles and parking illegally on the street. The developers bringing forward the plans of subdivision before you tonight have fixed this problem, not by insuring that the entire New Urbanist system will be in place, but rather by allowing room for each household to park three cars.

In order to address air quality and traffic congestion, you have made a commitment to reduce the number of car trips made within the region. On this flyer about rapid transit that we received recently it says … (read flyer)

Slide 4 This slide shows an example of a New Urbanist development with all the different ways that residents can access other areas of the city. (Read slide) The subdivisions proposed here Slide 3 are completely cut off from the rest of the city except by one access point.

The streets are laid out on a grid, but they don't connect to anything. Imagine if you can, what life will be like on weekday mornings between 7 and 9 for the residents of these new subdivisions as everyone tries to funnel out to Columbia street on the one access road. Talk about congestion. I certainly wouldn't want to be trying to ride my bike through that. It won't be long before residents are badgering council to punch another road through somewhere.

Slide 5 In the proposed plans, there is a diversity of housing types and sizes.

Density is higher than in a regular subdivision.

Slide 6 If, however, the other criteria for New Urbanism are not met, this just means it's higher density urban sprawl.

The region has decreed that the city of Waterloo's boundaries are fixed. Meanwhile, we're faced with intense growth. At no time in our history has it been more important to be extremely careful about what we do with our remaining undeveloped land.

We’re in the process of revising our Official Plan. There's a study being done on what makes a healthy community.

What I'm asking council to consider tonight is to send these plans back to the City for re-consideration. There are too many questions about environmental impacts. Let us weigh these plans against the new Clean Water Act. Let us finish our Official Plan Review. Let us take into consideration the findings of the Healthy Communities Study. Let us see what can be done to create a development that protects our water and meets regional targets of reduced car dependency.

There have been delays with this project. Another year to get it right is worth it.

NewNew UrbanismUrbanism CriteriaCriteria

•• ReRe--developmentdevelopment ofof “brown”“brown” fieldsfields (old(old industrialindustrial land),land), “grey”“grey” fieldsfields (old(old institutionalinstitutional land)land) oror oldold neighbourhoodsneighbourhoods •• EnvironmentalEnvironmental protectionprotection && enhancementenhancement && greengreen spacespace •• WalkableWalkable CommunityCommunity •• DiversityDiversity ofof housinghousing typestypes andand sizessizes •• HighHigh DensityDensity WalkabilityWalkability •• Work,Work, shopping,shopping, schools,schools, recreation,recreation, etc.etc. withinwithin 55--66 minutesminutes walkwalk •• 11 jobjob perper householdhousehold inin thethe areaarea •• Good,Good, reliable,reliable, frequent,frequent, publicpublic transittransit serviceservice •• ConnectivityConnectivity withwith otherother neighbourhoodsneighbourhoods “Provide“Provide anan interconnectedinterconnected streetstreet network,network, inin aa gridgrid oror modifiedmodified gridgrid pattern,pattern, toto ensureensure aa varietyvariety ofof itinerariesitineraries andand toto dispersedisperse traffictraffic congestion”congestion” NewNew UrbanismUrbanism CriteriaCriteria

•• ReRe--developmentdevelopment ofof “brown”“brown” fieldsfields (old(old industrialindustrial land),land), “grey”“grey” fieldsfields (old(old institutionalinstitutional land)land) oror oldold neighbourhoodsneighbourhoods •• EnvironmentalEnvironmental protectionprotection && enhancementenhancement && greengreen spacespace •• WalkabilityWalkability •• DiversityDiversity ofof housinghousing typestypes andand sizessizes •• HighHigh DensityDensity

REGIONAL COUNCIL MINUTES

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

The following are the minutes of the Regular Council meeting held at 7:15 p.m. in the Regional Council Chamber, 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario, with the following members present: Chair K. Seiling, J. Brewer, M. Connolly, D. Craig, K. Denouden, H. Epp, T. Galloway, J. Haalboom, R. Kelterborn, C. Millar, W. Roth, J. Smola, B. Strauss, J. Wideman*, and C. Zehr.

Regrets: J. Mitchell

DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

B. Strauss disclosed a pecuniary interest with respect to an item in the closed session related to solicitor-client privilege as he has an interest in the affected property. He left the closed session for the discussion.

CLOSED SESSION

MOVED by J. Smola SECONDED by W. Roth

THAT a closed meeting of Council be held on Wednesday, August 30, 2006 at 6:45 p.m. in accordance with Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001, for the purposes of considering the following subject matters:

a) acquisition of land b) personal matters about an identifiable person c) solicitor-client privilege

CARRIED

MOVED by M. Connolly SECONDED by K. Denouden

The Council reconvene in Open Session.

CARRIED

PRESENTATIONS a) Jamie Martin, Chair, and John Tennant, CEO, Canada’s Technology Triangle Inc. (CTT) appeared before Council to provide a program update. J. Martin provided introductory remarks. J. Tennant gave a powerpoint presentation, a copy of which is appended to the original minutes. He highlighted the valued partnership CTT has with the Region and also their community and corporate partners. He noted the successes and future of the Regional economy.

Council Minutes - 2 - 06/08/30

J. Wideman inquired if CTT has a breakdown of sectors for the inflow of people. J. Tennant responded the source of inflow is known but not the sector. It was noted 25% of the workforce is in manufacturing and this figure peaked approximately 2 years ago.

C. Zehr asked if other comparative figures related to immigration are available and how this region compares to other major communities in Canada. J. Tennant replied this area is performing well in general terms and among communities of over 500,000 residents, Waterloo Region is very high. CTT has been working with the Waterloo Region Employee Network to increase these numbers.

*J. Wideman left the meeting at 7:45 p.m.

DELEGATIONS a) Waterloo West Side Development

i) Pauline Richards appeared before Council regarding approval of subdivisions on the west side of Waterloo. She requested Council to intervene as they have the approval authority. She referenced the new Clean Water Act and concerns that it has not been considered. She was also concerned that these subdivisions are not proactive in getting people out of their cars and stated the plan of subdivision should be sent back to the City for further review.

ii) Louisette Lanteigne appeared before Council regarding development on the west side of Waterloo, advising she will email a copy of her presentation to all members of Council. She expressed concern with the connectivity of these issues and their direct impact on health risks, particularly the medical effects of road salt. She quoted articles and documents with respect to her concerns. She stated with the water loss, contamination will result.

iii) Ginny Quinn appeared before Council on the development on the west side of Waterloo and invited Rob Horne to a meeting the citizens are having with Professor John Cherry, an expert on till cap and aquifers. She provided a response from Emil Frind to a question raised by Mark Whaley, Councillor from the City of Waterloo related to the impermeability of clay till. A copy of this response is appended to the original minutes.

M. Connolly thanked the delegations for their input and suggested their questions be submitted in writing to staff. Rob Horne, Commissioner, Planning, Housing and Community Services, encouraged citizens to meet with staff as the technical review is currently being completed. All submissions will be considered and done consistently as with other applications.

Chair Seiling clarified that all written submissions will be included in the compliance review being completed by staff and if there are problems the issue can come back to Council. If all staff concerns are satisfied, the application will be approved by R. Horne and there is an appeal route to the Ontario Municipal Board.

C. Millar noted if Council believes this matter should be brought back before them then a motion of Council could direct that.

Memo Re: Planning Act Criteria and Regional Process for Approval of Applications for Plans of Subdivision was received for information.

304937 Council Minutes - 3 - 06/08/30

*J. Wideman returned to the meeting at 8:05 p.m.

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

J. Haalboom requested clarification on page 3 of the July 12, 2006 Council minutes related to the South Kitchener Transportation Corridor Study and the expansion of ESPA 27. The minutes should reflect that the parallel activity for studying the expansion of ESPA 27 occur along with the Class Environmental Assessment.

MOVED by B. Strauss SECONDED by J. Brewer

THAT the following Minutes be approved as amended: a) Council – July 12, 2006 b) Planning & Works – August 22, 2006 c) Community Services – August 22, 2006

CARRIED

COMMUNICATIONS a) Ginny Quinn Re: West Side Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zone Change Application was received for information.

MOVED by K. Denouden SECONDED by J. Brewer

THAT Council go into Committee of the Whole to consider reports.

CARRIED

FINANCE REPORTS a) F-06-058, T2006-030 Baden Water Tower Replacement, Township Of Wilmot

MOVED by J. Wideman SECONDED by M. Connolly

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept the tender of Landmark Structures Co. for the Baden Water Tower Replacement, Township of Wilmot, in the amount of $4,078,880.00 including all applicable taxes

CARRIED b) F-06-059, T2006-029 Miscellaneous Roadway Improvements at Various Locations, Cities of Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and Township Of Woolwich

C. Zehr inquired where the inlaid ladder markings will be used. Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services, advised he does not have the

304937 Council Minutes - 4 - 06/08/30 specific criteria but can get more detailed information. The markings will be used where there is significant pedestrian traffic.

There was discussion about the section of Can Amera Parkway to be improved. The issue of one lane versus two lane was also highlighted for staff to review.

MOVED by J. Wideman SECONDED by M. Connolly

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept the tender of Steed & Evans Ltd. for Miscellaneous Roadway Improvements at Various Locations, Cities of Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and Township of Woolwich in the amount of $545,900.00, including all applicable taxes subject to receipt of approval from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, for the storm sewer extension on Sawmill Road at Golf Course Road – Part H;

AND THAT the Region of Waterloo authorize a capital budget transfer of $65,321.17. The projected cost increase to be funded from recent savings in the Rural Roads Rehabilitation Contract 2006-018 ($238,756.90 under budget);

AND FURTHER THAT the Region of Waterloo authorize an increase in project funds of $16,169.40 gross and $0 net to facilitate work undertaken on behalf of the City of Kitchener

CARRIED

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Planning & Works

The Summary of Recommendations of the Planning and Works Committee was presented by Jim Wideman, Chair of the Committee. M. Connolly requested Item #2 be dealt with separately and he stated he does not understand why the traffic lights are being removed. He has received a number of calls about this issue and concerns that the hill issue has not been addressed. J. Wideman referred to the staff report and the decreased traffic counts. He also noted the school supports the temporary removal.

MOVED by J. Wideman SECONDED by B. Strauss

THAT the Summary of Recommendations of the Planning and Works Committee, dated August 22, 2006, Items 1 and 3 to 5, and 1 report from closed session, Item 6, be adopted as follows:

The Planning and Works Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo take the following actions with respect to the Regional Operations Centre Salt Storage Facility project as outlined in Report E-06-089/CR- FM-06-013 dated August 22, 2006:

a) Approve increases to the Transportation Operations 2006 Capital Budget and the Operations Centre 2006 Capital Budget of $500,000 and $100,000 respectively, increasing the total project budget to $2,745.000, to be funded from reserve funds and debentures; and

b) Authorize staff to negotiate an increase to the Consultant’s fees not to exceed $50,000 304937 Council Minutes - 5 - 06/08/30

for additional services related to the increased scope of work.

3. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo take the following actions with respect to the Class Environmental Assessment for Weber Street (Regional Road #8) from Fergus Avenue to Kinzie Avenue, City of Kitchener:

a) Approve the recommended Alternative 3 for roadway improvements, including a raised centre median island on Weber Street from Fergus Avenue to the driveway at 1418 Weber Street with median openings at the driveways to 1342/1375 Weber Street and 1375/1400 Weber Street, as outlined in the project file and Report E-06-091, dated August 22, 2006;

b) Direct staff to file the Notice of Completion for the Class Environmental Assessment Study by means of advertisements in local newspapers and delivery of notices to businesses and residences in the study area and place the project file on the public record for a period of 30 days; and

c) Amend Traffic and Parking By-law 00-032, as amended, upon completion of construction of the proposed roadway improvements to remove the centre lane dual left-turn designation on Weber Street from 30 m south of Fergus Avenue to 100 m north of Kinzie Avenue; and

d) That a Capital Project in the amount of $55,000 be added to the 2006 Transportation Capital Budget with funding to be provided from the roads rehabilitation reserve fund.

4. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept P-06-078, Monthly Report for Development activity for June 2006, dated August 22, 2006.

5. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve an amendment to Controlled Access By-law #58-87 for a temporary access on the west side of Regional Road #58 (Fischer- Hallman Road) approximately 225 meters south of Columbia Street in the City of Waterloo, as outlined in Report P-06-087, dated August 22, 2006.

6. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve, enter into an agreement for, and execute all documentation related to, the acquisition of lands and an easement interest over property described as Part Lot 40, German Company Tract, City of Waterloo from VDL (2005) Limited, Geoffrey L. Moore Realty Inc., P. Dietrich Consulting Ltd. and G. Wright and Associates Limited for the sum of $397,500, subject to adjustment based on acreage to be determined by survey, plus associated costs, as detailed in Report CR-RS-06-044 dated August 22, 2006, to the satisfaction of the Regional Solicitor

CARRIED

MOVED by J. Wideman SECONDED by B. Strauss

THAT the Summary of Recommendations of the Planning and Works Committee, dated August 22, 2006, Item 2, be adopted as follows:

The Planning and Works Committee recommends as follows:

304937 Council Minutes - 6 - 06/08/30

2. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo remove the traffic control signals from operation for a trial period of approximately one month at the intersection of Erb Street (Regional Road #9) and Erbsville Court, City of Waterloo. [E06-065]

CARRIED

Community Services

The Summary of Recommendations of the Community Services Committee was presented by Jane Brewer, Chair of the Committee.

MOVED by J. Brewer SECONDED by T. Galloway

THAT the Summary of Recommendations of the Community Services Committee dated August 22, 2006, Items 1 to 10 , be adopted as follows:

The Community Services Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve for fall 2006 consultation the draft report, Understanding the Housing Stability System for Adults in Waterloo Region’s Urban Areas (August 2006) as outlined in Report SS-06-048, dated August 22, 2006.

2. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the request to enter into a urchase of service agreement with the following agencies for projects under the federal Regional Homelessness Fund as outlined in Report SS-06-046, dated August 22, 2006:

Argus Residence for Young People $ 48,250 Lutherwood $ 76,200 Reaching Our Outdoor Friends (ROOF) $ 31,400

AND THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve $15,000 of the Regional Homelessness Fund to be used to complete a Youth Homelessness Report and Action Plan,

AND THAT the 2006 Operating Budget for Social Planning be increased by $201,000 gross and $0 net.

3. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a Memorandum of Understanding subject to the approval of the Regional Solicitor, for up to $50,000 effective September 1, 2006, with the federal government of Canada or a Ministry or agency thereof, for a demonstration project to support the local coordination of the Homelessness Individual and Family Information System ;

AND THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into an agreement with the House of Friendship for $44,330 for the period September 1, 2006 to March 31, 2007 to administer components of the demonstration project;

AND THAT the 2006 Operating Budget for the Social Planning, Administration and Policy Division of the Social Services Department be increased by $28,600 gross and $0 net, as detailed in Report SS-06-050, dated August 22, 2006.

304937 Council Minutes - 7 - 06/08/30

4. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve one-time social development grants to the following organizations:

Children’s Recreation – Playcreate Grants Wilmot Family Resource Centre $ 5,000 The Working Centre $ 6,500 KW Counselling Services Inc. $ 8,855 Lang’s Farm Village Association $ 4,500 African-Canadian Association of Waterloo Region & Area $ 5,000 House of Friendship $ 5,000 Fiddlesticks Neighbourhood Association $ 4,500

Employment Support and Outreach Grants Christopher-Champlain Community Centre $10,000 Lang’s Farm Village Association $10,000 Lutherwood $ 7,645 Our Place Family & Early Years Centre $10,000 The Working Centre $ 7,000 KW Counselling Services Inc. $ 7,000 Woolwich Community Health Centre $ 4,000

to be funded from the National Child Benefit (NCB) reinvestment funds as outlined in Report SS-06-049, dated August 22, 2006.

5. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the participation of Sunnyside Home in the Province’s Common Assessment Project in Long-Term Care;

AND THAT an additional 2.05 temporary full time equivalent be approved for Sunnyside Home for a period commensurate with provincial funding;

AND THAT the 2006 Operating Budget for Sunnyside Home be increased by $124,000 gross and $0 net to reflect the 2006 one-time expenditures as outlined in Report SS-06- 051, dated August 22, 2006.

6. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the investment of 2005 Consolidated Verification Process funding as outlined in Report SS-06-043 , dated August 22, 2006;

AND THAT the 2006 Operating Budget for Income Support be increased by $60,000 gross and $0 net to reflect the 2006 expenditures.

7. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the request to enter in to fee subsidy Purchase of Service Agreements with the following four centres: Butterfly Learning Centre, Lexington Campus located at Lexington Public School, 431 Forestlawn Road; Creative Beginnings Child Care Centre located in Wilmot Township, Baden Elementary School 155 Livingston Blvd; Mére Élisabeth Bruyére’s child care centre located at 280 Glennridge Road in Waterloo; and École Élementaire L’Harmonie’s child care centre located at 158 Bridgeport Road East in Waterloo as outlined in Report SS-06-044, dated August 22, 2006 as follows:

Butterfly Learning Centre Lexington Campus JK/SK 6 hours or more $36.00 JK/SK 4 to 6 hours $28.00 Creative Beginnings

304937 Council Minutes - 8 - 06/08/30

Toddler 6 hours or more $35.00 Pre School 6 hours or more $29.00 Pre School 4 to 6 hours $21.25 School Age 6 hours or more $20.00 School Age 4 to 6 hours $14.50 Mére Élisabeth Bruyére Toddler 6 hours or more $35.50 Pre School 6 hours or more $31.50 Pre School 4 to 6 hours $24.50 JK/SK 6 hours or more $30.00 JK/SK 4 to 6 hours $23.00 School Age 6 hours or more $30.00 School Age 4 to 6 hours $12.00 École Élementaire L’Harmonie Pre School 6 hours or more $34.00

8. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo request 100% Provincial funding from the Minister of Children and Youth Services and the Minister of Community and Social Services in the amount of $953,243 to fund the actual projected 2007 operating costs for the Infant Development Program as outlined in Report SS-06-047, dated August 22, 2006.

9. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo receive Report P-06-083, Regional Growth Management Strategy Initiative – Regional History Museum Feasibility Study, dated August 22, 2006, for information;

AND THAT staff be directed to complete additional background work, as described in this report.

10. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo take the following actions with respect to the Regional Forest Management Plan, as described in P-06-082, dated August 22, 2006:

a) approve the “Regional Forest Management Plan: Overview and Approach” dated August 22, 2006;

b) direct staff to prepare Operating and Management Plans for the period 2007-11 for the respective tracts; and

c) direct staff to prepare capital and operating budgets beginning in the 2007 fiscal year to implement the Regional Forest Management Plan and the 2007-2011 Operating and Management Plans.

CARRIED

MOVED by B. Strauss SECONDED by K. Denouden

THAT Committee of the Whole rise and Council resume.

CARRIED

MOVED by M. Connolly SECONDED by T. Galloway 304937 Council Minutes - 9 - 06/08/30

THAT Council adopt the proceeding of the Committee of the Whole.

CARRIED

OTHER BUSINESS

M. Connolly requested staff to pursue discussions with the City of Waterloo for a new emergency medical services station in conjunction with the new fire station in Waterloo.

J. Haalboom commended summer students, Jason Niblock and Mike Puillandre for all of their efforts with the landscaping maintenance at the Provincial Offences Court and Regional Administration buildings this past summer.

It was announced that Dr. Nolan and Dr. Wang will be providing Acting Medical Officer of Health duties for the Wellington/Dufferin/Guelph Health Unit over the next few months while they fill the vacant position.

ENACTMENT OF BY-LAWS – (FIRST, SECOND & THIRD READINGS)

MOVED by J. Haalboom SECONDED by J. Smola a) That a By-law to Amend Traffic and Parking By-law 00-032, as Amended to Reflect the Plans for Roadway Improvements on Lobsinger Line be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-052 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal b) That a By-law in respect of the Tile Drainage Debentures – Township of Wilmot be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-053 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal c) That a By-law to Amend By-law Number 58-87, as Amended, Being a By-law to Designate and Regulate Controlled-Access Roads be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-054 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal d) That a By-law to A By-law to Amend Traffic and Parking By-law 00-032, as Amended, to Reflect the Plans for Roadway Improvements on Gerber Road between Nafziger Road and Moser-Young Road on the Boundary of Wellesley and Wilmot Townships be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-055 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal e) That a By-law to Confirm the Actions of Council of August 30, 2006 be read a first, second and third time, finally passed and numbered 06-056 signed by the Regional Chair and Regional Clerk and sealed with the Regional Seal

CARRIED

304937 Council Minutes - 10 - 06/08/30

Chair Seiling reminded everyone that the next cycle of Committee and Council meetings for September 5th and 13th are cancelled. The next Council meeting will be September 27th.

ADJOURN

MOVED by J. Brewer SECONDED by C. Millar

THAT the meeting adjourn.

CARRIED

REGIONAL CHAIR, K. Seiling

REGIONAL CLERK, K. Fletcher

304937 REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO PLANNING AND WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:00 a.m. Council Chamber 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario

Present were: J. Wideman, D. Craig, H. Epp, J. Haalboom, W. Roth, B. Strauss, K. Seiling and C. Zehr

Regrets: K. Denouden

DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

None declared.

DELEGATIONS

J. Wideman vacated the Chair as he was a former owner of the land to be addressed by the first delegation. Vice-Chair B. Strauss assumed the position of Chair at J. Wideman’s request. a) David Wellhauser, Waterloo, appeared before Committee regarding three subdivisions on Wilmot Line in Waterloo approved by the City of Waterloo. He provided a presentation outlining residential development impacts. He highlighted land-use planning and private development bias; issues and concerns; scarcity of groundwater in the Region; seriousness of drinking water and public health within the Region; impacts on air pollution; incomplete environmental assessments; and effects of development on ESPA 19. D. Wellhauser explained how the developments are non-conforming to Regional Policy, the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) ruling in 1992, the Planning Act and the March 2005 Provincial Policy Statement. (D. Wellhauser provided Committee with a written submission)

Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services indicated staff have met with D. Wellhauser and are technically reviewing the matter.

J. Wideman assumed the position of Chair. b) Sue Pryde, Kitchener, appeared before Committee representing the residents on Glasgow Street with concerns regarding Highland Road/Glasgow intersection. She indicated the problem at the intersection is when trying to go from Glasgow Street and turning left onto Highland Road; there is ongoing traffic at the right side of the vehicle stopped on Glasgow Street obstructing view, which gives an unsafe advantage to ongoing traffic coming in off Trussler and Snyder’s Road. S. Pryde highlighted the points factor, which is at 85; and the high traffic times when school buses are entering the street. She indicated the endangerment at the intersection in question can be solved by the addition of temporary traffic lights until the completion of Ira Needles and consider re-evaluating it at a later date. (S. Pryde provided Committee with a written submission)

C. Zehr requested clarification regarding the extension of Glasgow Street and was advised by Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services the final alignment of Glasgow Street is not yet decided, but it will be a through street to Ira Needles P&W - 2 - 06/09/19

Boulevard. He clarified another traffic count would be done at the completion of Ira Needles Boulevard (to be completed late 2007) to review the warranting of lights.

J. Haalboom suggested an all-way stop be established until Ira Needles Boulevard is completed. Nancy Button, Manager, Transportation Engineering advised that the intersection does not warrant an all-way stop and that an all-way stop brings with it other issues. Eventually the traffic will be diverted onto Ira Needles Boulevard.

C. Zehr requested additional signage be placed on Trussler Road in order to redirect traffic at a distance into a continuous flow.

T. Schmidt indicated staff is reviewing the purchase of two education signs when Ira Needles Boulevard is open at which time additional information on the signs could indicate it is the preferred route.

Committee concurred a date for a review at the completion of Ira Needles Boulevard be included in the recommendation. T. Schmidt indicated by June/July 2008 a review should be done, in the meantime signs will be going up Fall 2006.

REPORTS – TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

TRANSPORTATION a) E-06-090 Review for the Installation of Traffic Control Signals at the Intersection of Regional Road #6 (Highland Road) and Glasgow Street, City of Kitchener

MOVED by W. Roth SECONDED by D. Craig

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo take no action regarding the request for the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Regional Road #6 (Highland Road) and Glasgow Street, in the City of Kitchener.

AND THAT a review of the traffic light warrant for the intersection be completed by June 2008.

CARRIED, as amended

DELEGATIONS - continued c) Dr. Wayne Parker, University of Waterloo appeared before Committee regarding Report E-06-102, University of Waterloo Organic Waste Research Project - Waterloo Landfill Site. He explained the University has approached the Region requesting the temporary use of approximately one half hectare of land at the Waterloo Landfill Site for the purpose of establishing a technical scale demonstration facility for processing organic waste. Dr. W. Parker explained the Region will embark on a pilot program for the diversion of food waste, which will coincide with the University of Waterloo’s research project; allowing the University of Waterloo to assist the Region in future decisions regarding the processing of food waste.

REPORTS – TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES - continued

WASTE MANAGEMENT b) E-06-102 University of Waterloo Organic Waste Research Project- Waterloo Landfill Site

P&W - 3 - 06/09/19

MOVED by B. Strauss SECONDED by H. Epp

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the use of the Waterloo Landfill Site by the University of Waterloo for the purpose of establishing a technical scale demonstration facility for the processing of organic waste, with all subsequent required agreements subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

CARRIED

DELEGATIONS - continued d) Mike Delsey, Totten Sims Hubicki Associates and Fred Leech, Ministry of Transportation, Southwestern Region appeared before Committee regarding the Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Class EA Study, from Highway 403 in Brantford to Highway 401 in Cambridge. M. Delsey provided an overview of the study process and purpose; the Outreach and Consultation Program; the study schedule; and the public information centres.

F. Leech responded to Committee member’s questions and concerns regarding the City of Cambridge westside by-pass; issues regarding Highway #7, with a final report to be filed Spring 2009; the request to review increasing the number of exits in the City of Kitchener to the 401; and the request for continuous construction to Highway #8. F. Leech indicated all reports would be forwarded to the Region and follow up information regarding concerns and questions would be addressed. (a written submission was provided)

REPORTS – PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING c) P-06-093 Ministry of Transportation Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Environmental Assessment Study - Highway 401 to Highway 403

R. Horne noted staff from the City of Cambridge, North Dumfries and the Region of Waterloo are on the Municipal Agency Team. In early 2007 a detailed study overview for the Region Transportation Master Plan update will be brought forward.

Received for Information.

COMMUNITY PLANNING d) P-06-089 Monthly Report of Development Activity for July and August 2006

MOVED by C. Zehr SECONDED by D. Craig

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept P-06-089, Monthly Report for Development activity for July and August 2006, dated September 19, 2006.

CARRIED

P&W - 4 - 06/09/19 e) P-06-090 Building Permit Activity, January to June 2006

R. Horne provided an overview of the report. K. Seiling requested a report be brought forward outlining historic trends of building permits, in order to put a perspective on it.

Received for Information.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING - continued f) P-06-091 Route 74 RIM Park Service Improvements

MOVED by K. Seiling SECONDED by H. Epp

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the changes to Route 74 RIM Park shown in Appendix 2, as described in Report P-06-091, dated September 19, 2006, to take effect on Monday October 2, 2006.

CARRIED g) P-06-092 Amendment to Regional Municipality of Waterloo Controlled Access By-law #58- 87 for an Access to Regional Road #58 (Fischer-Hallman Road), City of Kitchener

MOVED by C. Zehr SECONDED by W. Roth

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve an amendment to Controlled Access By- law #58-87 for a right-in, right-out only access on the east side of Regional Road #58 (Fischer- Hallman Road) approximately 135 metres north of Regional Road #50 (Westmount Road) in the City of Kitchener subject to Site Plan approval by the City of Kitchener, as explained in Report P-06-092, dated September 19, 2006.

CARRIED

REPORTS – TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES - continued

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION h) Weber Street Improvements, Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road, Information Package in Advance of Public Information Centre was received for information i) E-06-094 New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road All-Way Stop

Received for Information.

WASTE MANAGEMENT j) E-06-101 Agricultural Bale Wrap Recycling

P&W - 5 - 06/09/19

MOVED by W. Roth SECONDED by D. Craig

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a ten-year Agreement with Think Plastics Inc. of New Hamburg, Ontario for the collection and processing of white agricultural bale wrap, at no cost to the Region of Waterloo, and subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

CARRIED

OTHER BUSINESS a) C. Zehr raised the issue of the intersection at Lackner Boulevard and Fairway Road, indicating consideration should be given to an all-way stop, and was advised a report would be forwarded to the October 3, 2006 Planning and Works Committee meeting. b) K. Seiling received a request from the K-W Bilingual School to extend the trial period for the removal of the traffic control signals from operation at the intersection of Erb Street (Regional Road #9) and Erbsville Court, City of Waterloo.

MOVED by K. Seiling SECONDED by B. Strauss

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo extend the trial period as required for the removal of the traffic control signals from operation at the intersection of Erb Street (Regional Road #9) and Erbsville Court, City of Waterloo, until a report comes back from staff.

CARRIED c) Council Enquiries and Requests for Information Tracking List was received for information.

ADJOURN/CLOSED SESSION

The meeting adjourned at 10:30 a.m.

MOVED by J. Haalboom SECONDED by H. Epp

THAT a closed meeting of Planning & Works Committee be held on Tuesday, September 19, 2006, following the regular meeting of the Planning and Works Committee, in accordance with Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001, for the purposes of considering the following subject matters:

a) a proposed or pending acquisition of land for municipal purposes

CARRIED

COMMITTEE CHAIR, J. Wideman

COMMITTEE CLERK, I. Sa Melo

#317602 REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:00 p.m. Council Chamber 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario

Present were: Chair J. Brewer, M. Connolly, *T. Galloway, R. Kelterborn, C. Millar, J. Mitchell, J. Smola, and K. Seiling

The meeting commenced at 1:05 p.m.

DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

None declared.

DELEGATIONS a) Sandra Forwell, appeared before Committee regarding Cara's Hope Maternity Home, Cambridge, Ontario. She outlined the support, benefits and services provided for prenatal and postnatal women ages 15-24 years of age. b) Dale Stuebing and Karen Gilmet appeared before Committee regarding Marillac Place Purchase of Service Agreement with Social Services. They outlined the support, benefits and services provided for prenatal and postnatal women ages 16-25 years of age and expressed the need for relying on the generosity of the community to support the program.

*T. Galloway joined the meeting at 1:15 p.m.

REPORT – Social Services a) SS-06-052 Requests for Purchase of Service Agreements

In response to Committee’s question concerning the length of time a mother and child are covered, Mike Schuster, Commissioner, Social Services advised that both mother and child are covered under the per diem for a three month period and beyond that, the coverage would be under Ontario Works.

MOVED by J. Mitchell SECONDED by M. Connolly

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a purchase of service agreement, on a trial basis, for the provision of per diem for emergency and transitional shelter for prenatal and postnatal women (postnatal up to 90 days maximum) ages 16-25 from October 1, 2006 to December 31, 2007 with the following agencies:

a) Society of St. Vincent De Paul Kitchener Particular Council carrying on business (c.o.b.) as The Special Works Conference of St. Louise De Marillac (Marillac Place); and

b) Cara’s Hope Maternity Home CS - 2 - 06/09/19 as outlined in Report SS-06-052, dated September 19, 2006.

CARRIED

DELEGATION c) Dr. Paul Deman, Waterloo Wellington Dental Association appeared before Committee expressing concerns with the Request for Proposal (RFP) to dental providers for the provision of denture services for low income persons. A copy of Dr. P. Deman’s letter outlining concerns is attached to the Community Services Committee (CSC) September 19, 2006 agenda.

A copy of a letter responding to Dr. P. Deman from David Dirks, Director Social Services, Employment & Income Support was circulated prior to the meeting.

M. Schuster advised staff will meet with the Waterloo Wellington Dental Association to discuss services, financial implications and alternatives before proceeding with a RFP and report back to Committee.

INTERDEPARTMENTAL REPORT – Planning, Housing and Community Services a) P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045 Update on the Region of Waterloo's Affordable Housing Strategy

Keith Lucas, Director of Housing provided an overview of the report highlighting since inception of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy, approximately 1200 units of affordable housing have been constructed, are currently being constructed or are in the design and financing phases. K. Lucas indicated the goal is to meet 1500 affordable units through additional allocation funding partnerships.

Jeff Schelling, Solicitor (Corporate) provided an update of the Victoria Park Community Homes project and the Sunnyside Supportive Housing project.

MOVED by M. Connolly SECONDED by J. Smola

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo receive Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045, Update on the Region of Waterloo’s Affordable Housing Strategy, dated September 19, 2006, for information;

AND THAT the Region of Waterloo reiterate its request that the Provincial government provide sustainable supportive housing funding to the Region of Waterloo, including the proposed Sunnyside Supportive Housing Development.

CARRIED

REPORTS – Public Health b) PH-06-042 Emergency Medical Services Master Plan Background Paper

John Prno, Director, Emergency Medical Services provided an overview of the report highlighting current Emergency Medical Services (EMS), historic trends and future predictions which include challenges and growth.

Received for Information.

CS - 3 - 06/09/19 c) PH-06-049 Charged Food Premises: Ben Thanh Supermarket

Received for Information. d) PH-06-050 Charged Food Premises: Euro C. Affe

Received for Information. e) PH-06-051 Charged Food Premises: Boardwalk Gaming & Entertainment Inc. (operating as Bingo Country)

Received for Information. f) PH-06-052 Charged Food Premises: Pioneer Bar-B-Q

Received for Information. g) PH-06-055 Together 4 Health

Shelley Bolden, Public Health Planner/Together 4 Health Coordinator provided an overview of the report highlighting funding received, activities and partnerships.

Received for Information. h) PH-06-057 2005-2006 Influenza Season Summary

Naideen Bailey, Manager of Communicable Disease Control Programs highlighted the available programs for the coming year to reduce the incidence of influenza.

Leslie Rintche, Manager Immunization & Vaccine Preventable Disease advised the flu vaccine supply has been delayed due to production but is anticipated to be available in the near future.

Received for Information.

REPORTS – Social Services i) SS-06-053 Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP)

M. Schuster provided an overview of the report.

MOVED by M. Connolly SECONDED by T. Galloway

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Provincial Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP), as detailed in Report SS-06-053, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Grant pre-budget approval for the allocation of one-time grants for January 1 to December 31, 2007 to the following community agencies subject to 100% funding from the Province:

Cambridge Kiwanis Village Non-Profit Housing – Supportive Housing $ 51,453 Cambridge Shelter Corporation – Welcome Aboard Drop-in $ 15,000 House of Friendship – Supportive Housing $ 243,015 CS - 4 - 06/09/19

K-W YWCA – Supportive Housing $ 162,046 Lutherwood - Rent Bank and Eviction Prevention $ 65,500 Lutherwood – Families in Transition $ 47,786 Reaching our Outdoor Friends – Outreach and Direct Support $ 30,424 Total $ 615,224

b) Request an increase in the CHPP allocation in the 2007 provincial budget submission to reflect actual community program and implementation costs under the CHPP Program Guidelines and Performance Measures; and

c) Request the Province reconvene the original provincial CHPP data working group to review and further refine data collected under CHPP.

CARRIED j) SS-06-054 Changes to the Domiciliary Hostel Program Per Diem

M. Schuster provided an overview of the report highlighting in June 2006 the maximum per diem rate increased to $45.00.

MOVED by J. Mitchell SECONDED by J. Smola

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem as outlined in Report SS-06-054, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Increase the per diem between June 1 and December 31, 2006 up to $45.00 subject to Domiciliary Hostel Program operators’ commitment to comply with the Domiciliary Hostel Program minimum standards and subject to 100% funding by the Province of Ontario;

b) Increase the 2006 Operating Budget for Income Support Programs by $298,809 gross and $0 net; and

c) Forward the 2007 Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem rate to Budget Committee of the Whole for consideration during the 2007 Operating Budget process.

CARRIED k) SS-06-056 2006 Child Care Fee and Wage Subsidy File Review

M. Schuster provided an overview of the report.

Received for Information. l) SS-06-057 Provincial Changes to Social Assistance Programs

M. Schuster provided an overview of the report.

Received for Information. m) SS-06-058 Ontario Works Year 2: Focused Review Final Report

M. Schuster provided an overview of the report and advised it is an ongoing monitoring process.

Received for Information. CS - 5 - 06/09/19

INFORMATION/CORRESPONDENCE a) Letter from Dr. Paul DeMan, Waterloo Wellington Dental Society, dated August 23, 2006 was received for information. b) Chair J. Brewer advised she attended a Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs) luncheon and provided highlights. She requested a copy of the LHINs document be forwarded to all Regional Council members and staff.

OTHER BUSINESS

None.

NEXT MEETING – October 3, 2006

ADJOURN

The meeting adjourned at 2:45 p.m.

MOVED by J. Smola SECONDED by M. Connolly

THAT the meeting adjourn.

CARRIED

COMMITTEE CHAIR, J. Brewer

COMMITTEE CLERK, T. Campbell

#317775 REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MINUTES

Wednesday September 20, 2006 9:00 a.m. Regional Council Chamber 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario

Present were: Chair T. Galloway, J. Brewer, M. Connolly, J. Haalboom, C. Millar, J. Mitchell, W. Roth, B. Strauss, J. Wideman, and K. Seiling

Regrets: K. Denouden

The meeting commenced at 9:04 a.m.

DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

None declared.

DELEGATIONS

REPORTS - Finance a) F-06-060 2006 Fall Debenture Issue

Angela Hinchberger, Director of Financial Services, Treasury & Tax Policy provided an overview of the report highlighting the planned process during the municipal election period.

Received for Information.

REPORTS – Office of the Chief Administrator a) CA-EM-06-001 New Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act

Bryan Stortz, Director, Corporate Communications provided an overview of the report highlighting the new Provincial Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.

In response to Committee’s questions concerning response to emergencies within the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Mike Murray, Chief Administrative Officer advised the Region would continue to be first response.

In reference to Committee’s question concerning communication during an emergency, staff advised the Region has a radio voice system in place which would ensure communication to all necessary departments and services.

Committee requested follow-up be provided regarding financial arrangements to deal with potential costs and cost sharing.

Received for Information.

A&F - 2 - 06/09/20

REPORTS – Corporate Resources a) CR-FM-06-014 Pre-Budget Approval for Vehicle Procurement for 2007

Gary Sosnoski, Commissioner, Corporate Resources provided an overview of the report highlighting the reduction in the number of replacement vehicles for 2007.

In response to Committee’s question requesting a list of vehicles to be replaced, Ken Noonan, Director Facilities Management and Fleet Services advised the information will be available.

In response to Committee’s questions concerning vehicle specifications and cost allocation to departments, K. Noonan explained vehicle specifications vary depending on use and the cost is allocated to departments for which they are used.

MOVED by J. Wideman SECONDED by J. Brewer

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the pre-budget expenditure of $3,004,000 for the purchase of 42 vehicles scheduled for procurement in 2007 as set out in the 2006 10 Year Capital Plans of various departments to be funded from the appropriate vehicle/equipment reserve funds.

CARRIED

INFORMATION/CORRESPONDENCE

None.

OTHER BUSINESS

None.

NEXT MEETING- October 18, 2006

ADJOURN

The meeting adjourned at 9:30 a.m.

MOVED by C. Millar SECONDED by J. Brewer

THAT the meeting adjourn.

CARRIED

COMMITTEE CHAIR, T. Galloway

COMMITTEE CLERK, T. Campbell

318333

Report: F-06-061 REGION OF WATERLOO

FINANCE DEPARTMENT Purchasing Division

TO: Regional Chair Ken Seiling and Members of Regional Council

DATE: September 27, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: T2006-127 250 STRASBURG ROAD SECURITY FENCE, CITY OF KITCHENER

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept the tender of Ontario Parking Systems Limited for 250 Strasburg Road Security Fence, 250 Strasburg Road, Kitchener, Ontario at a total price of $117,319.74 including all applicable taxes.

SUMMARY:

Nil

REPORT:

Tenders were called for the 250 Strasburg Road Security Fence, 250 Strasburg Road, Kitchener Ontario and were opened in the presence of T. Lee, B.Zyta and J. Markovic.

The following tenders were received:

Ontario Parking Systems London, ON $117,319.74 Jared Enterprises Inc. Cambridge, ON $132,924.00

Advertisements for a pre-qualification were placed in the Record on Monday April 10, 2006. Three contractors were pre-qualified. The pre-qualified contractors were called for a mandatory site meeting of which one contractor chose not to submit a bid for the tender as they felt the scope of work was outside their ability. Two bids were received and reviewed by Facilities staff and the low bid is considered to be fair and reasonable.

The work of this contract is to increase security around the existing 250 Strasburg Road Transportation Operations Centre as part of the approved Transit Facility Strategy and Capital Program (CR-FM-04-014/E-04-089 dated May 18, 2004). It will involve the installation of new gates, controls, and monitoring equipment for the facility to ensure that the Grand River Transit bus fleet is kept secure during all times of the day.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

To ensure that we spend wisely the dollars that we are entrusted with and maximize their use for those we serve. Increasing the security of the Grand River Transit bus fleet is consistent with the Region’s Strategic Focus #5 “ensuring operational effectiveness and efficiency.”

Page 1 of 2

September 27, 2006 Report: F-06-061

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

T2006-127 $117,319.74 Contingency 12,000.00 Sub-Total $129,319.74 Less: Municipal Rebate of 6% G.S.T. (6,640.74) Total $122,679.00

The adjusted GRT Capital Program included $6,320,000 (CR-FM-06-009 dated June 20, 2006) in 2004 and 2005 for the expansion of the Strasburg Road facility to be funded from subsidy, development charges and debentures. Of this budget, $1,450,000 is available in 2006 to complete this expansion and $125,000 has been allocated to this work. The remaining funds have been allocated to other phases of the project.

The final date of acceptance for this tender is December 7, 2006.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE: Nil

ATTACHMENTS: Nil

PREPARED BY: C. Whitlock, Chief Purchasing Officer

APPROVED BY: L. Ryan, Chief Financial Officer

317610 Page 2 of 2 PS-060919

THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO PLANNING AND WORKS COMMITTEE

Summary of Recommendations to Council

The Planning and Works Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo take no action regarding the request for the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Regional Road #6 (Highland Road) and Glasgow Street, in the City of Kitchener.

AND THAT a review of the traffic light warrant for the intersection be completed by June 2008.

2. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the use of the Waterloo Landfill Site by the University of Waterloo for the purpose of establishing a technical scale demonstration facility for the processing of organic waste, with all subsequent required agreements subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

3. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept P-06-089, Monthly Report for Development activity for July and August 2006, dated September 19, 2006.

4. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the changes to Route 74 RIM Park shown in Appendix 2, as described in Report P-06-091, dated September 19, 2006, to take effect on Monday October 2, 2006.

5. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve an amendment to Controlled Access By-law #58-87 for a right-in, right-out only access on the east side of Regional Road #58 (Fischer-Hallman Road) approximately 135 metres north of Regional Road #50 (Westmount Road) in the City of Kitchener subject to Site Plan approval by the City of Kitchener, as explained in Report P-06-092, dated September 19, 2006.

6. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a ten-year Agreement with Think Plastics Inc. of New Hamburg, Ontario for the collection and processing of white agricultural bale wrap, at no cost to the Region of Waterloo, and subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

7. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo extend the trial period as required for the removal of the traffic control signals from operation at the intersection of Erb Street (Regional Road #9) and Erbsville Court, City of Waterloo, until a report comes back from staff.

September 19, 2006

#317606 SS-060919

THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE

Summary of Recommendations to Council

The Community Services Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo receive Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045, Update on the Region of Waterloo’s Affordable Housing Strategy, dated September 19, 2006, for information;

AND THAT the Region of Waterloo reiterate its request that the Provincial government provide sustainable supportive housing funding to the Region of Waterloo, including the proposed Sunnyside Supportive Housing Development.

2. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a purchase of service agreement, on a trial basis, for the provision of per diem for emergency and transitional shelter for prenatal and postnatal women (postnatal up to 90 days maximum) ages 16-25 from October 1, 2006 to December 31, 2007 with the following agencies:

a) Society of St. Vincent De Paul Kitchener Particular Council carrying on business (c.o.b.) as The Special Works Conference of St. Louise De Marillac (Marillac Place); and

b) Cara’s Hope Maternity Home

as outlined in Report SS-06-052, dated September 19, 2006.

3. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Provincial Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP), as detailed in Report SS-06-053, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Grant pre-budget approval for the allocation of one-time grants for January 1 to December 31, 2007 to the following community agencies subject to 100% funding from the Province:

Cambridge Kiwanis Village Non-Profit Housing – Supportive Housing $ 51,453 Cambridge Shelter Corporation – Welcome Aboard Drop-in $ 15,000 House of Friendship – Supportive Housing $ 243,015 K-W YWCA – Supportive Housing $ 162,046 Lutherwood - Rent Bank and Eviction Prevention $ 65,500 Lutherwood – Families in Transition $ 47,786 Reaching our Outdoor Friends – Outreach and Direct Support $ 30,424 Total $ 615,224

b) Request an increase in the CHPP allocation in the 2007 provincial budget submission to reflect actual community program and implementation costs under the CHPP Program Guidelines and Performance Measures; and

#317795 SS-060919

c) Request the Province reconvene the original provincial CHPP data working group to review and further refine data collected under CHPP.

4. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem as outlined in Report SS-06-054, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Increase the per diem between June 1 and December 31, 2006 up to $45.00 subject to Domiciliary Hostel Program operators’ commitment to comply with the Domiciliary Hostel Program minimum standards and subject to 100% funding by the Province of Ontario;

b) Increase the 2006 Operating Budget for Income Support Programs by $298,809 gross and $0 net; and

c) Forward the 2007 Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem rate to Budget Committee of the Whole for consideration during the 2007 Operating Budget process.

September 19, 2006

#317795 FS-060920

THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

Summary of Recommendations to Council

The Administration and Finance Committee recommends as follows:

1. THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the pre-budget expenditure of $3,004,000 for the purchase of 42 vehicles scheduled for procurement in 2007 as set out in the 2006 10 Year Capital Plans of various departments to be funded from the appropriate vehicle/equipment reserve funds.

September 20, 2006

#318901 MEDIA RELEASE: Friday, September 15, 2006, 4:30 p.m.

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO PLANNING AND WORKS COMMITTEE AGENDA

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:00 A.M. Council Chamber 2nd Floor, Regional Administration Building 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario

1. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

2. DELEGATIONS a) David Wellhauser, Waterloo, ON re: Three Subdivisions on Wilmot Line in Waterloo approved by the City of Waterloo b) Sue Pryde, Kitchener, ON re: Highland Rd/Glasgow Intersection c) Mike Delsey, Totten Sims Hubicki Associates and Fred Leech, Ministry of Transportation, Southwestern Region re: Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Class EA Study, from Highway 403 in Brantford to Highway 401 in Cambridge d) Dr. Wayne Parker, University of Waterloo re: Report E-06-102, University of Waterloo Organic Waste Research Project - Waterloo Landfill Site

3. REPORTS – TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION a) Weber Street Improvements, Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road, Information 1 Package in Advance of Public Information Centre

TRANSPORTATION b) E-06-090, Review for the Installation of Traffic Control Signals at the 30 Intersection of Regional Road #6 (Highland Road) and Glasgow Street, City of Kitchener c) E-06-094, New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road All-Way Stop 34

WASTE MANAGEMENT d) E-06-101, Agricultural Bale Wrap Recycling 36 e) E-06-102, University of Waterloo Organic Waste Research Project- Waterloo 38 Landfill Site

Agenda - 2 - September 19, 2006

REPORTS – PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

COMMUNITY PLANNING f) P-06-089, Monthly Report of Development Activity for July and August 2006 43

COMMUNITY SERVICES g) P-06-090, Building Permit Activity, January to June 2006 49

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING h) P-06-091, Route 74 RIM Park Service Improvements 55 i) P-06-092, Amendment to Regional Municipality of Waterloo Controlled Access 65 By-law #58-87 for an Access to Regional Road #58 (Fischer-Hallman Road), City of Kitchener j) P-06-093, Ministry of Transportation Highway 24 Transportation Corridor 69 Planning and Environmental Assessment Study - Highway 401 to Highway 403

5. OTHER BUSINESS

a) Council Enquiries and Requests for Information Tracking List 75

6. NEXT MEETING - October 3, 2006

7. CLOSED SESSION (motion required)

THAT a closed meeting of Planning & Works Committee be held on Tuesday, September 19, 2006, following the regular meeting of the Planning and Works Committee, in accordance with Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001, for the purposes of considering the following subject matters:

a) a proposed or pending acquisition of land for municipal purposes

8. ADJOURN

Document Number: 293202 Document Name: P&W AGENDA – SEPTEMBER 19 2006 Agenda - 3 - September 19, 2006

NEXT MEETINGS

Date Time Description Location

Planning and Works Committee

Tues., Oct. 3, 2006 9:00 A.M. Planning and Works Council Chamber Committee 2nd Floor, Regional Administration Building 150 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario

Tues., Oct. 17, 2006 9:00 A.M. Planning and Works Council Chamber Committee 2nd Floor, Regional Administration Building 150 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario Planning, Housing and Community Services

Thurs., Sept. 21, 2006 6:00 P.M. – Public Information Session St. Andrew’s 9:00 P.M. and Workshop Re: Rapid Presbyterian Church, Transit Environmental 54 Queen St. North Assessment Kitchener, Ontario Transportation and Environmental Services

Wed., Sept. 20, 2006 4:30 p.m. – Public Information Centre Christian Fellowship 8:00 p.m. Re: Weber Street Church, Improvements, Northfield 315 Northlake Drive, Drive to Benjamin Road Waterloo, Ontario

Wed., Oct. 4, 2006 4:30 p.m. – Public Information Centre Calvin Presbyterian 8:30 p.m. Re: Greenbrook Water Church, Treatment Plant 248 Westmount Road East Kitchener, Ontario

Document Number: 293202 Document Name: P&W AGENDA – SEPTEMBER 19 2006 Groundwater Protection or Residential Road Map Development

Response to Waterloo City Council’s approval of • Land-use planning Staff Report DS-06-16 • Concerns and Issues with DS-06-16 • Environmental Degradation and DS-06-16 Presentation to Regional Planning and Works Committee – Tuesday September 19, 2006 • Policy inconsistency and DS-06-16 By David Wellhauser HBA, MA, MPA, Bed Grand River Watershed • Conclusions and Questions Waterlooians.ca Spokesperson Member of Citizens for the Protection of the Waterloo Moraine (CPWM)

Issues and Concerns Land Use Planning and (not exhaustive): Private Development Bias Leads to Environmental Degradation of the Community • Water quantity and quality issues • Private interests may have deleterious • Air pollution and incomplete environmental assessments

implications despite the benefits they may bring Does not conform to all necessary OMB, Regional, or Provincial about and thus must be reconciled with the policy and legislation • Non-conforming to Regional Policy interests that the public has for appropriate • Non-conforming to 1992 Ontario Municipal Board ruling development that takes into consideration other • Non-conforming to Planning Act and March 2005 Provincial Policy values such as environmental protection and not Statement overburdening municipal services (Swaigen, Therefore, Waterloo City Staff Report DS-06-16 appears to 1993). represent bad planning.

1 Pro-development bias trumps Groundwater volumes are in short supply in community health considerations Region of Waterloo. • Policy failure demonstrates institutional barriers to sustainable planning.

• Bias has lead to the approval of subdivision report DS-06-16 which violates Regional and Provincial policy and will adversely affect Regional water quality and quantity.

Local Context – Drinking Water Groundwater volumes are in short supply in Region of Waterloo. and Public Health • Elmira – groundwater is unsafe to drink due to chemical Scarcity of groundwater is why contamination. • Cambridge – “Old dry cleaning leaves dirty legacy: study we protect this renewable resource! to determine if chemicals a risk to Cambridge drinking water” (KW Record, Feb. 14, 2005) • Kitchener – Greenbrook Wells closed due to chemical contamination (KW Record, 2004-2005) • Waterloo – “Discoloured water stumps city officials” (Waterloo Chronicle, Jan. 19, 2005) • Waterloo Region – “Region’s tap water high in salt” (KW Record, Feb. 14, 2001). Furthermore, Region is targeted for growth by provincial government (estimates of 500,000 new residents)

2 Local Context – Drinking Water Groundwater volumes are in short supply in and Public Health Region of Waterloo. • Minister of Public Infrastructure and Renewal David Caplan stated the Provincial government would “intervene in development projects to protect groundwater” (Places to Grow Consultation, Kitchener, Tuesday July 20, 2004) The Record • Recently in Waterloo – “Whoa water! Project too close to water 5 July 2006 table; ditches collapse” on the Wideman Road dewatering of 5,000,000 pristine litres of water (Waterloo Chronicle, July 5, 2006)

• July 17, 2006 Waterloo City Council approved DS-06-16, the development of 1378-1618 residential units for a population of 4,000-4,500 people. These subdivisions are located on significant groundwater recharge areas on the Waterloo Moraine located on the northwest corner of the City of Waterloo. These developments will have adverse impacts on the long term health and well being of Waterloo and represent bad planning

Air pollution and incomplete environmental assessments Non-conformity

1. The residential developments will have a significant impact on air pollution. No air quality studies have been conducted. • Non-conforming to Regional Policy

2. Columbia Street connection to the Wilmot Line: adversely affect northern route of Wilmot Line • Non-conforming to 1992 Ontario Municipal “Traffic increases on the Wilmot Line will be attributed to increased Board ruling background traffic, not these subdivisions” not supported by facts or evidence (DS-06-16, pg 56).

Wilmot south 6,000-7,000 vehicles a day (DS-06-16, pg. 54). • Non-conforming to Planning Act and March 2005 Provincial Policy Statement 3. Class environmental assessment not completed for Erb St./Wilmot Line (DS-06-16, pg. 61).

3 Non-conformity to Regional Degradation to ESPA 19 Policy ESPA 19 • Region of Waterloo CL1 designation: • The proposed residential developments These are preservation areas intended to preserve, enhance and protect important environmental features from land use impacts that ignore Regional policy dealing with would detrimentally alter of impair their size, physical form, significant nature heritage features as ecological functions and/or quality. Traditional urban development designated by Regional Constrain Level is not permitted within CL1 areas or their associated buffers, with the exception of public services. (DS-06-16, pg. 34). One status, which according to the proposal are knowingly being degraded. This demonstrates that the proposal does • City of Waterloo Key District Plan Objectives: Retention of ESPA 19 (Forested Hills) and significant environmental not conform to Regional policy. features (DS-06-16, pg. 18)

Effects of development Effects of development on on ESPA 19 ESPA 19 con’t… • “The ecologist is of the opinion that the proposed buffers • “The LMR study has documented 45 species of will protect and maintain ESPA 19 post development, recognizing that the forest is transitioning [degrading] to birds, 14 of which are considered species at risk” an urban woodlot and some sensitive urban sensitive (DS-06-16, pg. 39). species will be lost” (DS-06-16, pg. 37).

• “However, some urban-sensitive species residing in the • “The [scoped] EIS concludes that the forest may be displaced as it transitions [degrades] to subdivisions will displace one regionally an urban woodlot. For example, some sensitive bird significant bird species (Vesper Sparrow) as a species have declined in the ESPA neck and lobe in result of habitat loss” (DS-06-16, pg. 37). recent years as the adjacent lands developed” (DS-06- 16, pg. 37).

4 Non-conforming to 1992 Ontario Non-conforming to 1992 Ontario Municipal Board ruling Municipal Board ruling • The 1992 OMB decision on these disputed What the DS-06-16 says: lands places several constraints on the “Cut and till is typically in the order of 1-4 metres, proposed developments. however up to 9 metres of cut and 7 metres of fill will be required on some portions of land” (DS- • They must work with the existing 06-16, pg. 75) topography of the land not adversely affect natural ecological functions, e.g. water Region’s Long Term Water Strategy includes a recharge, quality, and flow. pipeline to Lake Erie (DS-06-16, pg. 49). This is an inferior source of water.

Summary of Issues and Conclusion: Waterloo City Staff Report Concerns (not exhaustive): DS-06-16 represents bad planning Leads to Environmental Degradation of the Community • There are still outstanding issues with the • Water quantity and quality issues proposed subdivision as outlined by global • Air pollution and incomplete environmental assessments groundwater specialist Dr. Emil Frind Does not conform to all necessary OMB, Regional, or Provincial policy and legislation during his July 17, 2006 presentation to • Non-conforming to Regional Policy Council on this matter and reported on by • Non-conforming to 1992 Ontario Municipal Board ruling the local media. • Non-conforming to Planning Act and March 2005 • The root source of water pollution should Provincial Policy Statement be addressed, source groundwater Therefore, Waterloo City Staff Report DS-06-16 appears to represent bad planning. protection.

5 Waterloo City Staff Report DS-06-16 represents bad planning con’t… Questions • Current proposal creates false sense of water • Who is liable for the destruction of our security and is inadequate in ensuring water groundwater supply resulting from these security for exploding population. subdivisions if they are approved? • Proposed developments represent traditional • Why given the political nature of these standard practices and are not based on subdivisions is Region Council not voting on this principles of sustainable development. matter? • The subdivisions as presented in Waterloo City • How does this committee respond to the policy Staff Report DS-06-16, can not be approved as inconsistency of these proposed subdivisions? the plan of subdivision does not comply with • Will this committee recommend Regional Municipal, Regional, and Provincial policy. Council vote on the approval of DS-06-16?

The answer is because Waterloo is Why are we destroying beautiful landscapes running out of appropriate and important groundwater recharge areas undevelopment land. in the northwest side of Waterloo?

6 References References Con’d…

• City of Waterloo Staff Report DS-06-16 • Ontario Provincial Policy Statement March 2005 • Makuch, S.M. from Municipal and Planning Law. Carswell Publishing, 2004. • Swaigen, John and David Estrin. “Environment on trial: a guide to Ontario environmental law and policy”. Canadian • Ontario Planning Act Institute for Environmental Law and Policy. Toronto : E. Montgomery Publications Ltd., 1993

7

Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Class Environmental Assessment Study

Region of Waterloo Planning & Public Works Committee September 19th, 2006 9:00 am

www.24corridorstudy.ca

Purpose of Today’s Presentation

z Provide an overview of: – Study Purpose – Study Process – Outreach and Consultation Program – Study Schedule – Public Information Centre #1

www.24corridorstudy.ca

Study Purpose

z Develop a plan that addresses:

– Capacity, operation and safety needs between the built-up areas of Brantford and Cambridge for the movement of people and goods

– Linkage needs between Highway 403 and 401 for broader transportation connections to other regions in the province

z Prepare a preliminary design for provincial roadway components of recommended plan

www.24corridorstudy.ca

1 Study Purpose (cont’d) z The study will: – Review and build on findings of the MTO 2004 Study Design Report – Address policies and growth forecasts of the Final Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, released by the province in June 2006 – Develop a highway access management plan for Highway 24 – Be carried out as a Group ‘A’ project in accordance with the Class Environmental Assessment Process for Provincial Transportation Facilities

www.24corridorstudy.ca

Analysis Area z Aboriginal Stakeholders: – Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation – Six Nations of the Grand River First Nation z Municipal Stakeholders: – City of Brantford – City of Cambridge – Region of Waterloo – County of Brant – Wellington County – Township of North Dumfries – Township of Puslinch – City of Hamilton z Plus: business/commercial, emergency service providers, general public, regulatory agencies, transportation service providers and utility companies

www.24corridorstudy.ca

Overview of Study Process z Comprehensive planning & EA process (3-year schedule) z Entire study detailed at outset in a Study Plan z 6 Study Phases z 6 Key Points of Decision-Making z 6 Rounds of PICs as part of proactive outreach and consultation program z 11 Reports prepared to support decision-making, outreach and consultation

www.24corridorstudy.ca

2 Study Phases z Study Plan z Transportation Needs Assessment z Preliminary Planning for Provincial Roadways z Detailed Planning for Provincial Roadways z Preliminary Design for Provincial Roadways z Transportation Environmental Study Report

www.24corridorstudy.ca

Study Reports z Reports A through K z Working Papers and Milestone Reports z 30-day Review Period for Working Papers z 60-day Review Period for Milestone Reports z Tight schedule requires overlap of review period with next stage of work (“homework”)

www.24corridorstudy.ca

Outreach and Consultation Program z Early and ongoing z Study Newsletters (7) z Municipal Advisory Group z Regulatory Advisory Group z Council Presentations z Public Information Centres (6 rounds) z Public Notices in Newspapers z Project Website z Toll Free Telephone Number (1 866 437-2304)

www.24corridorstudy.ca

3 Public Information Centre #1

z Location / Date: – Cambridge: September 26th – Brantford: September 27th z Information to be Presented: – Draft Report A: Study Plan – Draft Report B: Overview of Transportation, Land Use and Economic Conditions – Draft Report F (Part 1): Environmental Conditions and Constraints – Proposed approach to upcoming work

www.24corridorstudy.ca

Study Schedule

Study Schedule Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Class EA Study

2006 2007 2008 2009 Study Phase 1. Study Plan 2. Transportation Needs Assessment 3. Preliminary Planning for Provincial Roadways 4. Detailed Planning for Provincial Roadways 5. Preliminary Design for Provincial Roadways 6. Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR)

Public Information Centres

September 2006

www.24corridorstudy.ca

THANK YOU

QUESTIONS?

www.24corridorstudy.ca

4

Regional Municipality of Waterloo

WEBER STREET IMPROVEMENTS 100 METRES NORTH OF NORTHFIELD DRIVE TO BENJAMIN ROAD City of Waterloo

INFORMATION PACKAGE

Public Information Centre Wednesday, September 20, 2006 4:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

at

Christian Fellowship Church 315 Northlake Drive Waterloo

There is a Comment Sheet at the back of this package. If you wish, please fill it out and deposit it in the designated box provided at this Information Centre.

DOCS #291524-v3

1. What is the Purpose of this Public Information Centre? The Region of Waterloo is currently undertaking a Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Study to consider road improvements on Weber Street from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road in the City of Waterloo. (Please refer to Appendix “A” for a Key Plan). Weber Street is an arterial roadway under the jurisdiction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Northfield Drive is an arterial roadway under the jurisdiction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Benjamin Road is a boundary roadway between the City of Waterloo and the Township of Woolwich. Weber Street in this section is intersected by Golden Eagle Road, Randall Drive and Swallow Street, which are local roadways under the jurisdiction of the City of Waterloo. Improvements currently under consideration include:

· Reconstruction of Weber Street; · Widening sections of Weber Street to provide two (2) through lanes in each direction; · Construction of reserved on-road cycling facilities on each side of Weber Street; · Intersection improvements at Golden Eagle Road, Randall Drive, Swallow Street and Benjamin Road; · Possible construction of a roundabout at the Weber Street and Randall Drive intersection ; and · Construction of new sidewalk on both sides of Weber Street between Swallow Street and Benjamin Road.

This Information Centre is a forum for you to: · Become informed of the current and future traffic operational issues; · Review the design alternatives that have been developed; · Learn how these alternatives are being evaluated by the Project Team; understand how a preliminary preferred alternative is being identified; and how a recommended alternative will ultimately be established; · Ask questions of Regional and City staff; and · Provide comments on the design alternatives under consideration and indicate which alternative you prefer.

We kindly request that you fill out the Comment Sheet attached to the back of this Information Package and place it in the box at this Information Centre or send it to the address indicated on the Comment Sheet. Your comments will be considered by the Project Team, in conjunction with all of the other relevant information, in establishing a preferred design for roadway improvements on Weber Street from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road.

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 1

2. What is the Class Environmental Assessment Process? This Class EA Study is being carried out in accordance with the Environmental Assessment Act and is following the approved environmental planning process for Schedule “C” projects under the “Municipal Class Environmental Assessment” (2000). Please refer to Appendix ‘B’ for information about the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Process.

3. Who is directing this Class Environmental Assessment Study? This Class EA Study is being directed by a “Project Team” consisting of staff from the Region of Waterloo, City of Waterloo, Regional Councillor Bill Strauss and City of Waterloo Councillor Jim Bolger. The engineering consulting firm of Totten Sims Hubicki Associates has been retained by the Region to carry out the Class EA Study.

4. Why are we Considering Road Improvements? The intersection of Northfield Drive and Weber Street was reconstructed in 2004 in conjunction with the widening of Northfield Drive. Accordingly, the southerly limit for this Class EA Study is approximately 100 metres north of Northfield Drive. The existing pavement within the section of Weber Street from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road is in generally poor condition and in need of reconstruction. The Region of Waterloo’s Transportation Master Plan, completed in April 1999, identified the need to make capacity improvements on Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road within five (5) to ten (10) years to accommodate projected traffic growth. Significant growth in recent years in the north-west area of the City of Waterloo has resulted in the need to consider roadway capacity improvements at this time in conjunction with the proposed pavement reconstruction. Additionally, a new Power Centre is proposed at the intersection of King Street and Farmer’s Market Road in the Township of Woolwich which, will result in increased traffic on this section of Weber Street. Weber Street from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road is also identified in the Region’s 2004 Cycling Master Plan Update as being a candidate for reserved on-road cycling facilities.

A detailed traffic study has been completed by the firm of Totten Sims Hubicki Associates as part of this Class Environmental Assessment Study. The purpose of the traffic study was to examine existing traffic operations within the study area, forecast future traffic volumes, and identify and evaluate alternative solutions for accommodating projected traffic volumes and improving traffic operations. The traffic study focused on the following transportation aspects:

· Existing traffic operations on Weber Street including the current level-of-service at intersections during peak traffic periods; · Projected traffic volumes on Weber Street in the year 2018 and the resulting traffic operations on Weber Street in that year; and · Options to improve traffic operations on Weber Street to accommodate future projected traffic volumes.

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 2

The traffic study analyzed future traffic operations under various alternative improvement concepts to determine the effectiveness of the alternatives from a transportation perspective. Alternatives analyzed in the traffic study included: reconstructing Weber Street in its current two-lane roadway configuration, reconstructing Weber Street to five lanes from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to south of Randall Drive and three lanes from south of Randall Drive to Benjamin Road with intersection improvements and permanent traffic control signals at Randall Drive; and reconstructing Weber Street to five lanes from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to south of Randall Drive and three lanes from south of Randall Drive to Benjamin Road, including intersection improvements and a roundabout at Randall Drive. The five lane section would extend from Golden Eagle Road northerly to approximately 230m north of Golden Eagle Road, where it would taper into 3 lanes at Randall Drive. Current and projected traffic volumes on Weber Street within the Study limits are shown in Appendix ‘C’ of this Information Package. These traffic projections take into consideration the proposed Power Centre development (in the Town of Woolwich) and a projected increase in public usage of Grand River Transit services over the next several years in accordance with the Region’s Transportation Demand Initiatives to encourage alternative modes of travel. The traffic study concluded that some capacity improvements to Weber Street are required in order to address future traffic operational issues. The traffic study also found that, based on projected volumes on Weber Street in 2018, providing four (4) through lanes on Weber Street within the entire study limits is not warranted. The traffic study provided the following recommendations to improve future traffic operations on Weber Street from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road:

· Widen Weber Street from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to just south of Randall Drive to provide two(2) through lanes in each direction; · Construct new left-turn lanes at Golden Eagle Road, Randall Drive, and Swallow Street; · Extend the length of the existing left-turn lane at Benjamin Road; · Provide improved access to abutting properties fronting onto Weber Street through construction of a continuous turn lane from Golden Eagle Road to Benjamin Road; and · Install permanent traffic signals or a roundabout at Randall Drive.

5. What Design Alternatives are Being Considered? Prior to this Information Centre, the following three (3) design alternatives were developed by the Project Team to address the recommendations contained in the traffic study and the Regional Cycling Master Plan. Each design alternative includes reconstruction of the deteriorated road structure on Weber Street with curb and gutter, construction of reserved on-road cycling lanes on each side of Weber Street and sidewalk from Swallow Street to Benjamin Road. (Please refer to Appendix “D” for cross- section drawings of each of the design alternatives).

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 3

Alternative 1: Reconstruct Weber Street in its Current two-lane configuration. Alternative 2A: Reconstruct Weber Street to five lanes from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to south of Randall Drive and three lanes from south of Randall Drive to Benjamin Road including permanent traffic control signals at Randall Drive. Alternative 2B: Reconstruct Weber Street to five lanes from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to south of Randall Drive and three lanes from south of Randall Drive to Benjamin Road including a Roundabout at Randall Drive. Under Alternatives 2A and 2B, the five lane section would extend from Golden Eagle Road northerly to approximately 230m north of Golden Eagle Road, where it would taper into 3 lanes at Randall Drive Under Alternatives 2A and 2B, new left-turn lanes are provided on Weber Street at Golden Eagle Road, Randall Drive and Swallow Street, and the storage length of the existing turn lanes south of Benjamin Road are extended. Additionally, a continuous turn lane is provided between intersections from Golden Eagle Road to Benjamin Road to provide access to properties fronting onto Weber Street.

The traffic study identified that widening the entire length of Weber Street from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road to provide two (2) lanes of traffic in each direction would provide limited additional benefit from a transportation perspective based on 2018 traffic projections. In consideration of the associated high capital cost, significant environmental impacts and limited traffic benefits, the Project Team concluded that widening Weber Street from south of Randall Drive northerly to four(4) lanes did not warrant further consideration at this time.

6. How are the Design Alternatives being Evaluated? The following criteria are being used by the Project Team to evaluate the alternatives: Transportation: How does the alternative serve the expected vehicular, transit, pedestrian and cycling traffic in terms of travel delay, safety and emergency access? Social Environment: How does the alternative affect the residential and commercial properties abutting the road (driveways/access, on-site parking, noise)? Natural Environment: How does the alternative affect existing trees, vegetation and air quality? Cost: What is the total cost of the alternative including the cost for road construction, utility and street-lighting relocations, property acquisitions, traffic signal improvements and landscaping?

Each alternative has been preliminarily evaluated by the Project Team using the aforementioned criteria. The Project Team notes that all three (3) design alternatives remain under consideration and are being presented for public comment at this Public Information Centre. Upon receiving input from the public and technical agencies, the Project Team will re-assess the alternatives before identifying a Recommended Design Alternative for approval by Regional Council.

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 4

7. Which Design Alternative is Preferred by the Project Team?

The Project Team has identified either Alternative 2A or 2B as the preliminarily preferred option. Although both Alternatives 2A and 2B accommodate projected traffic volumes and result in an acceptable level-of-service at the intersections within the Study Limits, Alternative 2B (which includes a roundabout at Randall Drive) was deemed to provide only a marginal benefit from a transportation standpoint compared to traffic control signals. Unfortunately, Alternative 2B requires some property acquisition from abutting properties on the east side of Weber Street and more extensive utility relocations than Alternative 2A, which increases the construction cost and the lead time required for construction. Alternative 2B also has greater impacts on trees and private properties than Alternative 2A. The Project Team will undertake a detailed cost-benefit analysis following this Public Information Centre to further assess the viability of constructing a roundabout at Weber Street and Randall Drive. At this time the Project Team is seeking public input regarding the design alternatives, particularly the consideration of traffic control signals or a roundabout at the intersection of Weber Street and Randall Drive. The Project Team will consider the public input along with other technical and financial considerations to ultimately develop the Recommended Design Alternative for this project.

Please refer to Appendix “E” for general information regarding the operation and benefits of roundabout.

Alternative 1 does not address the traffic needs on Weber Street and therefore was not selected as the preferred option by the Project Team.

Please refer to Appendix “F” for a summary of the Project Team’s preliminary evaluation of the design alternatives.

8. What Other Improvements are being Planned for this Project?

Sidewalk

New sections of concrete sidewalk will be constructed on both sides of Weber Street between Swallow Street and Benjamin Road.

Street Lighting

Street lighting may be upgraded on Weber Street from Northfield Drive to Randall Drive due to the increased pavement width.

Grand River Transit

Two Grand River Transit Stops along Weber Street between Northfield Drive and Golden Eagle Road will be reconstructed and shelters possibly provided.

Landscaping

As part of the proposed improvements, new boulevard shrubs and trees will be planted in suitable areas to enhance the natural environment. Should a roundabout be constructed at Randall Drive, new landscaping features will be implemented within the roundabout.

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 5

City of Waterloo Watermain Upgrades

All watermain valves and hydrants within the study limits were found to be in poor condition and require replacement. The City of Waterloo has budgeted $60,000 in their Capital Program for these replacements and has requested that these works be completed in conjunction with the proposed road improvements on Weber Street.

9. What are the Impacts to the Natural Environmental Features? All design alternatives require that the existing ditches adjacent to the roadway be filled in to accommodate the curb and gutter, reserved on-road cycling lanes and sidewalks. Under these design alternatives, storm water will be directed to storm sewers via catch basins located along the curb and gutter. This type of storm water collection system is common in urban areas; however, it is not as beneficial as grassed ditches are in removing sediment from the storm water. In order to mitigate this impact, the roadside catch basins will be equipped with sumps to collect sediment from the storm water runoff prior to discharge to the storm sewer system. Additionally, it is proposed that the quality of stormwater be improved prior to discharge to Forwell Creek by the installation of “Stormceptors” to remove the silt and most suspended solids from the stormwater.

Alternative 2B (roundabout at Randall Drive) requires that eight (8) trees on the east side of Weber Street south of Randall Drive be removed. These trees would be replaced with trees of a similar type on a 2-for-1 basis in accordance with Regional Policy. Alternative 2A has no tree impacts. Sediment and erosion control features will be designed, implemented and maintained throughout construction regardless of which design alternative is constructed. Key measures of this sediment and erosion control plan will include silt fencing, temporary tree protection fencing, check dams, temporary sediment basins and other Best Practice measures.

10. Will the Posted Speed Limit be Changed or Parking Restrictions Implemented?

Weber Street is currently posted at 60 km/hr within the Study limits. No change to the posted speed limit is proposed.

Design alternatives 2A and 2B include reserved cycling lanes on each side of Weber Street. Where reserved cycling lanes are located, on-street parking is not permitted at any time. If either of these alternatives is constructed, parking would therefore be prohibited at all times on Weber Street within the project limits and a Regional By-law would be passed to formalize this parking restriction.

11. When will Construction Occur? Construction is tentatively scheduled to commence in April, 2008 and be completed in September, 2008. Subject to completion of the Class EA Study and receipt of all technical and financial approvals, construction may be advanced to 2007. The timing of construction will be confirmed upon completion of this Class EA Study in early 2007.

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 6

12. How does this Project Address the Region’s Transportation Master Plan and Regional Cycling Master Plan?

The Transportation Master Plan, approved in 1999, incorporates an auto reduction strategy which emphasizes maximizing use of the existing transportation system; and, assuming a more than doubling in transit, pedestrian and cycling trips, targets a 7% reduction in the percentage of future total trips made by autos by the year 2016. This auto reduction target is considered to be aggressive and will be accomplished through Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies focusing on public transit enhancements, cycling and pedestrian facilities and TDM supportive land uses.

As part of this Class Environmental Assessment Study, the Project Team is considering reserved on-road cycling lanes and new pedestrian facilities. Grand River Transit will be considering service enhancements on Weber Street in the future as part of its on-going efforts to enhance the transit network and increase ridership.

13. How will Traffic and Property Access be Maintained during Construction? It is anticipated that two-way traffic on Weber Street will likely be maintained during construction. Access to private driveways will be maintained during construction, with the exception of possible limited short-term periods when access may not be feasible, in which case arrangements for alternate access will be made.

14. Will Property be Required?

If Alternative 2A is approved as the Recommended Design Alternative, it is not anticipated that any property acquisition will be required for this project.

Alternative 2B requires that property be acquired by the Region from abutting property owners at No. 608 Weber Street and No 620. Weber Street, on the north-east and south-east corners of the intersection of Weber Street and Randall Drive, in order to accommodate the roundabout.

In areas where property is required, the property owner will be contacted directly by the Region of Waterloo’s Land Purchasing Officer. Compensation will be provided at fair market rates based on recent similar area sales.

15. Has Traffic Noise been Considered?

As part of this Class Environmental Assessment Study, a noise assessment study has been completed in accordance with Ministry of the Environment (MOE) and Region of Waterloo requirements. The Region’s “Implementation Guideline for Noise Policies (July, 1999) - Part “B” stipulates that a noise assessment be completed to determine the current and the projected daytime noise levels in ten (10) years time for the outdoor living area of the abutting properties where the existing roadway is proposed to be widened. Noise attenuation measures will be recommended for consideration by area residents, Area Municipal Council and Regional Council where: Ø The projected noise level exceeds 65 decibels (dBA); or Ø The projected noise level exceeds 60 dBA and the difference between the existing and projected noise levels is 5 dBA or more. DOCS #291524-v3 Page 7

The results of the noise assessment study for the most noise sensitive properties abutting Weber Street are summarized as follows:

Un-attenuated Modelled Day-time Noise Levels in Outdoor Living Areas of Adjacent Residential Properties(dBA) Section of Weber 2006 2018 *Change in Street dBA 101Golden Eagle 62.81 64.02 1.21 Drive 176B Coghill Place 63.17 64.33 1.16 335 Northlake Drive 60.06 61.51 1.45 * A noise level increase of 1-3 dBA is generally imperceptible.

Since the projected noise levels do no exceed 65 dBA and the increase in noise levels from 2006 to 2018 do not exceed 5 dBA, as per the Region’s Noise Policy, noise walls are not warranted and will not be implemented for this project.

16. What is the Estimated Cost of this Project? The preliminary estimated project cost of road improvements for the three alternatives are as following:

Ø Alternative 1 - $2.4M.

Ø Alternative 2A - $2.8M.

Ø Alternative 2B - $3.2M.

The City of Waterloo will fund the watermain upgrades described in Section 8 of this Information Package.

17. How will this Project be Funded? $3.5 million funding for the proposed road improvements is included in years 2006, 2007 and 2008 of the Region’s approved 2006 Transportation Capital Program to be funded from the Roads Capital Levy and the Development Charge Reserve Funds. The funds budgeted include the cost of constructing all road improvements excluding the City of Waterloo’s watermain upgrades.

18. What is the Next Step in Choosing a Recommended Design Alternative? Prior to making a final decision on the preferred design alternative, the Project Team is asking for the public’s input. This Public Information Centre is your opportunity to ask questions, provide suggestions, and indicate which alternative you prefer. Any public input received by the Region will be given careful consideration and will be documented as part of the Class EA Process. Once your input is received, it will be used by the Project Team, in conjunction with the other relevant information, to re-assess the alternatives and establish a Recommended Design Alternative for this project.

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 8

After the Project Team identifies the Recommended Design Alternative, we will advise all those who attended the Information Centre as well as adjacent property owners and tenants of the Recommended Design Alternative and you will have future opportunities to comment.

19. When will a Final Decision be Made for this Project? The Project Team intends to review the public comments received from today’s Public Information Centre and use them as input for developing a Recommended Design Alternative for this project. The Recommended Design Alternative will be presented to the Region’s Planning and Works Committee for their endorsement in early 2007. At this meeting, members of the public will be given an opportunity to provide comments on this project. Pending Committee endorsement, final approval of the Recommended Design Alternative for this project will be considered by Regional Council in early 2007. When Regional Council has made its decision as to which alternative will be constructed for this project, the Environmental Study Report will be filed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days. Anyone still opposed to the Recommended Design Alternative would have thirty (30) days, after the notice of filing of the Environmental Study Report is advertised, to request a Part II Order. A person or party may request that the Minister of the Environment make an order for the project to comply with Part II of the Environmental Assessment Act. Such requests must be received, in writing by the Ontario Minister of Environment, with a copy sent to the Region’s Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services. If there are no Part II order requests received in the 30-day period, the Recommended Design Alternative can proceed to design and construction in accordance with the concepts prescribed in the Environmental Study Report.

20. How will I Receive Further Notification regarding this Project? Adjacent property owners and tenants, as well as members of the public registering at this Public Information Centre, will receive further information and will be notified of future meetings via mail and/or hand delivered notices.

21. How can I Voice my Comments at this Stage? In order to assist us in addressing any comments or concerns you might have regarding this project, we ask that you please fill out the attached Comment Sheet and leave it in the box provided at the registration table. Alternatively, you can mail, fax or e-mail your comments to the Region of Waterloo, not later than September 29, 2006. We thank you for your involvement and should you have any questions please contact:

Mr. Ismail Abushehada, P. Eng. Senior Project Manager Regional Municipality of Waterloo Phone: 519-575-4757 Ext. 3184 150 Frederick St., 6th Floor Fax: 519-575-4430 Kitchener, ON Email: [email protected] N2G 4J3

DOCS #291524-v3 Page 9

Appendix A

Key Plan

DOCS #291524-v3

WEBER STREET IMPROVEMENTS – KEY PLAN

Appendix B

Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process

DOCS #291524-v3

MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS

ONTARIO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ACT The purpose of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act (EA Act) is to provide for “the betterment of the people of the whole or any part of Ontario by providing for the protection, conservation and wise management of the environment in Ontario”. Environment is applied broadly and includes the natural, social, cultural, built and economic components. The key principles of successful environmental assessment planning include: · Consultation with stakeholders and affected members of the public; · Consideration of a reasonable range of alternatives; · Assessment of the environmental impacts for each alternative; · Systematic evaluation of alternatives; and · Clear documentation of the process followed.

MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) The Municipal Class EA is a planning process approved under the Environmental Assessment Act that is used by municipalities to plan infrastructure enhancement projects while satisfying the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. Under the Class EA process, projects are planned in one of three ways depending on their scope, complexity, and potential for adverse environmental impacts. Schedule “A” - Includes routine maintenance, operation and emergency activities. - The Municipality can proceed with this work without further approval or public consultation. Schedule “B” - Includes projects with the potential for some adverse environmental effects. - These projects are subject to a screening process that includes consultation with directly affected public and agencies. Schedule “C” - Includes larger, more complex projects with the potential for significant environmental affects. - These projects are subject to all phases of the Class EA and require a minimum of 3 points of public contact.

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Members of the public that have a stake in the project are encouraged to provide comment throughout the Class EA process. For Schedule “C” projects there are a minimum of three (3) opportunities for public contact. These typically include two Public Information Centers and the Notice of Study Completion.

Class EA Process for Schedule “C” Projects

Change in Project Status – Appeal Provision It is recommended that all stakeholders (including the proponent, public and review agencies) work together to determine the preferred means of addressing a problem or opportunity. If you have any concerns, you should discuss them with the proponent and try to resolve them. In the event that there are major issues which cannot be resolved, you may request the Minister of the Environment by order to require a proponent to comply with Part II of the EA Act before proceeding with a proposed undertaking which has been subject to Class EA requirements. This is called a “Part II Order”. The Minister will make one of the following decisions: 1. Deny the request (with or without conditions); 2. Refer the matter to mediation; or 3. Require the proponent to comply with Part II of the EA Act, ordering a full Environmental Assessment. All stakeholders are urged to try to resolve issues since it is preferable for them to be resolved by the municipality in which a project is located, rather than at the provincial level. To request a Part II Order, a person must send a written request to : Minister of the Environment 135 St. Clair Avenue West 12th Floor Toronto, ON M4V 1P5 The request must address the following with respect to the identified concerns: · Environmental Impacts and specific concerns; · Adequacy of the planning and public consultation process; · Involvement of the person in the planning process; and · Details of discussions held between the person and the proponent.

Appendix C

Current And Projected Traffic Volumes

DOCS #291524-v3

CURRENT AND PROJECTED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES

WEBER STREET – NORTHFIELD DRIVE TO BENJAMIN ROAD

2006 Projected 2018* Peak Traffic Peak Traffic Weber Street Volumes Volumes

(veh/hr peak (veh/hr peak direction) direction) Northfield Drive to 900 1236 Golden Eagle Road Golden Eagle Road to 713 1022 Randall Drive Randall Drive to Swallow 534 756 Street Swallow Street to 385 624 Benjamin Road

*Note: The traffic study concluded that widening Weber Street to provide 4 through lanes of traffic from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to 230 metres north of Golden Eagle Road is required to accommodate projected 2018 traffic volumes.

Appendix D

DRAWINGS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

DOCS #291524-v3

Alternative 1: Reconstruct Weber Street in its Current 2-lane Configuration with Curb and Gutter and On-Road Cycling Lanes

WEBER STREET TYPICAL SECTION

2 LANES WITH CYCLING LANES AND CURB & GUTTER

Alternative 2A: Reconstruct Weber Street to 5 lanes from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to south of Randall Drive and to 3 lanes from south of Randall Drive to Benjamin Road with Curb and Gutter, reserved on-road Cycling Lanes and Traffic Control Signals at Randall Drive

WEBER STREET TYPICAL SECTIONS

5 LANES WITH CYCLING LANES (100 METRES NORTH OF NORTHFIELD DRIVE TO SOUTH OF RANDALL DRIVE)

3 LANES WITH CYCLING LANES (SOUTH OF RANDALL DRIVE TO BENJAMIN ROAD)

Alternative 2B: Reconstruct Weber Street to 5 lanes from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to south of Randall Drive and to 3 lanes from south of Randall Drive to Benjamin Road with Curb and Gutter, reserved on-road Cycling Lanes and a Roundabout at Randall Drive

WEBER STREET TYPICAL SECTIONS

5 LANES WITH CYCLING LANES (100 METRES NORTH OF NORTHFIELD DRIVE TO SOUTH OF RANDALL DRIVE)

3 LANES WITH CYCLING LANES (SOUTH OF RANDALL DRIVE TO BENJAMIN ROAD)

Alternative 2B

Appendix E

Roundabouts - Fact Sheet

DOCS #291524-v3

Why use modern roundabouts at traffic intersections?

A modern roundabout is a circular-shaped intersection in which all traffic flows through the intersection in a counterclockwise direction. Although a modern roundabout is similar to neighborhood traffic circles and old-style rotary intersections, a modern roundabout has specific geometric features that allow it to provide superior traffic-carrying capacity and exhibit better safety performance than these other types of circular intersections.

Modern roundabouts are currently in widespread use in the United Kingdom, Australia and many mainland European countries and have been implemented in various locations in the United States. The main benefits of roundabouts are:

· roundabouts generally provide a greater level of safety than other types of intersections for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists and have been proven to dramatically reduce injury collision rates (70 to 90%) at intersections converted from traffic signals;

· roundabouts can accommodate the volumes of traffic typically experienced on our Regional roads and typically will outperform, in terms of delays and queues, a similar sized All-Way Stop Control or a signalized intersection;

· roundabouts have lower negative environmental impacts because the lower delays associated with them result in lower fuel consumption and lower vehicle emissions; and

· roundabouts provide more opportunities to improve aesthetics than other types of intersections.

Given the considerable benefits of modern roundabouts in certain situations, Regional Council, on April 9, 2003, approved the adoption in principle of modern roundabouts on Regional roads where appropriate design standards can be met.

The Region of Waterloo has recently implemented two roundabouts on arterial roads in 2004, one at Can-Amera Parkway and Townline Road in Cambridge and the other at Ira Needles Boulevard and Erb Street in Waterloo. Both existing roundabouts have been operating well since opening.

Why are roundabouts safer than signalized intersections?

Numerous recent safety studies conducted in Europe and in the United States have concluded that there are as much as 80% fewer injury-related collisions (both for motorists and pedestrians) at modern roundabouts than at signalized intersections. In a recent study conducted in the United States which examined 55 signalized intersections that had recently been converted to roundabouts, there was a dramatic reduction (75%) in the number of injury-related collisions after the

roundabouts were implemented. Many of these roundabouts were located in areas of the United States where the local motorists had no familiarity with roundabouts. There are relatively few serious collisions at roundabouts because:

· There are fewer conflict points for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians; · Vehicle speeds are low (approximately 40 km/h to 50 km/h); · There is a lower speed differential between users (cars, bikes and pedestrians); · The lower speeds and geometry reduce the severity of collisions that do occur; and · Pedestrian crossing distances are shorter and crossing requires looking in one direction only.

How do motorists, cyclists and pedestrians use a roundabout?

Motorists approaching the roundabout must yield to all traffic already in the roundabout. Once in the roundabout, motorists have the right-of-way and travel counter-clockwise keeping the central island on their left side. Motorists should not enter the roundabout beside large trucks as these vehicles may require the entire roadway width to circulate.

Cyclists may choose to enter and traverse the roundabout in the same fashion as a motorist. Alternatively, should the cyclist lack the experience to traverse the roundabout like a motorist, ramps are available at the entries and exits to allow cyclists to leave the roadway, walk their bikes around the intersection and then re- enter the roadway.

Pedestrians must use the marked crosswalks around the perimeter of the roundabout and should never walk in the circulatory roadway or cross to the central island. Pedestrians must wait for a safe gap in traffic before starting any crossing. Pedestrians need only to cross one direction of traffic at a time and should use the splitter islands as a refuge.

Additional information about how to use a roundabout is available at this Public Information Centre in the form of brochures and video displays. Additional information can be accessed using the Region of Waterloo website at www.region.waterloo.on.ca (just click on the roundabout symbol.)

Are the roundabouts big enough for large trucks?

The roundabouts will be designed to accommodate buses and large trucks such as fire department ladder trucks and tractor trailers; however, large vehicles will use most of the pavement when traveling through the roundabout. Therefore, when a large truck is in the roundabout, there will not be enough room for another vehicle to enter beside it and motorists should never pass another vehicle while in the roundabout. Additional information can be accessed using the Region of Waterloo website at www.region.waterloo.on.ca (just click on the roundabout symbol.)

Appendix F

PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

DOCS #291524-v3

WEBER STREET IMPROVEMENT FROM NORTHFIELD DRIVE TO BENJAMIN ROAD PROJECT TEAM’S PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS Note: Each Alternative includes reconstruction of the existing pavement, reserved on-road cycling lanes and new sidewalk on each side of Weber Street

ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2A ALTERNATIVE 2B Alternative Reconstruct Weber Street from 100 Reconstruct Weber Street to five lanes from Reconstruct Weber Street to five lanes metres north of Northfield Drive to 100 metres north of Northfield Drive to south from 100 metres north of Northfield Drive Benjamin Road in its Current 2-lane of Randall Drive, and to three lanes from to south of Randall Drive, and to three Configuration. south of Randall Drive to Benjamin Road lanes from south of Randall Drive to Criteria Group (Traffic Control Signals at Randall Drive). Benjamin Road (Roundabout at Randall Drive). Transportation Poor Good Good · Does not address travel delays · Addresses travel delays · Addresses travel delays · Does not improve emergency access · Improves emergency access on Weber Street · Improves emergency access on Weber · Improves pedestrian facilities · Improves pedestrian facilities Street · Improves cycling facilities · Improves cycling facilities · Improves pedestrian facilities · Roundabout is safer than traffic signal · Improves cycling facilities Social Environment Fair Fair - Good Fair · No change to existing conditions · Imperceptible increase in noise levels from · Imperceptible increase in noise levels from · Property access unaffected but not traffic traffic improved · Property access improved through provision of · Property acquisition and associated impacts · Imperceptible increase in noise new centre turn lane to parking areas and utility relocation is levels from traffic required to facilitate the roundabout construction · Property access improved Natural Environment Fair Fair - Good Fair · No changes to existing conditions · Road side ditches are filled in, removing · Road side ditches are filled in, removing · Traffic congestion leads to increased benefits of sediment removal from storm water benefits of sediment removal from storm air pollution runoff, but mitigation is provided by new water runoff, but mitigation is provided by · No tree impacts stormceptors new stormceptors · Less traffic congestion leads to better air · Less traffic congestion leads to better air quality quality · No tree impacts · Some trees require removal to facilitate the roundabout construction Economic Environment Fair Good Fair-Good · Approximately $2.4M capital cost · Approximately $2.8M Capital Cost · Approximately $3.2M Capital Cost · Does not contribute to economic · Contributes to economic prosperity of the · Contributes to economic prosperity of the prosperity of the Region Region Region Overall Evaluation Poor to Fair Fair-Good Fair-Good

COMMENT SHEET REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO Weber Street Improvements, Northfield Drive to Benjamin Road September 20, 2006. Please complete and hand in this sheet so that your views can be considered for this project. If you cannot complete your comments today, please take this home and mail, fax or e-mail your comments to us by September 29, 2006.

Mr. Ismail Abushehada Senior Project Manager Regional Municipality of Waterloo Phone: 519-575-4757 Ext. 3184 150 Frederick Street, 6th Floor Fax: 519-575-4430 Kitchener, ON N2G 4J3 E-Mail: [email protected]

COMMENTS REGARDING THIS PROJECT (Please use back of the sheet if you need more space)

Please indicate your preferred design alternative, and the reason why it is preferred.

Alternative No. 1 Alternative No. 2A Alternative No. 2B

Do you wish to be placed on the mailing list for this project? Yes No

Name: ______Address: ______Postal Code: ______Phone & email: ______

COLLECTION NOTICE Personal information requested on this form is collected under the authority of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo Act and will be used to assist Regional staff and the Regional Planning and Public Works Committee in making a decision on this project. All names, addresses and comments will be included in material made available to the general public. Questions regarding this collection should be forwarded to the staff member indicated above.

DOCS #291524-v3

REGION OF WATERLOO Report: E-06-090

TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Transportation

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: C04-30, T02-30/06

SUBJECT: REVIEW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS AT THE INTERSECTION OF REGIONAL ROAD #6 (HIGHLAND ROAD) AND GLASGOW STREET, CITY OF KITCHENER

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo take no action regarding the request for the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Regional Road #6 (Highland Road) and Glasgow Street, in the City of Kitchener.

SUMMARY:

NIL

REPORT:

Ms. Sue Pryde has requested that the Region of Waterloo install traffic control signals at the Highland Road / Glasgow Street intersection. Staff has completed a review of this matter and offers the following comments:

Existing Conditions

Highland Road intersects Glasgow Street at a right angle forming a t-intersection. The north approach (Glasgow Street) to the intersection is controlled by a stop sign with the east and west approaches (Highland Road) consisting of a free flow condition. The posted maximum speed limit approaching the intersection from the north is 50 km/h and is 70 km/h from the east and west. The intersection attracts an Average Annual Daily Traffic Volume of approximately 15,900 vehicles.

Traffic signals are not warranted at this time. The intersection now only meets 85 points where 100 are required to warrant traffic control signals. Figure 1 illustrates the Highland Road / Glasgow Street intersection.

DOC#: 301077 Page 1 of 4 August 22, 2006 Report: E-06-090

Figure 1 – Highland Road and Glasgow Street Intersection

N

GLASGOW STREET

HIGHLAND ROAD

Future Ira Needles Boulevard

Ira Needles Boulevard is a north/south arterial roadway presently scheduled to be fully completed in 2007. The Region’s schedule includes the completion of Ira Needles Boulevard in the following three stages.

· Stage 1 - Ira Needles Boulevard between Erb Street and West Hill Drive completed 2005;

· Stage 2 - Ira Needles Boulevard between Victoria Street and Highway 7/8 completed in the fall of 2006; and

· Stage 3 - Ira Needles Boulevard between Victoria Street and West Hill Drive completed in the fall of 2007.

The completion of Ira Needles Boulevard will significantly impact travel patterns through the Highland Road / Glasgow Street intersection. Traffic forecasts indicate that traffic volume approaching the intersection during the heaviest hour will decrease by approximately 360 vehicles on Glasgow Street and 300 vehicles on Highland Road. It is anticipated that two-way traffic on Glasgow Street will see a total reduction of approximately 700 vehicles in this hour. Figure 2 illustrates Ira Needles Boulevard. Figures 3 and 4 show traffic volumes during the heaviest hour at the Highland Road / Glasgow Street intersection before and after the completion of Ira Needles Boulevard.

Page 2 of 4 August 22, 2006 Report: E-06-090

Figure 2 – Ira Needles Boulevard

N Erb St

West Hill Dr

University Ave

Victoria St

Future Ira Needles Blvd Highland Rd

Glasgow St

Trussler Rd

Figure 3 – Highland Road at Glasgow Street 2006 P.M. Peak Turning Movement

Glasgow Street Future Ira Needles

Boulevard 495

458

397 98 83 800 403 486 Highland Road 491 768 375 393

Roundabout

Page 3 of 4 August 22, 2006 Report: E-06-090

Figure 4 – Highland Road at Glasgow Street 2007 P.M. Peak Turning Movement Forecasts

Glasgow Street Ira Needles Boulevard 134

129

99 35 35 540 441 476 Highland Road 487 428 94 393

Roundabout

Consequently, Transportation Division Staff recommend that the Region of Waterloo take no action regarding the request for the installation of traffic control signals at the Highland Road / Glasgow Street intersection at this time. Staff will reanalyze the need for traffic control signals when Ira Needles Boulevard is complete and will recommend any necessary measures as required.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

NIL

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

The Design and Construction Division and the Transportation Planning Division were consulted in the preparation of this report.

ATTACHMENTS:

NIL

PREPARED BY: Mike Jones, Engineering Technologist (Traffic)

APPROVED BY: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services

DOC#: 301077 Page 4 of 4 Report: E-06-094 REGION OF WATERLOO

TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Transportation

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: T02-30/12, C04-30

SUBJECT: NEW DUNDEE ROAD/BRIDGE STREET/TRUSSLER ROAD ALL-WAY STOP

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

Staff are considering an all-way stop at the intersection of New Dundee Road/Bridge Street (Regional Road #12) and Trussler Road (Regional Road #70). It is anticipated that an all-way stop would dramatically reduce the high number of angle and turning collisions that are occurring at this intersection. Staff will be placing information signs at this intersection to notify the public of this issue and provide contact information for the public to comment and ask questions about this issue. Staff will then present a summary of the public response and a recommendation to Planning and Works Committee.

REPORT:

The intersection of New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road experienced 20 angle and turning collisions where 4 would be expected over the 5 years from 2001 to 2005. The intersection experienced 11 injury collisions where 2 would be expected. Most of the angle and turning collisions involve drivers who stop first and then pull out onto New Dundee Road/Bridge Street into a collision. Enhancing the stop control through larger signs or beacons would not be an effective countermeasure because the drivers at fault are already stopping before becoming involved in a collision. A traffic control signal is not warranted and is not expected to be warranted in the near future. An all-way stop is warranted.

In the spring of 2004, staff installed an all-way stop at an intersection with a similar collision pattern including a high number of angle and turning collisions, at Nafziger Road (Regional Road #5) and Erb’s Road (Regional Road #9). That intersection experienced a decrease of approximately 80% in angle and turning collisions in comparing the 2 years before and after the installation of the all-way stop. The all-way stop was an effective countermeasure in reducing angle and turning collisions at the Nafziger Road/Erb’s Road intersection. Staff are considering a similar all-way stop as a countermeasure for the angle and turning collisions at New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road intersection.

Similar to the Nafziger Road/Erb’s Road intersection, an all-way stop at New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road would include enhanced signing and beacons to notify drivers on New Dundee Road/Bridge Street of the stop ahead.

Page 1 of 2 September 19, 2006 Report: E-06-094

To obtain public input on this issue, staff will be placing information signs on each approach to the New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road intersection. The signs will indicate that an all-way stop is being considered for this intersection. The signs will provide contact information for the public to comment and ask questions about this issue. Staff will then present a summary of the public response and a recommendation to Planning and Works Committee.

The intersection of New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road is currently part of an Environmental Assessment for the reconstruction of Trussler Road from Hwy 7/8 to New Dundee Road/Bridge Street. The intersection will be assessed for future requirements, such as left-turn lanes, as part of that study.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

The all-way stop at the intersection of New Dundee Road/Bridge Street/Trussler Road is being considered to address the Region’s goal to provide a high quality transportation system.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The all-way stop with beacons would cost approximately $20,000 to implement. Funds to implement the all-way stop are available in the mid-year review of the 2006 Transportation Capital Base Budget to be funded from the Roads Rehabilitation Reserve Fund.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE: NIL

ATTACHMENTS: NIL

PREPARED BY: Nancy Button, Manager, Transportation Engineering

APPROVED BY: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

Document Name: E-06-094 Document Number: 309283

Page 2 of 2 Report: E-06-101 REGION OF WATERLOO

TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Waste Management

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: E20-01

SUBJECT: AGRICULTURAL BALE WRAP RECYCLING

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a ten-year Agreement with Think Plastics Inc. of New Hamburg, Ontario for the collection and processing of white agricultural bale wrap, at no cost to the Region of Waterloo, and subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

SUMMARY:

NIL

REPORT:

Earlier this year, the Region of Waterloo began receiving white agricultural bale wrap for recycling at the Crosshill Transfer Station. The used bale wrap is received free-of-charge at the transfer station. Once five tonnes of bale wrap has been received, Think Plastics will pick up the material at Crosshill and transport the bale wrap to their facility in New Hamburg. The used bale wrap is then converted into plastic lumber.

Think Plastics spent over four years on research and development of the plastic lumber product and have recently opened a 16,000 square foot facility in New Hamburg to manufacture the plastic lumber known commercially as “Baleboard”. In order to ensure a consistent supply of used bale wrap, Think Plastics is providing a written guarantee that it will pick up and process all materials collected, free-of-charge for a period of 10 years. The Region would be required to likewise commit that all materials collected would be provided to Think Plastics over this period. Helping to maintain a regular supply of used bale wrap for Think Plastics would ensure a no cost disposal option for local farmers and a no cost recycling program for the Region of Waterloo. Think Plastic generates revenue for the business through the sale of the Baleboard plastic wood product.

The proposed arrangement with Think Plastics provides the Region with a secure, long-term market for used bale wrap. However, should used bale wrap develop a positive market value over the next 10 years, the Region would be obliged to continue to supply Think Plastics. Staff consider that probability to be very small and support a long-term arrangement with Think Plastics.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

This arrangement supports the Corporate Strategic Objective of reducing the reliance on landfill disposal. Page 1 of 2 September 19, 2006 Report: E-06-101

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

The Purchasing Department was consulted during the preparation of this report.

ATTACHMENTS

NIL

PREPARED BY: James Archibald, Director, Waste Management

APPROVED BY: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

312111 Page 2 of 2 Report: E-06-102 REGION OF WATERLOO

TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Waste Management

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: E20-01

SUBJECT: UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO ORGANIC WASTE RESEARCH PROJECT – WATERLOO LANDFILL SITE

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the use of the Waterloo Landfill Site by the University of Waterloo for the purpose of establishing a technical scale demonstration facility for the processing of organic waste, with all subsequent required agreements subject to approval of the Commissioner of Transportation and Environmental Services and the Regional Solicitor.

SUMMARY:

NIL

REPORT:

The University of Waterloo has approached the Region requesting the temporary use of approximately one half hectare of land at the Waterloo Landfill Site for the purpose of establishing a technical scale demonstration facility for processing organic waste. A letter from Dr. Wayne Parker of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering dated August 1, 2006 is attached to this report for information. The attached letter provides details on the University’s request, and proposed commitments to the Region. This would be the third cooperative project at the site with the University of Waterloo, following the example of the Mechanical Engineering Department’s fire research building at Waterloo Region Emergency Services Training and Research Complex (WRESTRC) and the Civil Engineering Department’s pavement testing project on landfill site haul roads.

Many municipalities in North America are attempting to divert food waste and other household organics from the municipal wastestream. Despite the numerous processing facilities constructed over the last 10 years, there is no clear “best practice” for processing food waste. Aerobic (with oxygen) and anaerobic (without oxygen) processes have both encountered significant problems with odour control and low quality end products. Many facilities have been forced to close due to environmental or economic issues.

The Region of Waterloo will be beginning a pilot program for the diversion of food waste beginning in October of this year. Collected food waste will be transferred to a processing facility in Thorold. The University of Waterloo research project will assist the Region in the future when decisions regarding processing food waste for the entire Region are made.

Page 1 of 5 September 19, 2006 Report: E-06-102

The Region will provide access to utilities for the University project, and will supply compost and woodchip product as required. The University will be solely responsible for environmental approvals and any other required permitting. Staff strongly support this disciplined approach to developing a sustainable processing solution for food waste. If approved by Regional Council, updates will be provided on a periodic basis as the research proceeds.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

This arrangement supports the Corporate Strategic Objective of reducing the reliance on landfill disposal.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Region would provide temporary use of lands and access to utilities as well as providing compost and woodchips from on-site stockpiles. No financial contribution is required of the Region.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Staff from Facilities and Legal Services will be involved in developing agreements with the University of Waterloo.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Letter dated August 1, 2006; Parker to Archibald

PREPARED BY: James Archibald, Director, Waste Management

APPROVED BY: Thomas Schmidt, Commissioner, Transportation and Environmental Services

312684 Page 2 of 5 September 19, 2006 Attachment 1 Report: E-06-102

312684 Page 3 of 5 September 19, 2006 Attachment 1 Report: E-06-102

312684 Page 4 of 5 September 19, 2006 Attachment 1 Report: E-06-102

312684 Page 5 of 5 Report: P-06-089 REGION OF WATERLOO

PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Community Planning

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: D18-20

SUBJECT: MONTHLY REPORT OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY FOR JULYAND AUGUST 2006

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo accept P-06-089, Monthly Report for Development activity for July and August 2006, dated September 19, 2006.

SUMMARY:

In accordance with Regional By-law 01-028, as amended, the Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services has:

1. Approved the following part lot control exemption by-laws; 2. Accepted the following plans of subdivision and plans of condominiums; 3. Registered the following plans of subdivision and plans of condominium; and 4. Approved the following official plan amendments.

REPORT:

City of Cambridge

1. Part Lot Control Exemption By-law 162-06 Applicant: Cambridge Centre Village Inc. Location: Lena Crescent Proposal: To permit the creation of 4 townhouse units. Processing Fee: Paid July 13, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: July 14, 2006

2. Part Lot Control Exemption By-law 163-06 Applicant: Mattamy (Galt) Limited Location: Garth Massey Drive Proposal: To permit the creation of 22 semi-detached and 16 townhouse units. Processing Fee: Paid July 13, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: July 31, 2006

3. Part Lot Control Exemption By-law 161-06 Applicant: Cambridge (WHF) Investments Inc. Location: Green Gate Boulevard Proposal: To permit the creation of 2 multiple residential blocks. Processing Fee: Paid on July 13, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: August 21, 2006

308893 Page 1 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-089

4. Application for Plan of Condominium 30CDM-06102 Date Accepted: July 25, 2006 Applicant: Lancer Galt Inc. Location: Wellington Street/Commonwealth Lane Proposal: To permit the development of 84 apartment units. Processing Fee: Paid July 25, 2006

5. Registration of Draft Plan of Condominium 30CDM-05101 Draft Approval Date: September 9, 2005 Phase: Phase 2 Applicant: Christopher Heights Development Corporation Location: Dudhope Avenue and Brierdale Road Proposal: To permit the development of 12 townhouse units. Processing Fee: Paid July 5, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: July 7, 2006

6. Official Plan Amendment No. 20 Applicant: G. Nelson Location: 41 Hopeton Street Proposal: To create a site specific policy area to permit the use of the existing house for the sale and display of cemetery monuments, a retail store, a business or professional office or a detached one-family dwelling. Processing Fee: Paid March 24, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: July 14, 2006 Came Into Effect: August 4, 2006

7. Official Plan Amendment No. 21 Applicant: Canadian Tire Real Estate Location: McLaren Avenue Proposal: To redesignate the lands from Class 3 to Class 2 (General) Industrial District with a site specific policy provision to restrict the types of industrial uses permitted. Processing Fee: Paid June 9, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: July 14, 2006 Came Into Effect: August 4, 2006

8. Official Plan Amendment No. 22 Applicant: 439318 Ontario Ltd. Location: 2450 Eagle Street North Proposal: To redesignate the property to Class 4, Commercial District to permit a motor vehicle dealership with accessory service and repair facility. Processing Fee: Paid July 20, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval; August 8, 2006 Came Into Effect: August 29, 2006

City of Kitchener

1. Application for Plan of Subdivision 30T-06202 Date Accepted: August 9, 2006 Applicant: JHS Properties inc. Location: Deer Ridge Drive Proposal: To permit the creation of 17 residential lots. Processing Fee: August 9, 2006

308893 Page 2 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-089

2. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-96005 Draft Approval Date: January 28, 2002 Phase: Stage 5 Applicant: Max Becker Enterprises Ltd. Location: Fischer-Hallman Road Proposal: To permit the development of 19 to 48 multiple residential and 30 to 101 institutional residential units. Processing Fee: Paid July 17, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: July 17, 2006

3. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-96006 Draft Approval Date: October 19, 2004 Phase: Stage 1 Applicant: Harding/Max Becker Enterprises Ltd. Location: Fischer-Hallman/Bleams Road Proposal: To permit the development of 44 single detached and semi-detached units Processing Fee: Paid July 17, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: July 17, 2006

4. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-04201 Draft Approval Date: July 19, 2005 Phase: Entire Plan Applicant: Hidden Valley Estates Location: Hidden Valley Road Proposal: To permit the development of 55 single detached units. Processing Fee: Paid August 3, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: August 3, 2006

5. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-96006 Draft Approval Date: October 19, 2004 Phase: Stage 2 Applicant: Harding/Max Becker Enterprises Ltd. Location: Fischer-Hallman/Bleams Road Proposal: To permit the development of 13 single detached units. Processing Fee: Paid August 25, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: August 25, 2006

6. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-01207 Draft Approval Date: October 19, 2004 Phase: Stage 2 Applicant: Harding/Max Becker Enterprises Ltd. Location: Fischer-Hallman/Bleams Road Proposal: To permit the development of 14 single detached and 38 semi- detached units. Processing Fee: Paid August 25, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: August 25, 2006

308893 Page 3 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-089

7. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-01207 Draft Approval Date: October 19, 2004 Phase: Stage 3 Applicant: Harding/Max Becker Enterprises Ltd. Location: Fischer-Hallman/Bleams Road Proposal: To permit the development of 50 single detached units. Processing Fee: Paid August 25, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: August 26, 2006

City of Waterloo

1. Application for Plan of Condominium 30CDM-06403 Date Accepted: August 10, 2006 Applicant: Tanem Developments Limited Location: 745 University Avenue East Proposal: To establish a Vacant Land Condominium containing 7units for single detached residential units (6 new dwellings and 1 existing dwelling). Processing Fee: Paid August 10, 2006

2. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-03401 Draft Approval Date: December 1, 2005 Phase: Entire Plan Applicant: Activa Holdings Inc. Location: 558 Conservation Drive Proposal: To permit the development of 144 single detached and 19 street fronting townhouse units. Processing Fee: Paid July 21, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: July 21, 2006

3. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-87004 Draft Approval Date: December 22, 1988 Phase: Phase 2 Applicant: William J. Gies Construction Ltd. Location: Erb Street and West Hill Drive Proposal: To permit the development of 95 single detached units. Processing Fee: Paid August 17, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: August 17, 2006

4. Registration of Draft Plan of Condominium 30CDM-05401 Draft Approval Date: February 9, 2005 Phase: Stage 3 Applicant: Activa Holdings Inc. Location: 619 Wild Ginger Avenue Proposal: To permit the development of 14 townhouse units. Processing Fee: August 17, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: August 17, 2006

308893 Page 4 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-089

5. Official Plan Amendment No. 65 Applicant: COB LP Location: 187 King Street South and 155 Cardine Street South Proposal: To redesignate the lands from “Industrial” and Special Policy Area No. 4 to “Commercial” and Special Policy Area No. 69 to retain non-retail commercial areas adjacent to King Street South. Processing Fee: Paid June 29, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: July 14, 2006 Came Into Effect: August 4, 2006

Township of Wilmot

1. Application for Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-06601 Date Accepted: August 15, 2006 Applicant: PB Holdings Location: Hostetler Road Proposal: To permit the development of 54 single detached, 6 semi-detached and approximately 20 townhouse units. Processing Fee: Paid August 3, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: August 3, 2006

2. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-91006 Draft Approval Date: July 16, 2001 Phase: Entire Plan Applicant: 1512102 Ontario Inc. Location: Forrest Avenue, New Hamburg Proposal: To permit the development of 177 single detached, 28 semi-detached and 4 townhouse units. Processing Fee: Paid August3, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: August 3, 2006

Township of Woolwich

1. Part Lot Control Exemption By-law 49-2006 Applicant: Valleyview Heights (St. Jacobs) Ltd. Location: Printery Road Proposal: To permit the creation of 12 semi-detached units. Processing Fee: Paid July 13, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: July 17, 2006

2. Modification to Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-98701 Applicant: Thomasfield Homes Ltd./Arris Glen Developments Ltd. Location: Breslau Settlement Area Proposal: To amend the staging limits for Stages 2 and 3 resulting in a reduction in the number of units within Stage 2 from 116 to 86 units, while Stage 3 would increase from 146 to 177 units. The total of both remaining stages is now 263 units. Processing Fee: Paid May 3, 2006 Commissioner’s Approval: August 3, 2006

308893 Page 5 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-089

3. Registration of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-03702 Draft Approval Date: October 27, 2004 Phase: Stage 1 Applicant: 2024348 Ontario Inc. (formerly Woolwich Holdings Ltd.) Location: Church Street and Barnswallow Drive Proposal: To permit the development of 45 single detached, 24 semi-detached and 6 street-fronting townhouse units. Processing Fee: July 6, 2006 Commissioner’s Release: July 6, 2006

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

This report reflects actions taken by the Commissioner in accordance with the Delegation by-law adopted by Council consistent with the streamlining objectives reflected in Focus Area 1: Manage Regional Growth to enhance Quality of Life in the Corporate Strategic Plan.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

NIL

PREPARED BY: Andrea Banks, Program Assistant, Planning

APPROVED BY: Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services

308893 Page 6 of 6 Report: P-06-090 REGION OF WATERLOO

PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Community Services

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: D08-80

SUBJECT: BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY, JANUARY TO JUNE 2006

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

This interim report on building permit activity in the Region covers the first two quarters of 2006. It reflects building permit data related to new construction, as provided by Local Municipalities, for the period of January to June 2006.

Building permit activity remains strong in the Region, but has declined for residential development from the very high levels experienced in 2002 and 2003. Residential permits were issued for 2,106 units in the first half of 2006, down 5.6% from the 2,232 units in the first half of 2005. The value of these permits decreased to $313.5 million from $322.7 million. New non-residential floor space increased 10% relative to the first half of 2005. The value of non-residential permits issued in the first half of 2006 increased 5.5% to $135.4 million from $128.3 million in the same period in 2005.

The slightly easing demand for new home construction in Waterloo Region is part of a wider provincial trend. For the first half of 2006, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) reported that housing starts are down 3% in the province and down 12.2% in the second quarter alone. Despite being lower, Ontario new home starts remain above their 15 year average. CMHC expects a decline in new home construction this year and in 2007 resulting from several factors, including rising home prices and mortgage rates, and the fact that with a larger inventory of homes, there is less spillover of buyers from the existing home market into the new home market.

For the first time in a ‘Housing Now’ report, CMHC noted the increase in conversion type projects in the Kitchener Census Metropolitan Area (CMA), where older buildings are converted to condominiums. These projects add to the housing stock but are not included in new home start numbers.

REPORT:

Building permit activity is one indicator of the strength of a local economy. This report summarizes building activity in both the residential and non-residential sectors for each municipality in the Region, for the first two quarters of 2006 (January to March, and April to June). Building activity data for the same period in 2005 is provided for comparison. These figures are compiled by Planning, Housing and Community Services staff, based on data supplied by the Local Municipalities.

It is important to note that there are several differences between the statistics reported by CMHC and those found in this report. The first difference is that this report is for all seven local municipalities, whereas CMHC reports on the Kitchener CMA which includes only Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge, Woolwich and North Dumfries. Secondly, CMHC uses a ‘start’ as the measure of building activity. A 305834 Page 1 of 6 September 19, 2006 P-06-090

‘start’ is defined as the beginning of construction work on a building, usually when concrete has been poured for the footing. This report uses building permit issuance as the measure of activity.

Residential Activity

• A total of 2,106 units were constructed in the Region in the first half of 2006. Of these permits 50% (1,054) were single detached units, 7% (156) were semi-detached, 15% (319) were townhouse units and 27% (571) were apartment units.

• The number of single detached units constructed declined 15% from 1,241 units in 2005 to 1,054 in 2006; semi-detached units increased 205% from 51 to 156. Construction of townhouse units declined 27% from 438 units in 2005 to 319 in 2006.

• Apartment units increased 15% from 495 units to 571 units over the same period.

• If construction in the second half of 2006 continues as it has in the first half of the year, the total number of new residential units will be 4,212. This would be above the 10-year average of 3,531 units, and below the record of 4,567 permits issued in 2002.

Figures 1 to 9 illustrate building activity in each local municipality. The experience in each quarter (relative to 2005) varied by local municipality. Wellesley and North Dumfries Townships were the only two municipalities which issued more permits in the first half of 2006 over the same period last year (with increases of 7 and 12 units respectively). All five other local municipalities experienced a decline in the number of permits issued.

Figure 1: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Figure 2: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total New Residential Units By City Total New Residential Units By City

700 600 600 500 500 400 400 2005-Q1 2005-Q2 300 300 2006-Q1 2006-Q2 200 200 10 0 10 0 0 0 CAM KIT WAT CAM KIT WAT City City

Figure 3: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Figure 4: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total New Residential Units By Township Total New Residential Units By Township

60 10 0 50 80 40 2005-Q1 60 30 2005-Q2 2006-Q1 40 2006-Q2 20

10 20 0 0 NDU WEL WIL WOO NDU WEL WIL WOO Township Township

305834 Page 2 of 6 September 19, 2006 P-06-090

Figure 5: Total New Residential Units By Type, January-June Single Semi Lodging Townhouse Apartment Total Detached Detached Unit 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 Cam 246 273 0 50 42 157 260 12 0 0 548 492 Kit 554 467 29 68 293 87 201 412 0 0 1077 1034 Wat 243 130 10 18 66 63 30 130 7 6 356 347 Ndu 11 10 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 11 18 Wel 21 21 0 2 0 0 0 9 0 0 21 32 Wil 76 68 2 12 32 0 0 0 0 0 110 80 Woo 90 85 10 6 5 12 4 0 0 0 109 103 RMW 1241 1054 51 156 438 319 495 571 7 6 2232 2106

Figure 6: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Figure 7: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total New Residential Construction Value By Total New Residential Construction Value By City City

100000 80000

80000 60000 60000 2005-Q1 2005-Q2 40000 40000 2006-Q1 2006-Q2 20000 20000

0 0 Cam Kit Wat Cam Kit Wat City City

Figure 8: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total Figure 9: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: New Residential Construction Value By Total New Residential Construction Value By Township Township

12 0 0 0 20000 10 0 0 0 150 0 0 8000 2005-Q1 2005-Q2 6000 10 0 0 0 2006-Q1 2006-Q2 4000 5000 2000 0 0 Ndu Wel Wil Woo Ndu Wel Wil Woo Township Township

Comments on Residential Activity

• The decline in the new home construction market in the Region of Waterloo is representative of the general easing of new home construction across the province. CMHC has also reported that total housing starts for the first half of 2006 are also down 14% in Peel Region and 47% in Halton Region respectively.

• One of the major factors responsible for the decline in the construction of single family detached homes is price. CMHC reported in their 3rd Quarter edition of ‘Housing Now’ that the average price of a new single family detached home in the Kitchener CMA is $309,682, an increase of more than 11% over last year. First-time home buyers have been fuelling the market for singles over the past few years; however, very few first-time home buyers are opting for less expensive multiple family type homes.

• There was a noticeable increase in the construction of apartment units in the first half of 2006, with 571 305834 Page 3 of 6 September 19, 2006 P-06-090

units created. Last year, at this point there were 495 units created. This sector of the housing market can vary.

• CMHC reported in their ‘Housing Now’ July 2006 release that “the decline in the availability of serviced land has also contributed to the slowdown in construction this year.” However, the Region’s database indicates that as of June 30, 2006 there were 19,300 un-built units in registered and draft approved plans alone.

Comments on Non-Residential Activity

• Figures 10 to 18 illustrate non-residential building activity in each of the local municipalities. Non- residential building activity can be highly variable from year to year. Total floor space constructed increased 10% from 1.4 million square feet to 1.5 million square feet.

• In the first half of 2006, commercial building permits accounted for 48% of the floor space, industrial 36% and institutional 15% of non-residential activity.

• The value of non-residential permits increased 5.5% to $135.4 million from $128.3 million in the same period in 2005.

• The highest values for an individual 2006 non-residential building permit by type are: Institutional – $25 million for the City of Cambridge’s new city hall on Dickson St; Industrial - $2.5 million for a building at 95 Bathurst Dr in Waterloo by Aegis Holdings; Commercial - $2.5 million for a development at 619 Kumpf Drive in Waterloo.

Figure 10: Total New Non-Residential Floor Space By Type, January - June* Commercial Industrial Institutional Total 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 Cam 81,693 197,126 219,521 264,340 14,069 85,649 315,283 547,115 Kit 283,733 203,886 87,534 52,309 182,125 118,005 553,392 374,200 Wat 156,002 255,614 32,518 128,063 72,015 15,759 260,535 399,436 Ndu 11,053 8,953 17,250 45,364 880 2,405 29,183 56,722 Wel 3,726 1,762 39,024 42,793 1,916 0 44,666 44,555 Wil 11,776 16,103 1,040 0 52,875 0 65,691 16,103 Woo 0 41,885 75,067 15,408 22,647 4,494 97,714 61,787 RMW 547,983 725,329 471,954 548,277 346,527 226,312 1,366,464 1,499,918 * Values in square feet

305834 Page 4 of 6 September 19, 2006 P-06-090

Figure 11: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Figure 12: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total Non Residential Floor Space By City Total Non Residential Floor Space By City

350000 500000

300000 400000 250000 200000 2005-Q1 300000 2005-Q2 150000 2006-Q1 200000 2006-Q2 100000 100000 50000 0 0 CAM KIT WAT CAM KIT WAT City City

Figure 13: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Figure 14: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total Non Residential Floor Space By Total Non Residential Floor Space By Township Township

45000 120000 40000 100000 35000 30000 80000 25000 2005-Q1 2005-Q2 60000 20000 2006-Q1 2006-Q2 150 0 0 40000 10 0 0 0 20000 5000 0 0 NDU WEL WIL WOO NDU WEL WIL WOO Township Township

Figure 15: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Figure 16: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total Non Residential Construction Value By Total Non Residential Construction Value By City City

35000 50000 30000 40000 25000 20000 2005-Q1 30000 2005-Q2 15000 2006-Q1 20000 2006-Q2 10000 10 0 0 0 5000 0 0 Cam Kit Wat Cam Kit Wat City City

Figure 17: First Quarter 2005 and 2006: Figure 18: Second Quarter 2005 and 2006: Total Non Residential Construction Value By Total Non Residential Construction Value By Township Township

7000 10 0 0 0 6000 8000 5000 4000 2005-Q1 6000 2005-Q2 3000 2006-Q1 4000 2006-Q2 2000 2000 10 0 0 0 0 Ndu Wel Wil Woo Ndu Wel Wil Woo Township Township

305834 Page 5 of 6 September 19, 2006 P-06-090

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Tracking and reporting building permit activity contributes to Strategic Focus Area 1: Manage Regional Growth to Enhance Quality of Life.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

NIL

ATTACHMENTS:

NIL

PREPARED BY: Chris Rumig, Planning Technician

APPROVED BY: Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services

305834 Page 6 of 6 Report: P-06-091 REGION OF WATERLOO

PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Transportation Planning

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning & Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: D28-50

SUBJECT: ROUTE 74 RIM PARK SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the changes to Route 74 RIM Park shown in Appendix 2, as described in Report P-06-091, dated September 19, 2006, to take effect on Monday October 2, 2006.

SUMMARY:

Staff recommend that the changes to Route 74 RIM Park shown in Appendix 2 be implemented on October 2, 2006. The recommended route and schedule change was developed following consultation with area residents, and is one of the underperforming routes discussed during the 2006 Regional Budget deliberations.

Route 74 RIM Park operates between Conestoga Mall and RIM Park in Waterloo, as a BusPLUS van service. The route was one of several low performing Grand River Transit routes identified during 2006 Regional budget deliberations. Rather than eliminate these routes, council directed staff to study them and recommend changes to improve performance. The recommended improvements to Route 74 RIM Park are a result of that process.

Route 74 RIM Park would be restructured to operate through the Eastbridge neighbourhood, providing two-way service to Conestoga Mall and RIM Park. Service would operate every half-hour between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. on weekdays and on Saturdays. The proposed changes are intended to improve Route 74 RIM Park’s performance by: · Operating within a five minute walk of 70% of households in Eastbridge, · Providing midday, early evening and Saturday connections from Eastbridge to Conestoga Mall, and · Incurring no increase in operating costs over the currently provided service.

REPORT:

During the 2006 Regional budget deliberations, several low performing routes were identified for potential elimination. Regional Council deferred a decision on low performing routes for one year and directed staff to evaluate and recommend initiatives that would improve route performance.

Route 74 RIM Park was one of the routes identified as a low performing route. Accordingly, staff developed options to modify the configuration and schedule of Route 74 RIM Park to improve the attractiveness of the route and its potential ridership and revenue performance. Staff also initiated the development of the Waterloo Area Transit Service Plan which includes a comprehensive review of transit needs in Waterloo and the development of service options, including the east side of Waterloo.

302205 Page 1 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Current Service

Route 74 RIM Park began service in September 2003, with the goal of extending transit service to the newly created RIM Park in northeast Waterloo. The service was implemented as a BusPLUS service. BusPLUS routes are a cost-effective way to initiate and provide service to new or growing areas until ridership increases to a level warranting conventional transit service.

RIM Park generates travel throughout the day, instead of having a morning and afternoon peak like other major activity centres. Because of this, the route’s hours of operation were designed to reflect the needs of RIM Park patrons.

Route 74 RIM Park provides service to RIM Park using the most direct possible routing from Conestoga Mall, along Northfield Drive and University Ave. Route 74 RIM Park’s current route is shown in Appendix 1. Land uses within walking Figure 1: BusPLUS 14 Seat Van distance of the route are predominantly industrial, with limited access to the service. Parkwood Mennonite Home at 726 New Hampshire St, a long-term care facility, is the only other major destination currently served by Route 74 RIM Park. There is limited access from nearby residential neighbourhoods to this route.

The route operates every half-hour between 12 p.m. and 9 p.m. on weekdays and between 9a.m. and 6 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Service is provided with 14 seat vans under contract with Hendry Coach Lines (see figure 1).

Route 74 RIM Park Performance History

Following its introduction, Route 74 RIM Park initially experienced a steady but slow growth in monthly passenger boardings. In 2005/ 2006 this growth has stabilized. Currently, the route carries an average of 33 riders on a weekday, 23 on Saturday, and 22 on Sunday.

Normally transit ridership declines in the summer, but this seasonal variation is not evident on Route 74 RIM Park, likely a result of the route’s orientation to RIM Park – a year-round activity centre. Monthly boardings from 2004 to June 2006 are shown in Appendix 3.

In the first 6 months of 2006, Route 74 RIM Park averaged 8% cost recovery and carried an average of 3 passengers per service hour. For local route service, the Grand River Transit minimum performance standards are 30% cost recovery and 25 passengers per service hour.

Eastbridge Neighbourhood Service Improvement Opportunity

The residential area bounded by Northfield Drive, University Avenue, Lexington Road and Bridge Street contains 2,175 households. This area is served by Route 5 Eastbridge which operates between Conestoga Mall and Uptown Waterloo every half hour, in weekday peak periods only. Route 5 Eastbridge currently carries approximately 11,000 boardings/ month and is in a period of steady growth.

The opportunity exists to improve Route 74 RIM Park’s ability to generate ridership by: · reorienting the route to more effectively serve the neighbourhood, and · adjusting the schedule to provide maximum service coverage when Route 5 does not operate.

302205 Page 2 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Public Consultation

A Public Consultation Centre was held in the area at St Luke’s Catholic Elementary School on Chesapeake Drive on June 8, 2006. This was a follow-up to a Public Workshop held at the same location in February 2005. At the Consultation Centre, staff displayed potential service options developed using feedback at the 2005 Workshop and invited comments and suggestions from interested members of the public. Over 20 residents attended and provided comments on the proposed route options as summarized in Appendix 4. The most frequent request was for an increase in the level of service including requests for midday, evening and weekend service. Some residents indicated they already take advantage of the existing Route 74 RIM Park service in those periods when Route 5 is not operating, but for most the route is too far away to be of any benefit. Most expressed a preference for two-way service through the neighbourhood. Concern was raised by some residents about the possibility of the route operating on the southern leg of Chesapeake Drive, because of potential conflict with traffic generated by two busy elementary schools in the area.

Proposed Routing for Route 74 RIM Park

The recommended new routing for Route 74 RIM Park is shown in Appendix 2. The route would provide two-way service along Northfield Dr, Bridge St and through Eastbridge on Chesapeake Dr and New Bedford Dr, with a small one-way loop at RIM Park. This routing provides maximum service coverage for a single route operating in the Eastbridge neighbourhood. The proposed routing would serve 1,713 households within a five minute walk, including 70% of households in Eastbridge.

The proposed schedule for Route 74 RIM Park is summarized in Table 1. Service would begin at 9 a.m. on weekdays and operate every half-hour until 7 p.m. By starting later than conventional transit service, the route can provide midday service to Eastbridge and operate through the evening to RIM Park with no increase in operating costs. This start time has the added benefit of minimizing conflict with traffic around the two elementary schools during the morning rush. The route would operate in front of the schools during the afternoon, though the van will only traverse the area twice during the busiest times of the day.

Table 1: Current and Proposed Service Levels Current Service Levels Proposed Service Levels

From To From To Weekday 12 p.m. 9 p.m. 9 a.m. 7 p.m. Saturday 9 a.m. 6 p.m. 9 a.m. 7 p.m. Sunday 9 a.m. 6 p.m. No service

The earlier weekday service (beginning at 9 a.m.) would be accommodated within the existing budget by ending the service one hour earlier each weeknight and removing Sunday service. The hours saved can be reallocated to provide midday and evening service on weekdays and service on Saturdays. This reallocation of Sunday service hours creates a schedule that is closer to those of other GRT routes serving similar neighbourhoods.

The number of hours of service provided per week would remain the same, thus the cost of operation would remain the same. However, the increased number of served households and provision of service throughout the day are expected to contribute to an increase in boardings, and to show a positive trend towards performance targets.

302205 Page 3 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Additional Public Consultation

A letter was sent to all residents who attended the Consultation Centre describing the proposed route and schedule changes on August 16, 2006, as well as to the principals of the two area elementary schools adjacent to the proposed route, RIM Parkview Mennonite Home, and RIM Park. The letter is included as Appendix 5. The proposed route map and schedule were also included in this mailing. Since the letter was distributed, one resident has voiced concerns that the proposed route does not operate late enough in the evening, or on Sunday, and noted the potential conflict with school traffic in the afternoon peak period.

A representative of the Lester B. Pearson Elementary School safety subcommittee has also contacted staff to discuss the potential traffic conflict in the school area. It was clarified that the BusPLUS van would be used to deliver this service. Staff also committed to monitor the traffic situation in this area following the route change and recommend route and/ or schedule adjustments if they are warranted. It should be noted that transit service is provided at the main entrance or primary drop-off point of 57 elementary schools in the Region of Waterloo. A further 20 elementary schools have transit service at the side of the building. No collision history exists between a bus and pedestrian in a school zone.

Monitoring

The GRT performance standard for local transit service is a minimum 30% cost recovery and 25 boardings per hour. These standards were developed based on the expectation that service would be provided using conventional transit vehicles, which have a capacity of between 50 and 70 passengers.

BusPLUS services have considerably lower operating costs than conventional transit buses making cost recovery standards achievable. However, to achieve the boarding standard on a 30 minute route, the van would have to be operating at near 100% capacity. The local route boarding standard is closer to 20% of the capacity of a conventional bus. Staff will work to develop revised standards for BusPLUS routes while preparing the upcoming GRT Business Plan.

Planning, Housing and Community Services staff continuously monitor and report on the performance of all GRT routes. Staff will continue to monitor Route 74 RIM Park’s performance following service improvements. Performance data will be used in the development of future transit service plans for the area.

Staff will also monitor Route 74 RIM Park to: · Evaluate any traffic conflicts around the elementary schools, · Determine which areas served by the route generate ridership and, · Determine which times of the day and week generate ridership.

A broader review of transit service in the Waterloo area is underway and further opportunities for service improvement will be considered through this process.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

The 2006 Route 74 RIM Park Transit Service Improvements will contribute to improving Route 74 RIM Park and transit service in east Waterloo, to support the implementation of Council’s Strategic Focus, identified under Focus Area 4: Ensure High Quality Regional Transportation System

302205 Page 4 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The proposed restructuring of Route 74 RIM Park is designed to have no increase in costs from the currently provided service, and is within the transit operating budget.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

The 2006 Route 74 RIM Park Transit Service Improvement Plan was developed in collaboration with the Transit Services Division of Transportation and Environmental Services.

ATTACHMENTS

Appendix 1: Current Route 74 RIM Park Route Map Appendix 2: Route 74 RIM Park Proposed Route Map Appendix 3: Route 74 RIM Park Monthly Boardings 2004-Present Appendix 4: Comments from Public Consultation Centre on June 8, 2006 Appendix 5: Letter sent to Consultation Centre Participants on August 16, 2006

PREPARED BY: Gethyn Beniston, Principal Planner

APPROVED BY: Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services

302205 Page 5 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Appendix 1: Current Route 74 RIM Park Route Map Route 74 RIM Park Current Route Map Appendix 1: Recommended Route 74 RIM Park Route Map and Schedule

Current Route 74

DOCS # 302205 Page 6 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Appendix 2: Proposed Route 74 RIM Park Route Map

Route 74 RIM Park Recommended New Routing

Proposed Route 74

DOCS # 302205

Page 7 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Appendix 3: Route 74 RIM Park Monthly boardings 2004-present

Route 74 RIM Park Monthly Boardings

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0 Jul Jul Jan Apr Jun Jan Apr Jun Jan Apr Jun Oct Nov Oct Nov Feb Mar Feb Mar Feb Mar Aug Sep Dec Aug Sep Dec May May May 2004 2005 2006

302205 Page 8 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Appendix 4: Route 74 RIM Park Comments/ Preferences from Consultation Centre on June 8, 2006

Route 74 RIM Park Reason for Preference Numbrer Staff Response Preference of comments received Prefer 2-way routing Provides more direct service 8 Develop a final routing that: options Prefer Routing on North leg of 1 · provides direct service, Chesapeake Dr. · provides best possible Provides better 1 service to the neighbourhood service neighbourhood Prefer one-way loop Covers a greater area 4 · covers the maximum routing option possible area

Category Comment Numbrer Staff Response of comments received Hours and Extend service hours 6 Note request, and reflect in Frequency of service Increase Frequency of Service 1 short and long-term plans where possible. Stops Stop at Parkwood Mennonite 2 Work to ensure Home recommended routing serves Parkwood Mennonite Home Destination · RIM Park Preferred destinations noted, Preferences · Universities and will be considered in · Waterloo Rec Complex development of current and · Plaza (Bridge & University) future service options. · Early Years Centre (near University Ave & Auburn Dr) · Lexington Rd Service Design Would like to see service on 4 New Hampshire St was not Issues New Hampshire Street designated for transit service in the Plan of Subdivision. Prefer options that avoid 2 Develop service options that schools on Chesapeake Dr minimize potential conflict with schools while meeting above design goals Extend Route 5 Eastbridge to 1 Consider future extension of serve entire area and cancel Route 5 Eastbridge to serve Route 74 RIM Park entire area. Use Major Roads to increase 1 Using major roads exclusively speed of service provides inadequate service coverage. Service Issues Schedule Adherence 1 Transit Scheduling problems department received and addressed these concerns.

302205 Page 9 of 10 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-091

Appendix 5: Text of letter sent to area residents on August 16, 2006

Re: Proposed Changes to Route 74 RIM Park

This letter follows the Public Consultation Centre held at St Luke’s School on Chesapeake Drive on June 8, 2006. Thank you to those who participated. The information we gathered at that meeting assisted in the development of the proposed changes to Route 74 RIM Park. GRT staff are planning to take a recommendation for changes to Route 74 RIM Park to Regional Planning and Works Committee on September 19, 2006. If approved, the changed route would enter service on Monday October 2, 2006. If you wish to appear as a delegation at this meeting, please contact Regional Clerks office at 519-575-4732.

It should be noted that this proposed route and schedule are intended as an interim service improvement, with the combined goals of improving service to the area and improving the performance of Route 74 RIM Park. Comprehensive service plans for the area are now being developed, and will be presented in a public forum in the coming months. The proposed route would operate through Eastbridge as a two-way route, using Northfield Dr, Bridge St, Chesapeake Dr and New Bedford Dr, before turning around at RIM Park. A route map and proposed schedule are included on the reverse of this letter. By using the south end of Chesapeake Dr, the route will be within a 5-minute walk of the greatest possible number of area residents. The proposed changes to the hours of service for Route 74 RIM Park are intended to supplement the Route 5 Eastbridge service which only operates Monday to Friday during peak periods. As illustrated in Table 1, Route 74 RIM Park would begin operating earlier during weekdays. By starting weekday service at 9 a.m. Route 74 RIM Park would provide midday service to the Eastbridge area. Saturday service would also be provided. In order to provide the proposed Route 74 RIM Park hours of service within existing budgets, early evening service would be terminated 1 hour earlier, and Sunday service would be discontinued. The combination of Route 5 Eastbridge operating during weekday peak periods, and Route 74 RIM Park operating through the midday to the evening and on Saturday, brings the overall service level in Eastbridge up to that of other similar neighbourhoods in the Region. Table 1: Current and Proposed Service Levels Current Service Levels Proposed Service Levels Weekday 12 p.m. - 9 p.m. 9 a.m. - 7 p.m. Saturday 9 a.m. - 6 p.m. 9 a.m. - 7 p.m. Sunday 9 a.m. - 6 p.m. No service If you have any comments regarding the proposed route and schedule, please contact me. A summary of all comments received will be included in the report to the Planning & Works Committee, which will be available online on the Friday before the meeting. Thanks again for participating in the development of public transit in Waterloo,

302205 Page 10 of 10 Report: P-06-092 REGION OF WATERLOO

PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Transportation Planning

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: T15-40/58

SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO CONTROLLED ACCESS BY-LAW #58-87 FOR AN ACCESS TO REGIONAL ROAD #58 (FISCHER-HALLMAN ROAD), CITY OF KITCHENER

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve an amendment to Controlled Access By-law #58-87 for a right-in, right-out only access on the east side of Regional Road #58 (Fischer-Hallman Road) approximately 135 metres north of Regional Road #50 (Westmount Road) in the City of Kitchener subject to Site Plan approval by the City of Kitchener, as explained in Report P-06-092, dated September 19, 2006.

SUMMARY:

RBJ Schlegel Holdings Incorporated is proposing a commercial development on the vacant land north of the existing gasbar/carwash at the intersection of Fischer-Hallman Road and Westmount Road in the City of Kitchener. A single access is proposed to both Fischer-Hallman Road and Westmount Road for the development. As Fischer-Hallman Road is designated as a Controlled Access – Prohibited road under the Region’s Controlled Access By-law #58-87, an amendment to this by-law is required to permit the access.

REPORT:

By-law #58-87, “A By-law to Designate and Regulate Controlled – Access Roads” was enacted to control the construction or alteration to the geometric design of any private means of access to a Regional road. All Regional roads are included in either Schedule “A” or Schedule “B” of the By-law. Regional roads included in Schedule “A” (Controlled Access – Prohibited), include arterial roads and freeways where access to these roads must be restricted due to high traffic speed and volume. The main function of a Controlled Access – Prohibited road is to move through traffic. All requests for changes to existing accesses or for new accesses require an amendment to the By-law. All remaining Regional roads are included in Schedule “B” (Controlled Access – Regulated). The function of a Controlled Access – Regulated Road is to move through traffic and provide access to adjacent lands. Typically, these roads are front lotted with access available only to the Regional road or are comparatively lower volume rural roads.

The developer, RBJ Schlegel Holdings Incorporated is proposing a commercial development consisting of a credit union and coffee house as the first phase of development of these lands. The property is located to the north of the existing gasbar/car wash on the northeast corner of Fischer- Hallman Road and Westmount Road. A right-in, right-out only access is proposed to Fischer- Hallman Road approximately 135 metres north of the intersection of Fischer-Hallman Road and Westmount Road. There is an existing raised concrete median on Fischer-Hallman Road extending from the Fischer-Hallman Road/Westmount Road intersection to Cotton Grass Street to the north of the subject property which will restrict the traffic movements at this access. A full movement access is also proposed on Westmount Road.

312231 Page 1 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-092

Fischer-Hallman Road is designated as a Controlled Access – Prohibited road from Regional Road #4 (Ottawa Street) to Regional Road #12 (New Dundee Road) in the Region’s Controlled Access By-law #58-87. A by-law amendment is therefore required prior to the issuance of an access permit by Regional staff.

Staff has reviewed the proposed access location and has no concerns as the access will operate with right-in, right-out only traffic movements and the available sight distance at the access is sufficient.

The developer will be proceeding through the site plan process with the City of Kitchener and approval of the by-law amendment should be conditional upon approval of the site plan.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

The proposed additions and revisions to the Region of Waterloo Controlled Access By-law will support the economic prosperity of the Region through improved movement of goods and traffic throughout the Region and to ensure the maximum value is achieved for the dollars spent on the construction of the Regional roads. In addition, the provision of safe access is an operational activity used to assist in the implementation of the Region’s strategic objective of providing a safe community.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The developer will be responsible for the cost to Region of Waterloo staff to install a one way directional arrow sign on the raised median on Fischer-Hallman Road at the proposed access and to install directional information signs on the property.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

The Corporate Resources Department will be required to amend Controlled Access By-law #58-87.

ATTACHMENTS:

Appendix A - Map showing the location of the subject property.

Appendix B - Site plan showing the location of the proposed amendment to Controlled Access By- law #58-87.

PREPARED BY: Bruce Erb, Transportation Planner

APPROVED BY: Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services

312231 Page 2 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-092

APPENDIX A

GREENOCK DR DUNSMERE DR

WILLIAMSBURG RD

DINISON CRES GREY FOX DR BOSWORTH CRES RADCLIFFE DR

FISCHER-HALLMAN RD

WESTMOUNTBLOCK RD E LINE RD RISTAU CRES KILLARNEY CRES

HIGHBROOK ST BUSH CRESCLOVER HIGHBROOK CRES

TILLSLEY DR JULIA CRES C I T Y O F HIGHBROOKCRT ROSEBANK CRES K I T C H E N E R ACTIVA AVE RITTENHOUSE RD

RIDGEWAY BRIDLEWREATH ST < TARA CRES COMMONWEALTH ST CRES

MAX BECKER DR S I T E COTTON GRASS ST

COPPER LEAF ST MOUNTAIN LAUREL CRES SWARTZ ST

DUBRICK CRES MAX BECKER DR ERINBROOK DR ROCKWOODRD

YARROW CRT COMMONWEALTH

ISABELLA ST

CRES

BLEAMS RD

NN Not to scale

KEY PLAN

Produced by: Planning, Housing & Community Services, August 2006

312231 Page 3 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-092

APPENDIX B

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CONTROLLED ACCESS BY-LAW #58-87

Site Plan Source:Max Becker Enterprises Ltd. & Cornerstone Architecture Inc.

Planning, Housing and Community Services © Regional Municipality of Waterloo, 2006

312231 Page 4 of 4 Report: P-06-093 p REGION OF WATERLOO

PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES Transportation Planning

TO: Chair Jim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: T15-40

SUBJECT: MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION HIGHWAY 24 TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY – HIGHWAY 401 TO HIGHWAY 403

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) will be attending the September 19, 2006 Planning & Works Committee to make a presentation and introduce the Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Environmental Assessment Study – Highway 401 to Highway 403. The main purpose of the study is to develop a plan that addresses capacity, operation and safety needs between Brantford and Cambridge and to investigate linkage needs between Highway 403 and 401.

The current Highway 24 linkage to Highway 401 is via Water Street and Hespeler Road through Cambridge. This corridor is currently at capacity and alternative routes are necessary. In addition, improved north-south transportation links are required to facilitate goods movements and travel between Waterloo Region and the United States border crossing at Niagara.

The study process identified by MTO will consider these issues. A Public Information Centre will be held from 4:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. on September 26, 2006 at the Cambridge Centre for the Arts, 45 Thorne Street, Cambridge.

REPORT:

Background – Highway 24 Corridor Planning Study

The Highway 24 Corridor Planning Study was initiated by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) in 2001 to examine the need for improved highway access between Highway 401 at Cambridge and Highway 403 at Brantford. The study objectives were to consider possible options for improved accessibility between these two provincial highways, establish a study area and associated issues to be addressed in a future Environmental Assessment (EA) and to solicit agency and public responses to these issues and options.

An extensive Origin – Destination roadside travel survey was conducted as part of this study. On Highway 24, 90% of trips had either an origin or destination in Cambridge or Brantford, 19% had either an origin or destination in Kitchener/Waterloo and 39% made trips exclusively between Brantford and Cambridge.

Traffic volumes counted on the two lane section of Highway 24 indicates that the Highway is currently operating at Level of Service E (at/near capacity). Volume projections to 2021 indicate that Highway 24 will exceed capacity with its two lane cross section.

312883 Page 1 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-093

The Corridor Planning Study recommended a Study Area that extends north to Highway 401 on the east side of Cambridge, and south to Highway 403 in Brantford between King George Road and east of Gordon Avenue. It also extends about 2.5 kilometres east of the Brant County/Hamilton boundary. The recommended study area does not extend west of the Grand River. The study area is illustrated in Figure 1. The 2001 Highway 24 Corridor Planning Study was to be used as background to the upcoming Class EA Study.

Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Class EA Study

The Ministry of Transportation has initiated the Highway 24 Transportation Corridor Planning and Class EA study in 2006 and met with the Municipal Agency Team on August 23, 2006 to introduce their study process. Staff from the City of Cambridge, Township of North Dumfries and Waterloo Region are represented on the Municipal Agency Team.

The MTO has identified the purpose of the study to develop a plan that addresses:

· Capacity, operation and safety needs between the built up areas of Brantford and Cambridge for the movement of people and goods · Linkage needs between Highways 401 and 403 for broader transportation connections to other regions in the province

The study will review and build on the findings of the previous Corridor Planning Study and will address policies and growth factors of the Final Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe released by the province in June 2006. It should be noted that the Provincial Growth Plan indicates a Higher Order Transit Corridor between Cambridge and Brantford connecting to the Region of Waterloo Rapid Transit Corridor and will be considered in the course of this study.

The study will result in the preparation of a preliminary design for provincial roadway components of the recommended plan. A chart outlining the study process is attached as Figure 2. MTO staff will be in attendance at the September 19 Planning and Works Committee to make a presentation on the study process and to respond to questions.

Region of Waterloo Interest

This is a critical study for the future of the Region of Waterloo transportation network. Highway 24 currently connects to Highway 401 via urban arterial links (Water St./Hespeler Road) through the built up areas of Cambridge. These arterial links are operating at capacity and cannot accommodate additional provincial traffic. This inter-regional traffic interferes with local traffic and land use and is not consistent with the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan goals for the Cambridge downtown Urban Growth Centre.

Transportation connections between Waterloo Region and the Niagara Peninsula, including the border crossings, are poor. An improved transportation facility would improve the movement of goods from Waterloo Region to American markets through the Niagara border crossings. A potential new Highway 24 connection between Highway 401 and 403 is one possible link as is the potential Mid-Peninsula Expressway if the selected alignment swings to the north to connect to Highway 401. The Mid-Peninsula Expressway Study is now known as the Niagara to GTA Transportation Corridor Study.

Regional Council approved the following resolution on April 23, 2003:

“That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo request the Ministry of Transportation to consider an improved north-south transportation corridor to facilitate goods movement and travel between

312883 Page 2 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-093

Waterloo Region and United States border crossing at Niagara as outlined in Report P-03-032, dated April 15, 2003.

AND FURTHER THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo supports an environmental assessment process to examine route location options and impacts prior to determining a preferred route.”

The study process proposed by MTO is consistent with this resolution.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

This study is consistent with the development of Strategic Focus Area 4 which is the planning and implementation of a High Quality Regional Transportation System.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no Regional costs associated with this study other than staff time to participate and assist in the study.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

The City of Cambridge and Township of North Dumfries are represented on the Municipal Agency Team.

ATTACHMENTS:

Figure 1 – Study Area Figure 2 – Study Process

PREPARED BY: Graham A. Vincent, Director of Transportation Planning

APPROVED BY: Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services

312883 Page 3 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-093

Highway 24 Corridor Planning Study - Recommended Study Area

COUNTYCOUNTYCOUNTY RD RD RD 35 35 35 COUNTYCOUNTYCOUNTY RD RD RD 35 35 35

SIDEROADSIDEROADSIDEROAD 10 10 10 SIDEROADSIDEROADSIDEROAD 10 10 10

TOWNLINETOWNLINETOWNLINE RD RD RD TOWNLINETOWNLINETOWNLINE RD RD RD

CONCESSIONCONCESSION RDRD 11 KITCHENER KITCHENER PUSLINCHPUSLINCH TWPTWP

REGIONALREGIONALREGIONAL RD RD RD 52 52 52 CAMBRIDGE GOREGORE RDRD REGIONALREGIONALREGIONAL RD RD RD 52 52 52

CLYDECLYDE RDRD

SHELLARDSHELLARDSHELLARD SIDE SIDE SIDE RD RD RD SHELLARDSHELLARDSHELLARD SIDE SIDE SIDE RD RD RD

SHEFFIELDSHEFFIELDSHEFFIELD RD RD RD OLDOLD BEVERLYBEVERLYSHEFFIELDSHEFFIELDSHEFFIELD RD RD RD RDRD KIRKWALLKIRKWALLKIRKWALL RD RD RD KIRKWALLKIRKWALLKIRKWALL RD RD RD MAINMAIN STST EE

ROSEVILLEROSEVILLE RDRD

BRANTFORDBRANTFORDBRANTFORD HWY HWY HWY

BRANTFORDBRANTFORDBRANTFORD HWY HWY HWY CEDARCEDAR CREEKCREEK RDRD BRANTFORDBRANTFORDBRANTFORD HWY HWY HWY

CHEESECHEESECHEESE FACTORY FACTORY FACTORY RD RD RD CHEESECHEESECHEESE FACTORY FACTORY FACTORY RD RD RD SAFARISAFARI RDRD HIGHWAYHIGHWAY 401 401 FLAMBOROUGHFLAMBOROUGH TWPTWP

DUMFRIESDUMFRIESDUMFRIESALPS ALPSRD RD RD RDRD DUMFRIESDUMFRIESDUMFRIESALPS ALPSRD RD RD RDRD HIGHWAYHIGHWAY 88 SPRAGUESSPRAGUESSPRAGUES RD RDRD REIDSVILLEREIDSVILLEREIDSVILLE RD RD RD COUNTYCOUNTY RDRD 88 REIDSVILLEREIDSVILLEREIDSVILLE RD RD RD GREENFIELDGREENFIELD RDRD GREENFIELDGREENFIELD RDRD BRANCHTONBRANCHTONBRANCHTON RD RDRD BRANCHTONBRANCHTONBRANCHTON RD RD RD CONCESSIONCONCESSION RDRD 66 WW

BEKEBEKE RDRD CONCESSIONCONCESSION RDRD 55 WW AYR LOCKIELOCKIE RDRD AYR WESTWESTWEST RIVER RIVER RIVER RD RD RD AYR WESTWESTWEST RIVER RIVER RIVER RD RD RD WRIGLEYWRIGLEY RD WESTWESTWEST RIVER RIVER RIVER RD RD RD

SAGERSAGERSAGER RD RD RD SAGERSAGERSAGER RD RD RD BRANTBRANT WATERLOOWATERLOO RDRD GLENGLEN MORRISMORRIS RDRD EE CONCESSIONCONCESSION RDRD 44 WW GLENGLEN MORRISMORRIS RDRD WW MCPHERSONMCPHERSONMCPHERSON SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL RD RD RD MCPHERSONMCPHERSONMCPHERSON SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL RD RD RD

NORTHNORTH DUMFRIESDUMFRIES TWPTWP MCLEANMCLEAN SCHOOLSCHOOL RDRD MCLEANMCLEAN SCHOOLSCHOOL RDRDGEORGEGEORGEGEORGE RD RD RD GEORGEGEORGEGEORGE RD RD RD HIGHWAYHIGHWAYHIGHWAY 24 24 24 HIGHWAYHIGHWAYHIGHWAY 24 24 24 WESTWESTWEST RIVER RIVER RIVER RD RD RD S S S WESTWESTWEST RIVER RIVER RIVER RD RD RD S S S LYNDENLYNDENLYNDEN RD RD RD SOUTHSOUTH DUMFRIESDUMFRIES TWPTWP LYNDENLYNDENLYNDEN RD RD RD DRUMBODRUMBO RDRD PINEHURSTPINEHURSTPINEHURST RDRD RD DRUMBODRUMBO RDRD PINEHURSTPINEHURSTPINEHURST RDRD RD

EASTEAST RIVEREAST RIVER RDRIVER RD RD EASTEAST RIVEREAST RIVER RDRIVER RD RD EASTEAST RIVEREAST RIVER RDRIVER RD RD HOWELLHOWELL RDRD HARRISBURGHARRISBURGHARRISBURG RD RD RD BLANDFORD-BLENHEIMBLANDFORD-BLENHEIMBLANDFORD-BLENHEIM TWP TWPTWP HARRISBURGHARRISBURGHARRISBURG RD RD RD BLANDFORD-BLENHEIMBLANDFORD-BLENHEIMBLANDFORD-BLENHEIM TWP TWPTWP

FOXDENFOXDENFOXDEN RD RD RD WESTWEST DUMFRIESDUMFRIES RDRD FOXDENFOXDENFOXDEN RD RD RD TRUSSLERTRUSSLERTRUSSLER RD RD RD WESTWEST DUMFRIESDUMFRIES RDRD COUNTYCOUNTY RDRD 2929 TRUSSLERTRUSSLERTRUSSLER RD RD RD

AYRAYRAYR RD RD RD NITHNITHNITH RD RD RD AYRAYRAYR RD RD RD HIGHWAYHIGHWAY 55 NITHNITHNITH RD RD RD HIGHWAYHIGHWAY 55

PARISPARIS PLAINSPLAINS CHURCHCHURCH RDRD

KITCHENKITCHENKITCHEN SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL RD RD RD KITCHENKITCHENKITCHEN SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL RD RD RD GERMANGERMAN SCHOOLSCHOOL RDRD WATTSWATTS PONDPOND RDRD

CLARKECLARKECLARKE RD RD RD CLARKECLARKECLARKE RD RD RD GOVERNORSGOVERNORS RDRD EE

PARKPARKPARK RD RD RD N N N PARKPARKPARK RD RD RD N N N

KING GEORGEKING GEORGEKING RD GEORGE RD RD

KING GEORGEKING GEORGEKING RD GEORGE RD RD

KING GEORGEKING GEORGEKING RD GEORGE RD RD

KEGKEG LANELANE GOLFGOLFGOLF RD RD RD GOLFGOLFGOLF RD RD RD POWERLINEPOWERLINE RDRD

PARISPARIS RDRD PARIS PARISPARIS RDRD

GOVERNORSGOVERNORS RDRD WW HIGHWAYHIGHWAY 403403

BRANTFORD

BURFORDBURFORDBURFORD TWPTWP TWP BURFORDBURFORDBURFORD TWP TWP TWP

Legend Municipal Boundary NN Recommended Study Area (from Highway 24 Corridor Planning Study) Not to scalescale

312883 Page 4 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-093

312883 Page 5 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: P-06-093

312883 Page 6 of 6 MEDIA RELEASE: Friday, September 15, 2006, 4:30 p.m.

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE AGENDA

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:00 p.m. Council Chamber 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario

1. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

2. DELEGATIONS a) Sandra Forwell, Cara's Hope Maternity Home, Cambridge, ON. re: Per diem for residential care program b) Dr. Paul Deman, Waterloo Wellington Dental Association, Kitchener, ON. re: Dental Program

3. INTERDEPARTMENTAL REPORT – Planning, Housing and Community Services a) P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045 Update on the Region of Waterloo's Affordable Housing Strategy 1

REPORTS – Public Health b) PH-06-042 Emergency Medical Services Master Plan Background Paper 8 (Attachment Distributed Separately) c) PH-06-049 Charged Food Premises: Ben Thanh Supermarket 11 d) PH-06-050 Charged Food Premises: Euro C. Affe 13 e) PH-06-051 Charged Food Premises: Boardwalk Gaming & Entertainment 15 Inc. (operating as Bingo Country) f) PH-06-052 Charged Food Premises: Pioneer Bar-B-Q 17 g) PH-06-055 Together 4 Health 19 h) PH-06-057 2005-2006 Influenza Season Summary 29

REPORTS – Social Services i) SS-06-052 Requests for Purchase of Service Agreements 32 j) SS-06-053 Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP) 36 CS Agenda - 2 - September 19, 2006

k) SS-06-054 Changes to the Domiciliary Hostel Program Per Diem 42 l) SS-06-056 2006 Child Care Fee and Wage Subsidy File Review 46 m) SS-06-057 Provincial Changes to Social Assistance Programs 49 n) SS-06-058 Ontario Works Year 2: Focused Review Final Report 51

4. INFORMATION/CORRESPONDENCE a) Letter from Dr. Paul DeMan, Waterloo Wellington Dental Society, dated August 53 23, 2006.

5. OTHER BUSINESS

6. NEXT MEETING – October 3, 2006

7. CLOSED SESSION (motion required)

8. ADJOURN

316238

Report: P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045 REGION OF WATERLOO

PLANNING HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES CORPORATE RESOURCES

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE REGION OF WATERLOO’S AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo receive Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045, Update on the Region of Waterloo’s Affordable Housing Strategy, dated September 19, 2006, for information;

AND THAT the Region of Waterloo reiterate its request that the Provincial government provide sustainable supportive housing funding to the Region of Waterloo, including the proposed Sunnyside Supportive Housing Development.

SUMMARY:

In May of 2001, the Region of Waterloo announced its Affordable Housing Strategy. The initial goal of the Strategy, namely to help create 1,000 new affordable housing units, has been achieved. On May 10, 2005, Regional Council approved enhancements to the original Strategy by establishing a goal of adding 500 additional units to the initial 1000 unit target (see Report P-05- 057).

In the fall of 2005, the Province of Ontario, in partnership with the Federal government, made a funding allocation of $10.15 million available to the Region to assist in the construction of new affordable rental units (described in more detail in Report 05-102). The Region of Waterloo requested Expressions of Interest from various proponents, both non-profit and private enterprise organizations, to construct and operate affordable housing. On December 6, 2005, Regional Council made a number of recommendations to the Province regarding projects that could proceed forward to construction with the assistance of federal-provincial funding (see Report P-05-123/CR- RS-05-088).

Since the inception of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy, approximately 1200 units of affordable housing have been constructed, are currently being constructed or are in the design and financing phases (see Appendix A). This report provides a summary of the status of the projects which have been completed or are ongoing with the assistance of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy.

Initial Affordable Housing Strategy – May 2001 to May 2005

The Regional Municipality of Waterloo approved 21 rental projects as part of the first phase of its affordable housing strategy. These projects are listed in Appendix “A” attached to this Report. With the exception of a project by Victoria Park Community Homes Inc (which is described in more detail below) all of the projects approved in the initial phase of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy have been completed or are in the final stages of completion. Overall, the initial phase of the Strategy assisted in the creation of 891 affordable rental units (including 111 Region Rent

Page 1 of 2 September 19, 2006 Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045

Supplement units) with many of those units currently housing individuals that had been on the Region’s waiting list for community housing. The affordable rental project to be undertaken by Victoria Park Community Homes Inc. (“Victoria Park”), a non-profit corporation, is the only remaining project yet uncompleted as part of phase one of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy. This project was originally approved by Regional Council in PC-00-128 & P-01-128; however Victoria Park has encountered significant delays in the completion of the environmental due diligence which was required for the site located at 1021 Queenston Road in the City of Cambridge. This project is a four storey slab on grade building structure comprised of 42 units.

Over the past three years, Victoria Park has expended considerable time and expense in the completion of a Site Specific Risk Assessment (“SSRA”) of the property to address the presence of petroleum contamination in the groundwater underlying the bedrock at the site. The key finding of the SSRA, prepared by Trow and Associates Inc., was that the presence of the impacted groundwater was not a health and safety risk to potential residents of the property nor should it be considered a hindrance to site development. The Ministry of Environment (“MOE”) acknowledged the SSRA and have issued a Certificate of Property Use in May of 2006 which has been registered on title to the property. The Certificate of Property Use permits the construction of a multi- residential building on the site and requires Victoria Park to initiate an air and water quality program for a period of five (5) years following the completion of the building. In July of 2006, a building permit was issued by the City of Cambridge for the construction of the project.

The total cost of the project will be approximately $5.8 million dollars, with $3.6 million to be provided by way of a Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (“CMHC”) insured loan. The balance of the funding will be provided by a combination of Federal, Provincial, Regional and City of Cambridge assistance together with an equity contribution from Victoria Park. In particular, the sum of $1,218,000 will be provided by the federal-provincial affordable housing funding program ($29,000 per unit) with $630,000 to be provided in accordance with the approved framework of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy ($15,000 per unit). As the project is within an identified “core area” in the City of Cambridge, it is exempt from Regional and City of Cambridge development charges and is eligible for a $63,000 brownfield remediation grant from the City of Cambridge. In addition Victoria Park will contribute $ 300,000 in equity to this project.

The completion of the environmental due diligence for this project is a significant achievement made possible, in part, by the Province of Ontario’s recent amendments to the Environmental Protection Act (“EPA”) which encourage brownfield development. The Victoria Park project, together with a number of other brownfield affordable housing projects in the Province, has been part of a brownfield development initiative supported by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and CMHC. Associated documents will need to be executed between the Region and the Province.

Enhanced Affordable Housing Strategy – May 2005 to End of 2008

On May 10, 2005, Regional Council approved the framework of an Enhanced Affordable Housing Strategy, which principally entailed a plan to assist in the creation of 500 additional units of affordable housing by the end of 2008. On August 31, 2005, the Strategy was supplemented by an announcement of the Federal and Provincial governments to allocate the sum of $10.15 million to the Region of Waterloo under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Agreement to assist in the creation of new affordable housing. Within the parameters of the Provincial “Strong Starts” program, the Region of Waterloo again called upon local organizations to submit Expressions of Interest to construct and operate affordable housing. Despite the tight timeframes and requirements of the Provincial Strong Starts program, the Region received many expressions of interest from community groups. Report P-05-123 prioritized 21 proposals under the Canada-

316904 Page 2 of 7 September 19, 2006 Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045

Ontario Affordable Housing Agreement, of which 10 projects (see Appendix A) were recommended to the Ministry for funding under the Strong Start phase (approved by Council December 14, 2005).

In early 2006, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing approved the recommendations for project funding made by Regional Council and the ten (10) projects are currently underway with the exception of the Sunnyside Seniors Supportive Housing project. A brief outline of the status of each of these projects is set out below:

Affordable Rental Housing:

MennoHomes Inc. – The Rockway Gardens Village project comprising 50 new affordable senior’s rental units on a site that was donated to the proponent non-profit at 1420 King Street East (in the Rockway area) is currently under construction and is anticipated to be complete by March 2007;

L.M. Kovacevic Inc. & M.D. Kovacevic Inc. – This infill project consists of two triplex located on Avon Road in the City of Kitchener. Construction has begun and the projected occupancy is scheduled for December 2006;

Hunke Homes Ltd. – This renovation of an existing building at 1215 Queensbush Road in Wellesley is currently underway. The project consists of 7 units of affordable rental housing and is anticipated to be complete by fall of 2006, with an anticipated November 1, 2006 occupancy;

Lancer Tiger Lofts Corporation in partnership with Urban Non-Profit Homes – This fifty-four unit project involves the renovation of the former “Tiger Brand” textile facility on 35 Water Street South in Cambridge. The proponent of this project has incurred considerable expense in completing the environmental remediation of the property. Construction of the project has not yet begun as the proponent has requested additional funding of $396,000 from the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing program in order to partially address the costs of the environmental due diligence and remediation associated with the site. The balance of the additional costs is proposed to be offset by an additional equity contribution from the proponent. The request for additional funding is pending with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing;

Lena Melynychuk – This proponent has commenced the conversion of a commercial building in downtown Ayr (99 Stanley Street – formerly the “Queens Hotel”) into 8 residential rental units;

Maple Hill Creek Apts. Inc. – This proponent, affiliated with the Jamesway Construction group, has commenced the construction of a 98 unit project at a site located at the corner of University Avenue and Erb Street (105 University Avenue) in Waterloo. It should be noted that 70 units within the project will receive funding under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program. This project is anticipated to be complete by March 2007.

Supportive Affordable Housing:

YWCA- (Kitchener-Waterloo Young Women’s Christian Association)– As part of the overall renovation of the YWCA site at 84 Frederick Street in Kitchener, the YWCA has initiated the construction of 6 units of affordable housing intended to house victims of domestic violence drawn from the Region’s Special Priority (SPP) category of the co-ordinated access list. These apartments will be offered to tenants at 80% of the affordable rents as determined by CMHC ($433 per month for five bachelor apartments and $521 for a one-bedroom apartment);

The Working Centre –( KW Working Centre for the Unemployed)- The Working Centre, a non-

316904 Page 3 of 7 September 19, 2006 Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045 profit organization, is currently renovating 66 Queen Street South which will accommodate five apartment units on the second floor ($330 for two bachelor, $527 for one bedroom and $571 for two bedroom). Working Centre Programs, including employment and mental health, will provide ongoing support to the tenants. This first floor will also be renovated, with separate funding, to integrate employment supports for individuals, a computer training lab and a commercial kitchen/culinary training area; Sunnyside Seniors Supportive Housing – On November 15, 2005, Regional staff reported to Community Services Committee on the potential to construct to 28 units of supportive seniors housing at the Sunnyside Home campus (see Report P-05-115/SS-05-070). Some preliminary work has been done on site plan, capital budget and operating budget and the project has enthusiastic support from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and the local Community Care Access Centre. Regional Council authorized staff to submit a request for capital funding of the project to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing but to also endeavor to secure a commitment from the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care for sustainable, long-term operating funding. This requirement for operating funding is a key element of the project without which it cannot proceed.

On January 19, 2006 the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing approved a financial contribution towards the capital cost of the project in the amount of $ 1,092,000 under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program and the local Community Care Access Centre has committed to assisting with a portion of the required operating funds. However, the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care has declined to provide the additional operating funding, citing an overall lack of funding for new community support or supportive housing services. Regional staff, with the support of staff from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing will continue to follow up with the request for operational funding for the project. If funding cannot be secured by March 2007, the project may not proceed, as capital funding under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program may cease to be available.

Affordable Home Ownership:

Options for Homes – This proponent has initiated the construction of 64 stacked townhouse-style ownership units on a three-acre wooded site near the intersection of Strasburg and Block Line Roads in Kitchener’s Laurentian Hills subdivision. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is finalizing the details of its program for affordable home ownership funding; however, as an interim measure, has agreed to provide funding for up to ten (10) affordable units within this project to purchasers that meet the eligibility requirements for assistance. Households that are, or eligible to be, on the Region’s co-ordinated access list and earning between $26,000 and $ 44,000 may receive a federal-provincial forgivable loan of up to $8,000 to assist with the purchase of an affordable unit;

Regional staff will continue to work with the proponents of the projects approved for funding under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Agreement and report to Council, as required, on any new developments concerning the status of the projects. Staff recommends that Regional Council formally reiterate this request for sustainable supportive housing funds.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Council’s Strategic Focus includes an action to aggressively implement the Affordable Housing Strategy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

316904 Page 4 of 7 September 19, 2006 Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045

Initial Phase of Strategy - The completion of all projects approved during the initial phase of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy was accomplished with the assistance of a Regional Forgivable Loan of up to $15,000 per unit and limited grants to offset Regional Development Charges in accordance with a funding framework approved by Regional Council (see Report No. P- 02-126). In total, the Region’s investment of $8.3 million in these projects was complemented by a Federal-Provincial financial contribution of $12.2 million. Enhanced Strategy - Funding for projects approved as part of the Region’s Enhanced Affordable Housing Strategy is provided by the Federal and Provincial government under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Agreement. In addition, projects have the financial incentives from the Region of the property tax equalization and grants for Regional Development Charges (RDC’S). Should each of the projects approved for Strong Starts be completed, the Region will have assisted in creating approximately 234 units of affordable housing with a total federal-provincial capital contribution of approximately $10.15 million. In the event that one or more of the projects cannot proceed, the Sunnyside Seniors Supportive Housing project for example, staff will bring forward a further report to Council with recommendations to re-distribute the Region’s funding allocation to projects that have already been approved in principal by Council (see “Affordable Housing Strategy: Strong Start Priority Projects”, P-05-123/CR-RS-05-088) or to projects that have responded to a further call for Expressions of Interest.

Next Steps - If the Region of Waterloo is to achieve its goal of creating 1,500 units of new affordable housing, a capital funding enhancement to the current capital funding allocation of $10.15 million under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Agreement will be required. A request for such funding has been made to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Regional staff is currently working with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) and other Service Managers to further refine details of the Home Ownership Program ($1.16M ), as well as, the Housing Allowance Program ($2.21M allocation).

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Staff from Finance, Social Services and Legal Services have been consulted in the preparation of this report. Legal Services has been extensively involved in the preparation of the agreements in connection with the Region’s forgivable loan of $630,000 to Victoria Park Community Homes Inc. Specifically in connection with the structuring the agreements and documentation for the loan, at Victoria Park’s expense and for the benefit of the Region of Waterloo, an independent legal analysis and opinion were provided by the environmental law firm of Willms & Shier to ensure any contingent environmental liabilities are appropriately addressed.

ATTACHMENTS:

Appendix A: List of Affordable Housing Projects Completed in the First Two Phases of the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy

PREPARED BY: Keith Lucas, Director of Housing Jeff Schelling, Solicitor (Corporate)

APPROVED BY: Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services Gary Sosnoski, Commissioner of Corporate Resources

316904 Page 5 of 7 September 19, 2006 Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045

Appendix “A”

THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO LIST OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS COMPLETED IN THE FIRST TWO PHASES OF THE REGION’S AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY

Number Completion Date No. Proponent Report No. of Units of Project 1 Rotberg Development Group P-02-126 19 May 2003 2 Heartwood Place P-01-128 33 Dec. 22, 2003 3 Spadina Apartments Inc. P-02-084 27 June 25, 2003 4 Kitchener Housing Inc. P-01-128 42 June 25, 2003 5 K-W Working Centre For The Unemployed PC-00-128 6 July 10, 2003 6 Ayr And District Citizens Association P-02-043 2 June 24, 2003 7 King Street Properties (Elmira) Ltd. P-02-126 4 June 4, 2003 2019188 Ontario Limited (Cook Homes 8 P-02-126 52 July 28, 2004 Limited) November 30, 9 Cypriot Homes Association P-02-084 87 2005 10 Walnut Apartments Inc. P-02-126 66 June 8, 2004 Making Room Community Support for the 11 PC-00-128 20 March 21, 2006 Homeless (Bridges) 12 House of Friendship of Kitchener P-02-084 22 August 25, 2005 P-02-126 13 Old Firehall Apartments Ltd. 35 October 19, 2005 P-04-062 14 La Capanna II Homes (Non-Profit) Inc. P-02-126 42 November 2, 2005 15 Bloomingdale Mews Ltd. P-02-084 79 February 3, 2006 November 15, 16 MennoHomes Inc. P-01-128 16 2004 Region of Waterloo 17 CR-FM-03-009 32 February 15, 2005 Sunnyside Seniors Apartments 18 Blaze Properties Inc. P-03-074 25 April 18, 2006 19 Lancer Wellington Corporation P-04-062 77 November 2006 20 Lena Apartments Inc. P-05-044 52 October 2006

PC-00-128 Not Complete 21 Victoria Park Community Homes Inc. 42 P-01-128 22 Rent Supplement Units 111 Total Units – Initial Phase 891

316904 Page 6 of 7 September 19, 2006 Report P-06-095/CR-RS-06-045

ENHANCED AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY STRONG START PROJECTS

Number Projected No. Proponent Report No. of Units Completion Date 1 KW Working Centre for the Unemployed 5 March 2007 2 MennoHomes Inc. (The Rockway Gardens 50 March 2007 Village) 3 Hunke Homes Ltd. 7 November 2006 4 The Regional Municipality of Waterloo 28 March 2007 (Sunnyside Supportive Housing) 5 YWCA (Kitchener Waterloo Young Women’s P-05-123/CR- 6 March 2007 Christian Association) RS-05-088 6 Lancer Tiger Lofts Corporation/Urban Non- 54 March 2007 Profit Homes 7 Lena Melnychuk 8 March 2007 8 Maple Hill Creek Apts. Inc. 70 March 2007 9 L.M. Kovacevic Inc. & M.D. Kovacevic Inc. 6 December 2006 Projects under construction 234 10 Projects presently in the planning stages 75 Total Units – Strong Start 309 GRAND TOTAL ALL UNITS 1,200

316904 Page 7 of 7 Report: PH-06-042 REGION OF WATERLOO

PUBLIC HEALTH Emergency Medical Services

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES MASTER PLAN BACKGROUND PAPER

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

Nil

REPORT:

As part of the Region’s Human Services Planning Process, staff are in the process of developing a long term Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Master Plan. The Plan is intended to provide a strategic planning framework for the evolution of EMS over the next 25 years (2006-2031). The Background Paper referenced in this report is the first phase of the EMS Master Plan. The Background Paper reviews the current situation, historic trends and future projections with regards to EMS in the Region of Waterloo.

Since the Region assumed responsibility for EMS in 2000, Council has approved a number of service enhancements involving increased staffing, additional vehicles, enhanced technology, upgraded and added ambulance stations including a new Fleet Centre, and significantly increased the number of Advanced Care Paramedics. The volume of calls has also continued to grow significantly, increasing by 35% since 2000. This increase in call volume, combined with other changes in the health care system have contributed to ambulance response times not meeting the targets established by the Province and Regional Council. As described in the attached Background Paper, it is expected that EMS call volumes will continue to increase over the next 25 years.

Predictive modeling has revealed that the EMS call volume will double in twenty five years due to growth and aging of the Region’s population. The projected call volume in 2031 is 64,000, up from 31,000 patient carrying calls in 2005. Major drivers of current and future EMS demand include:

• Annual Population Growth: Expected to remain at or above 1.5% during the RGMS timeline; • The Aging Demographic: Someone 70 years of age or older, is 6-1/2 times more likely to use an ambulance than someone less than 65 years of age. Today, only 8.5% of the Region’s population is over 70, but accounts for 38% of the call volume. Within 25 years, those over 70 will make up 18.5% of the Region’s population;

Page 1 of 3 September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-042

• Aging often equals Ailing: Due primarily to the aging demographic, the coronary heart disease rate is expected to increase by 92% between 2001-2031. Strokes and other cerebrovascular disease is estimated to increase by 69% in the same time frame, while hospitalizations for seizure related disorders will increase by 181%. Overall, a 10.4% annual increase in the top seven EMS medical/trauma call drivers is expected; • Health Care Restructuring: Driven mainly by travel time associated with health care restructuring, calls continue to climb in duration, having risen by an average of 13 minutes (22%) in the last five years; and • Hospital Offload Delays: Adding on average, 10 minutes to time spent in the Emergency Department with each call. During 2005, 58.4 – 24 hour ambulance days were lost to extended offload delays in Emergency Departments. A 41% increase in time lost is expected in 2006 with no resolution expected in the near future.

A number of measures will be required to address both the current and future expected demand for EMS resources.

Staff are currently investigating innovative service delivery options across four broad categories:

• Managing Resource Supply • Managing Service Demand • Redefining Performance Standards • Optimizing Response Capabilities

These efforts include investigating increased collaboration with other emergency services, possible enhancements to the dispatch of emergency services, utilizing other than ambulances to provide rapid response capabilities, redefining appropriate response time targets, investigating widened use of the existing traffic signal pre-emption system, and co-ordinating community education to train citizen responders to assist in the most time-sensitive cardiac arrest situations.

Distribution of this background paper is planned to external stakeholders, with added consultation as required.

The final EMS Master Plan, expected in February 2007, will provide a number of response time target options for Council review, suggest service optimization techniques and related costs, propose triggers to prompt resource increases, as well as a long term plan for station locations and related response time polygons.

Recommendations will be divided into firm suggestions and costs for the short term (2007-2010), and best effort estimates for the medium term (2011-2022), and long term (2023-2031). The Master Plan is proposed as an evergreen document, evolving into more accurate five year estimates as data develops and modeling becomes more precise.

The remaining steps and timelines for the development of the EMS Master Plan and its recommendations, include:

• Distributing this report and the Background Paper for comment by primary stakeholders such as other emergency services, municipalities, hospitals, etc. (September 20, 2006); • Developing a matrix of potential service delivery options in preparation for response time modeling and financial analysis (October/November 2006); • Response time modeling and financial analysis of potential service delivery options (November/December 2006);

DOCS #312754 Page 2 of 3 September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-042

• Information report to Committee/Council reporting on results of modeling and requesting Public Information Session(s) to gain public input (January 2007); • Public Information Session(s) (January or February 2007), and • Final EMS Master Plan presented to Committee/Council (February or March 2007)

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

As a component of the Human Services Plan in support of the Regional Growth Management Strategy, the EMS Master Plan addresses Focus Area 1: Manage Regional Growth to Enhance Quality of Life, and Focus Area 2: Enhance Community Health and Social Well Being, as well as Focus Area 5: Ensure Operational Effectiveness and Efficiency.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The EMS Master Plan will have significant financial implications as additional resources will be needed to address call volume increases and reduce emergency response times. Additional capital and ongoing operational costs are also anticipated. The financial impact will be dependent on the response time target selected by Council, the response triggers developed to address call volume growth, and the method(s) of service provision ultimately adopted.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

In addition to a number of outside stakeholders, the EMS Growth Management Working Group assembled for this project, included representation from Corporate Services (Facilities), Finance, Planning, Public Health, Risk Management, and Transportation & Environmental Services (WRESTRC).

ATTACHMENTS

Emergency Medical Services Master Plan: Background Paper

PREPARED BY: John Prno, Director, Emergency Medical Services

APPROVED BY: Dr. Liana Nolan, Commissioner/Medical Officer of Health

DOCS #312754 Page 3 of 3

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

During 1997, the Province of Ontario announced its intention to transfer responsibility for land ambulance services to upper tier municipalities (UTMs). Across the Province, this translated to approximately fifty Regions, Counties and District Social Services Delivery Boards (DSSBs) gaining newfound responsibility for Emergency Medical Services (EMS). Financial responsibility was transferred first in 1998, with overall governance control mandated by January 1, 2001.

Following an exhaustive review, the Region of Waterloo chose to provide direct delivery of EMS as a Division of Public Health. Effective December 3, 2000, the Region assumed the human and physical assets of the two predecessor ambulance services: The Cambridge Memorial Hospital Ambulance Service; and Kitchener Waterloo Regional Ambulance (1987) Inc.

Since the transition to direct delivery, Regional Council has approved increased staffing, added vehicles, enhanced technology, upgraded and added ambulance stations including a new headquarters and central fleet centre, increased paramedic wages and benefits, and significantly increased the number of Advanced Care Paramedics (ACPs) serving our communities.

Despite these very significant investments in EMS, population growth, demographic shifts and a changing provincial health care system, have impacted on the service’s ability to optimize pre- hospital care for the Region’s residents. In anticipation of these impacts continuing to increase call volumes exponentially, the need for a long term EMS Master Plan is essential. This review of EMS projected needs, challenges and service delivery options is an integral part of the Human Services Plan and the Regional Growth Management Strategy.

1.2 Objectives

The objective of the final EMS Master Plan is to provide an EMS strategic planning framework for the next twenty five years (2006-2031). Divided into short and long term phases, this evergreen document will evolve over time, providing a means of regularly evaluating and adjusting the service’s ability to respond to growth in the Region.

This background paper reviews the current situation, historic trends and future projections with regards to EMS in the Region of Waterloo. It is intended to generate discussion and not as a detailed examination of each issue. Following stakeholder input to this report, an external team will be contracted to conduct response modeling and review the recommendations provided. The final report expected in January/February 2007, will present service delivery options for consideration, as well as finalize recommendations, time lines and projected costing.

5

1.3 Working Group

In November, 2005, an EMS Growth Management Working Group was established to guide planning for EMS through 2031. Membership was wide ranging and included the following individuals:

John Prno (Chair) Roger Mayo Director, Operations Manager, Region of Waterloo Emergency Medical Services Region of Waterloo Emergency Medical Services

Blair Allen Lee Parent Transit Planner, Region of Waterloo Manager, Budgets and Financial Services, Region of Waterloo Kevin Curtis Associate Director of Community Planning, Becky Schlenvogt Region of Waterloo Principal Planner, Region of Waterloo

Henry Garcia Anne Schlorff Director, Environmental Health and Lifestyle Director, Central Resources, Resources, Region of Waterloo Public Health Region of Waterloo Public Health

Doug Gilmore Daniela Seskar-Hencic Facilities Planner, Region of Waterloo Manager, Planning and Evaluation, Region of Waterloo Public Health Rick Hummel Manager, Waterloo Region Emergency Services Craig Smith Training and Research Complex Manager, Risk Management Region of Waterloo Rick Kennedy Manager, Dr. Don Stewart Cambridge Central Ambulance Woolwich Community Health Centre Communications Centre Dr. David Waldbillig Lewinda Knowles Medical Director, Epidemiologist, Region of Waterloo Public Health Waterloo – Wellington – Dufferin Base Hospital Program Dr. Renee MacPhee Wilfrid Laurier University Don Wilcox Community Representative

The working group met monthly to review service delivery options in response to identified needs and challenges. The team will be expanded during the next phase of the Master Plan process to ensure it includes the necessary expertise to evaluate the full range of options that will be considered.

6

1.4 Service Description

Region of Waterloo EMS is the sole licensed provider of pre-hospital emergency care in the Region. Licensing is maintained through successful completion of a comprehensive Ministry of Health Certification Review conducted every three years. Operating from eight stations including the EMS Headquarters and Fleet Centre, Region of Waterloo EMS responded to over 36,000 requests for service during 2005, with 31,500 of those as potential patient carrying calls. Since 2000, patient carrying calls have increased by 35%.

At the end of 2005, 83 full-time and 55 part-time paramedics made up the work force, with 53% of full-time staff trained at the Advanced Care Paramedic level. 13 management and management support staff as well as 6 fleet support staff bring the staff complement to a total of 111.4 full time equivalents. 17 ambulances, 4 emergency response units, 1 emergency support unit and 3 multi-casualty incident trailers made up the primary emergency fleet, with a fleet support and driver training vehicle also available.

Locally, EMS resources are dispatched through the provincially owned and operated: Cambridge Central Ambulance Communications Centre (C-CACC). The Centre also dispatches ambulances for Dufferin and Wellington Counties as well as portions of Perth and Grey Counties.

Medical skills are delegated to the Region’s paramedics through the Waterloo – Wellington – Dufferin Base Hospital Program operated by Cambridge Memorial Hospital. The Base Hospital Program is also responsible for selected quality assurance audits and paramedic training.

1.5 Challenges

Three significant challenges will drive Region of Waterloo EMS over the next twenty five years:

• Managing increased call volume driven by population growth expected to exceed 1.5% a year for the foreseeable future;

• Managing increased call volume and change in call type associated with a demographic shift to an aging and ailing population;

• Establishing appropriate and substantiated response time standards, and then maintaining these standards in light of overall call volume growth and confounders such as traffic congestion, provincial health care reorganization and population intensification;

In conjunction with these challenges, EMS planning must also include preparation for what has become known as the “new normal”… Enhanced infection control practices and changing systems demands associated with pandemic and other major emergency preparedness planning.

7 To provide a basis for the development of a long-term EMS Master Plan, the following sections of this background paper describe:

• Current service delivery models; • Service delivery issues and challenges; • Historic, current and projected call volumes, and • Service improvement options to be reviewed

2.0 CURRENT SERVICE DELIVERY MODELS

Across the country, no single EMS service delivery model dominates:

• British Columbia: Single provincially operated Ministry of Health service • Alberta: Variety of Regional Health Authority, municipal Fire and third-service EMS • Saskatchewan: Regional Health Authority directed and private ambulance services • Manitoba: Variety of private, Regional Health Authority and municipal Fire services • Quebec: Variety of private and municipal third-service EMS • New Brunswick: Variety of private and hospital operated ambulance services * • Nova Scotia: A single private ambulance service operating under contract to the Ministry of Health • Prince Edward Island: Private ambulance services * • Newfoundland: Primarily private with a major hospital operated ambulance service

* In recent months, both New Brunswick and PEI have announced agreements with Medavie Blue Cross (the Nova Scotia contractor) to design customized EMS systems with single providers operating under contract to the provincial Ministry of Health.

The limited service provided in the Yukon, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories is operated in conjunction with municipal Fire Departments.

In Ontario, there are presently fifty Upper Tier Municipalities (UTMs) and District Social Services Delivery Boards (DSSBs) responsible for ambulance services. As illustrated in Figure 1, the vast majority (forty of these or 80%) are services directly operated by the UTM/DSSB (third-service), while two more (4%) utilize a combination of direct delivery and contracting out. The remaining eight UTMs/DSSBs (16%) contract out ambulance services to either hospitals or private operators. One of these eight UTMs/DSSBs (Rainy River) has served notice that it will be assuming direct delivery as of January 1, 2007.

8

Figure 1: Number of Ontario EMS by Service Delivery Type

Number of Ontario EMS by Service Delivery Type

45 40 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 8 5 2 0 Direct Contracted Combined

Of the six regional municipalities, five (Durham, Halton, Niagara, Waterloo and York) operate EMS as a division of their Public Health service, while one (Peel) operates under the Corporate Services Department. Four single tier cities in Ontario, i.e., Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa and Sudbury, operate administratively amalgamated Fire and EMS. These services remain operationally distinct but benefit from administrative efficiencies, e.g., single General Manager, shared Labour Relations expertise, etc.

3.0 SERVICE DELIVERY ISSUES

3.1 Matching EMS Supply to Demand

High performance Emergency Medical Services match supply (vehicles and paramedics) to demand (call volume) on an hour-by-hour basis. This means that unlike a Fire Department which typically staffs all stations to the same level around the clock, EMS staffing like Police, varies by time of day and related call volume. Matching supply to demand means current staffing levels that range from a minimum of seven ambulances between 0300-0600, to a maximum of thirteen ambulances and one response unit in the late afternoon and early evening. As a general rule, the early evening (1700-2100) requires nearly twice as many units as early morning (0200-0600), while other time periods fall between these extremes. The literature suggests one 24-hour ambulance is required for every 40,000 people in the community.

9

3.2 Deployment Styles

A combination of geographic and demand deployment is used to service the Region. Geographic deployment involves static stationing of resources at set stations located to optimize response across the Region. The system defaults to this model when call demand is low. As demand increases, the system becomes mobile and collapses towards the core areas where call demand is highest. EMS utilizes historic call data to predict call demand and move vehicles in anticipation of this demand. A modified form of System Status Management, this sets out priority stations to be staffed at different ambulance availability levels, i.e., as urban call volume grows throughout the day, rural ambulances must be used to provide urban coverage and rural stations often go under resourced. The Rural Emergency Response Unit (RERU) concept to be described later, was developed to limit the impact of this necessary ambulance redeployment.

3.3 Maximizing Resource Utilization

There has been a widely held understanding across EMS that 30% utilization of resources (1 patient carrying call every 3 hours) is the ideal Unit Hour Utilization (UHU). Below this level and excess capacity is wasted while beyond this point, little contingency remains for at-station vehicle availability. All time is spent traveling to or from calls and no time is available to rest and feed crews. At 40% utilization on an ongoing basis, staff burnout is common.

This belief has been further supported through Regional data comparing calls per 24-hour vehicle to response time generated. 8 calls per 24-hour vehicle represents a 30% utilization. During the past six years, response times have only shown a true downward trend when calls per 24-hour vehicle were below 8. Prior to the Spring 2006 service enhancements, calls per 24-hour vehicle were at 9.1 or 38% utilization.

Figure 2: Calls/Vehicle/Day and Response Time

Calls/Vehicle/Day and Response Time

12 16:48

10 14:24

12:00 8 9:36 Calls/Vehicle/Day 6 Minutes:Seconds 7:12 Linear (Minutes:Seconds) 4 Response Time

Calls/Vehicle/Day 4:48

2 2:24

0 0:00 1996199819992000200120022003200420052006

10

3.4 Dispatch Models

While Toronto, Ottawa and Niagara manage and dispatch their own EMS resources and claim substantial operational advantages as a result, the balance of the Province’s Central Ambulance Communications Centres are operated by or for the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.

A five-year moratorium presently exists (ending in 2009) to preclude additional municipalities from providing their own dispatch services while the Ministry studies results from Niagara and Ottawa.

The current model has all 9-1-1 calls answered at a Public Service Answering Point (PSAP) operated by the Waterloo Regional Police. Any caller requesting an ambulance is transferred to the C-CACC with the Police Communicator staying on the line to determine whether a Police response is also required. If the Ambulance Communicator determines the call meets Tiered Response criteria, they transfer the call to the appropriate Fire Dispatch (Kitchener or Cambridge), who determines which department and station are appropriate and alerts them.

3.5 Emergency Response Time Standards and Targets

Because they have the appearance of objectivity, response times are usually the key measure used to assess EMS system performance from the citizen’s perspective. It is essential however, to understand what exactly is being reported.

The speed with which ambulances respond to emergencies is highly variable. In some cases, this is due to geography. In dense urban areas for example, the distances traveled are short, but traffic and other hindrances such as traffic calming measures and high rise elevators cause delays, while rural areas involve greater distances and longer travel times.

In urban areas, the most widely used standard is arrival in less than nine minutes, ninety percent of the time. In suburban and rural areas, or for non life-threatening calls, it is common to set longer response time targets. In most jurisdictions outside Ontario, the nine minutes includes time spent by the dispatch centre processing the call before it is dispatched to an ambulance.

In Ontario, Section 42. (1) of the Ambulance Act Regulations requires “that in 90% of the priority 4 (life threatening) calls received in a twelve month period, the response time performance is equal to the response time performance set by the person who operated the service in 1996”, 1996 being the last full year that the MOHLTC controlled all aspects of EMS funding and operational control. For the Region of Waterloo, this represents a legislated standard of 10 minutes 30 seconds (From the time the crew is notified until they arrive at the scene… Note that this does not include dispatch handling time). Figure 3 illustrates the 1996 response times for a range of municipalities in Ontario.

11

Figure 3: Legislated Response Time Standard by Upper Tier Municipality

In addition to the legislated standard, during the 2000 transition to Regional control of EMS, Regional Council established a Region-wide response time target of less than nine minutes, for ninety percent of all emergency calls. A long-standing industry gold standard, the “less than nine minutes” concept originates from a decades old Seattle study of cardiac arrest victims, that

found when BLS (Basic Life Support) was initiated within four minutes and ALS (Advanced Life Support) within eight, the victim had a much greater chance of survival. However, with cardiac arrests making up only 1% of overall call volume (albeit the most critical portion), there is increasing controversy about whether overall system performance should be driven by these patients.

In the 2003 Position Paper entitled: “Considerations in Establishing EMS Response Time Goals”, Bailey and Sweeney writing for the National Association of EMS Physicians note that: “Except for cardiac arrest, there is little or no scientific evidence suggesting a causal relationship between response interval and improved patient outcomes. There is little evidence linking improved response intervals to improved survival in critical trauma, and there is no literature suggesting that rapid response intervals improve outcome for non-critical patients. However, there is a public expectation that when EMS is requested, an ambulance will appear within a reasonable time no matter what the complaint. The definition of “reasonable time” can vary considerably between communities of varying population density.”

12

Further, in their article “Paramedic Response Time: Does it affect patient survival?”, Pons, Haukoos, et al, concluded that: “A paramedic response time within 8 minutes* was not associated with improved survival to hospital discharge after controlling for several important confounders including level of illness severity. However, a survival benefit was identified when the response time was within 4 minutes for patients with intermediate or high risk of mortality. Adherence to the 8-minute response time guideline in most patients who access out-of-hospital emergency services is not supported by these results.”

* It should be noted that the “within 8 minutes” response time described in the article, is actually within 8 minutes 59 seconds, or equivalent to the “nine minute” target set locally.

The “nine minute” gold standard is a demanding target that was established for a specific purpose within high urban population densities and call volumes. In less densely populated, suburban, rural and remote areas, a longer response time may be required. If this is the case, it should be widely communicated to avoid unrealistic public expectations. A survey summarizing current selected EMS response time targets across Canada, is attached as Appendix A.

During 2005, the Region of Waterloo Code-4 (the most emergent calls) response time continued to climb, reaching 13 minutes 43 seconds, 90% of the time, or 16 minutes 04 seconds when dispatch processing time was included. These values are significantly higher than both the Ministry standard and the Council target.

Figure 4: EMS Response Time by Year (Minutes:Seconds)

EMS Response Time by Year (Minutes:Seconds)

16:48

14:24 13:43

12:00 11:51 12:05 12:00 11:12 11:21 11:01 10:30 10:51

9:36

7:12

4:48

2:24

0:00 1996 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

The Region of Waterloo is not alone in having difficulty keeping up with arbitrary response time standards. The Provincial Auditor General’s report released in December 2005, revealed that response times have increased in 44% of municipalities (2004 vs. 2000 Audit results). As shown in Figure 5, 64% did not meet their legislated response time standards in 2004. Across the 13

province, call volume growth due to population growth, demographic shift and health care system rationalization, exceeded resource growth, although the total provincial and municipal cost of providing ambulance service increased by 94% over these four years. The Ministry of

Health and Long Term Care (MOHLTC) is presently reviewing the existing response time standards. It is anticipated that municipalities will be allowed to set their own standards within prescribed limits.

Figure 5: Municipalities Meeting Legislated Response Time Standard in 2004

Internationally, other jurisdictions are also re-evaluating emergency response time standards. Subsequent to the transformation agenda for their national ambulance services, reworked standards in the United Kingdom now require a first response paramedic at the scene within 14 minutes, and a transport-capable ambulance within 19 minutes, 90% of the time. Figure 6 shows 2005 response times in Ontario Upper Tier Municipalities as compared to both the standard North American and United Kingdom standards.

14

Figure 6: 2005 Upper Tier Municipality Response Times

3.5.1 A Provincial Comparison of Response Times by Similar Call Density

In response to the growing difficulty in maintaining response times in the face of rapidly increasing call volumes and associated funding concerns, ten OMBI (Ontario Municipal Benchmarking Initiative) municipalities chose to review response times based on call density rather than simply within a geographic boundary.

The MOHLTC collects calls performed within standardized square kilometer blocks across the province. The OMBI municipalities separated 253,570 emergency calls (2003 Code-4 calls) into those kilometer blocks with similar annual call volumes, i.e., 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 21-25, and >25 calls. Greater than 25 calls annually in a given square kilometer generally defines an “urban” response square. 90th percentile response times (From the time the crew is notified until they arrive at the scene) were then calculated across these similar call volume blocks rather than across a municipality to reveal performance across the OMBI sample based on annual call volume. True province-wide system performance is shown below:

Calls/Sq Km 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 >25 90th% Time 20:54 16:43 14:24 15:00 13:35 11:09

Most telling, is the fact that all of the response times are higher than the Region’s 10 minute 30 second legislated standard and the Council-directed 9 minute target. Even in the “>25” call “urban” kilometers, actual values were more than two minutes above the 9 minute “target”. It should also be noted that none of the times include dispatch centre handling time, which adds approximately two minutes to the true response time of service reaching the citizen in need. 15

3.6 Response Time Confounders

In the Region of Waterloo, as in most mixed urban/rural municipalities, call location is driven by population. 90% of ambulance calls occur within the Region’s three cities, and only 10% across the balance of the geography, similar to the population spread. Due to the travel distances involved and the need to provide some degree of geographically dispersed coverage regardless of the number of calls anticipated, it costs significantly more to provide a similar level of care in rural areas than in more densely populated urban areas. Yet, intensification of population in given areas also brings unique response concerns, the balance between which are not always understood.

Increasing traffic congestion, rail crossing delays, vertical response in high rise buildings, and traffic calming measures, all serve to slow response times even if an emergency vehicle is readily available. The Kitchener Fire Department estimates that their response time has risen at least one minute per call over the past six years due to these confounders alone. While EMS has not formally reviewed our data in this regard, the belief is that this is an understatement. Each traffic intersection or calming device can add 10-20 seconds to an emergency vehicle response, and a high rise response can easily add two minutes through controlled access and elevator travel.

3.7 Station Selection

The service currently operates from eight station locations. Four of these are shared Fire/EMS facilities while the remaining are stand alone EMS stations. Two additional stations approved for 2005 and 2006 construction in Report # CH-02-058, have been on-hold pending the development of the Master Plan. Delaying construction was a prudent step given changes in the original proposed station locations and growth management strategies, but it should be noted that these two stations and a 2011 station in Wellesley township were all planned elements required to maintain Region-wide response time targets.

16

Figure 7: Emergency Medical Services Station Locations

Traditionally, station locations have been selected in such as fashion as to:

• Provide immediate access to an arterial road; • Have timely highway access where possible; • Ensure coverage across physical barriers such as rivers; • Take advantage of municipal or other beneficial partnerships; • Provide six minute driving polygons to ensure coverage of 90% of the historic call volume when all stations are occupied.

Both immediate and long-range opportunities and challenges exist with regards to both existing and enhancement stations.

3.8 Roving Rural Response

As part of the May 2006 service enhancement approved by Council, a unique single-paramedic Rural Emergency Response Unit (RERU) was activated from noon to midnight daily. Single- paramedic ERUs are not uncommon in EMS, but typically used to support ambulances in high call volume urban areas, i.e., to assess patients and “call off” ambulance response if not needed. 17

In the Waterloo model, the RERU moves between the rural stations in St. Jacobs and Baden, depending on where coverage is needed, i.e., where the ambulance coverage has been depleted by call assignment. If both ambulances are out of their stations, the RERU moves midway to provide coverage for both areas. If both ambulances are in their stations, the RERU moves to provide coverage in Wellesley township. Since implementation, there has been a dramatic improvement in on-site coverage, a literal doubling of the hours an EMS vehicle is available in the rural stations.

When a call comes in, both the RERU and an ambulance respond. The RERU is staffed by an Advanced Care Paramedic who is rapidly on-scene, determines how urgent the need for an ambulance, and then provides advanced care while awaiting arrival of the ambulance. Little if any delay in transport to hospital exists as stabilization is conducted on-scene whether by an RERU or ambulance paramedic. It is expected that this new rural coverage initiative will reduce the need for Fire Department Tiered Response in the part-time Fire Department coverage areas.

Ultimately, the logical pattern would be for RERUs to be implemented first to address population growth in low call volume areas and be replaced by regular ambulances and stations when call volume ultimately warrants such a move.

3.9 The Impact of Health Care Restructuring

Over the past decade, hospital services in Ontario have been dramatically reconfigured. More emphasis on out-patient services has resulted in downsizing of in-patient bed counts and a subsequent lack of surge capacity in the system. The trend to day surgery and early discharge home has also increased the number of calls where patients require emergency ambulances to return them to hospital.

The system result is not only fewer full service hospitals, but rather selected regional facilities serving as best practices centres for specific patient types, e.g. Paediatrics, Obstetrics, Dialysis, Cardiac Care, Regional Stroke Centres, Cancer Centres, Trauma Centres, etc. While this specialization no doubt allows the centralization of resources and expertise, resulting in more economical, superior care to the patient, it has dramatically impacted the ability of EMS to fulfill our mandate of timely emergency care and transportation.

Instead of transporting patients to the nearest facility and rapidly clearing for the next call, ambulances now typically bypass one facility for a longer trip to another specialty site, e.g., a person who slips and breaks their ankle while entering St. Mary’s Hospital, must now be transported to Grand River for orthopaedic care. The Region of Waterloo is fortunate to have most commonly required specialties within our three hospitals, rather than needing to transport patients to out-of-region facilities. Neurosurgery however, remains one glaring exception.

3.9.1 Call Duration

Since 2000, the time spent on each ambulance call has increased by more than 22%. Where as in 2000, the average call tied up an ambulance for less than one hour, by 2005, the average call duration had climbed to one hour and twelve minutes (1:12) with 90% of calls completed in one hour and forty two minutes (1:42) or less. 18

With approximately 22,500 calls resulting in transport to hospital during 2005, the increase in call duration resulted in a loss of approximately 4,875 hours, or the equivalent of over 13 hours of potential ambulance coverage daily.

3.9.2 Off-Load Delays

Unheard of locally even two years ago, off-load delays can have a significant impact on the availability of ambulances for emergency calls. The shortage of staffed hospital beds and physician coverage, keeps patients waiting on ambulance stretchers until an Emergency Department bed becomes available.

These individual waits during 2005 and 2006 were as long as 4.5 hours each, and the number of ambulances lost to off-load delays totaled as many as 13.25 (2005) 24-hour ambulances a month during the peak Flu season. In many instances, this has led to situations where no ambulances are available to respond in the community, despite multiple ambulances having arrived at hospital.

Figure 8: 24 Hour Ambulance Days Lost to Offload Delays

Ambulance Days Lost to Offload Delays

14 13.25 12.36 12

10 9 8.81 8 7.84 6.73 6 6.03 5.42 5.39 5.12 5.08 4.65 4 3.67 3.67 3.48 3.7 3.04 2.67 2.73 3.56 2

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2004 2005 2006

Ambulances in 2006 spend on average, ten minutes longer in the Emergency Department on each call, than they did in 2003. Extrapolated across the 22,500 patients transported to hospital during 2005, this represented 10.3 additional hours each day that an ambulance crew was in hospital and not available for new calls.

Staff continue to monitor off-load delays and meet with hospital staff regularly to minimize the impacts of these delays and investigate control measures, e.g., a single paramedic First Response Units might be assigned to care for multiple off-load delay patients at a single institution, thus returning ambulances to service more quickly. 19

If offload delays continue to increase, the cost of providing EMS will similarly increase as additional ambulances and staff are required to compensate for time lost in the Emergency Department.

3.9.3 Non-Emergency Patient Transportation

The Region of Waterloo was one of the first municipalities to recognize the impact that the rationalization of health care services was having on increasing numbers of non-emergency patient transfers. More and more patients required inter-facility transportation and “free” ambulances became the de facto means of transportation. In 1996, low priority transfers totaled almost 6,000 calls or 28% of the entire EMS call volume. Emergency calls were often delayed due to resources tied up on transfer calls, and vice versa, as emergency calls took precedence over transfers, patients were late for difficult to obtain diagnostic tests. The situation deteriorated to the point that tertiary care hospitals were threatening to refuse Waterloo patients to avoid their expensive scanners sitting idle when ambulances failed to arrive on time.

The initial local response was to take advantage of provincial Community Transportation Action Plan funding to support the development of a private sector transportation system. The program was so successful at diverting patients from EMS, that funding was exhausted in the first six months. With the program at risk and understanding that failure to act would require a huge influx of expensive EMS resources, the Region stepped in and provided funding to offset the cost to hospitals. Local stretcher calls were funded to the tune of 50% and 100% Regional funding was provided if an alternate lower priced transportation option such as wheelchair van or taxi was used. By the beginning of 2005, the funding transitioned to being a hospital responsibility, and a private contractor took over responsibility for most non-emergency patient transfers.

During 2005, EMS performed but 879 low priority transfers (2.8% of call volume), mostly overnight when transfer services were unavailable. The extra capacity of some 6,000 calls created when low priority transfers were offloaded, was totally offset with new emergency calls by 2000. EMS continues to support the system as needed, stepping in early in 2006 to manage a temporary service while a new contractor was selected.

3.10 Cardiac Arrest Survival

The literature shows that the likelihood of survival from sudden cardiac arrest decreases by 10% for every minute that cardiac defibrillation (lifesaving electrical shock) is delayed. With 80% of cardiac arrests occurring in the home, and portable Fire and EMS defibrillators at the best many minutes away, the chance of survival is low. As reported in the media recently, local survival from pre-hospital cardiac arrest averages between 5-6%. While quite comparable with other Ontario municipalities, this survival rate pales when reviewed against communities such as Edmonton and Seattle, with “save” rates 5-6 times higher… and high rates of publicly supported citizen CPR training.

With 35% of local cardiac arrests witnessed by a bystander, life sustaining CPR is started by a bystander only 11% of the time. A significant effort is needed to improve CPR awareness in the community. High citizen CPR rates are a precursor to the high save rates found in the benchmark “Cardiac Safe” communities. Survival rates historically, more than double locally 20 when a bystander performs CPR. After studying the effectiveness of advanced cardiac life support in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, Stiell and Well, et al, concluded that: “In order to save lives, health care planners should make cardiopulmonary resuscitation by citizens and rapid- defibrillation responses a priority for the resources of emergency-medical-services systems.”

Preliminary discussions have taken place with St. John Ambulance to develop a community- wide CPR and lifesaving awareness program concentrated around our schools. The program is expected to include CPR and Public Access Defibrillator training for high school students, and across the community at large through public CPR training blitz days.

3.10.1 Public Access Defibrillators

EMS continues to support the placement of Public Access Defibrillators (PADs) in Regional public buildings to ensure heart attack victims are not solely dependant on emergency service response times for life saving defibrillation. The PAD units can be used by laypeople with little training. Properly located devices typical reach the victim in less than two minutes, thus greatly improving chances of survival. By the end of 2006, EMS will have trained staff and placed PAD units in the following Regional facilities:

• Regional Council Chambers • Regional Administration Headquarters • Public Health and Social Services Building, Waterloo • Public Health and Social Services Building, Cambridge • Waterloo Region International Airport

Additional units are planned for implementation at both central transit terminals, Provincial Offences Court, Doon Heritage Crossroads and Joseph Schneider Haus. In addition, EMS staff have trained WRPS staff in the use of PAD devices located in Police holding facilities and rural cruisers.

Although no formally organized PAD program exists in the broader community, Waterloo Region has a large number of portable defibrillators in place. Other levels of government, universities, recreation facilities, industries, and even area hotels and shopping malls, have also taken measures to equip their facilities with lifesaving PAD units.

3.11 Major Emergency Preparedness

Since the events of September 11, 2001, emergency services everywhere have worked to enhance their emergency planning and preparedness capabilities. During the past year, EMS reviewed and updated its major emergency response capacity. As the original MOHLTC supplied Emergency Support Unit was due for replacement, it was an ideal opportunity to reassess Regional needs and develop a better suited approach.

The original single vehicle has since been replaced by a smaller command vehicle and three Multi-Casualty Incident (MCI) trailers, each capable of fully supporting an incident involving up to twenty-five patients. One of the trailers is further equipped to convert three GRT buses to

21 transport multiple stretcher patients. The trailers are strategically located including one at the Region of Waterloo International Airport in support of charter operations. The combined MCI capacity of seventy-five patients is significantly greater than that found in similar size and risk- laden municipalities, and should be adequate for at least the next decade.

3.11.1 The “New Normal”

EMS had become more and more involved with interagency planning for pandemic and CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear) incidents. Efforts are on-going to establish an additional stockpile of personal protective equipment sufficient to deal with pandemic or other infectious disease emergencies, but equipping and training staff in support of Fire and hospital CBRN activities will be a priority during the next two years, especially in light of the Region’s three urban Fire Departments being designated as a Level II Provincial CBRN response team. Business continuity planning to ensure emergency services remain functional during large scale and extended duration emergencies, will also be a priority in the short term.

4.0 HISTORIC, CURRENT AND PROJECTED CALL VOLUMES

As the Region’s population grows and ages, call volume continues to increase. As illustrated in Figures 9 and 10, call volume increased 35% between 2000 and 2005, an average of 7% per year.

Figure 9: Patient Carrying Call Volume

Patient Carrying Call Volume

35000 31479

30000 29064 27398 25428 24469 25000 23259

20000

15000

10000

5000

0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

22 Figure 10: Year to Year Patient Carrying Call Volume Growth

Year to Year Patient Carrying Call Volume Growth

9.0 8.3 8.0 7.7 7.0

6.0 6.0

5.0 5.2

4.0 3.9

3.0 3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05

The literature suggests a norm of one emergency response per day for every 7-10,000 people in the service area (50-71 calls a day predicted in Waterloo Region). 2005 data indicates a much higher actual average of over 84 emergency calls a day locally, as the Region is seeing the impact of health care restructuring and the change in demographics.

4.1 Call Volume Growth

Although annual general population growth has been at or around 2% for the past five years, ambulance call volumes have grown between 4-7.5% annually. Call volume growth is expected to continue across the twenty five year RGMS planning period. Overall population growth as anticipated by the Provincial “Places to Grow” strategy, an aging and subsequently ailing population demographic, and the impacts of restructuring of health care services, all contribute to this growth.

23 Figure 11: Population and EMS Call Volume Growth

Population and EMS Call Volume Growth

510,000 35,000 31,479 500,000 30,000 490,000 23,259 25,000 480,000 20,000 470,000 Population Call Volume 460,000 15,000 Population 450,000

10,000 (C1-4) Volume Call 440,000 5,000 430,000

420,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Figure 12: Percentage Growth in Call Volume and Population

Percentage Growth in Call Volume and Population

8

7

6

5 Call Volume 4 Population Linear (Call Volume) % Growth 3

2

1

0 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06

24 4.2 The Aging Demographic

The Region’s citizens show a trend towards using more and more ambulance service. Where in 2000, 1 in every 19.6 residents would use an ambulance each year, by 2005 this had climbed to 1 in 16.1. When broken down by age, someone 70 years of age or older, is 6-1/2 times more likely to use EMS than someone less than 65 years of age. As the population ages, ambulance use rises exponentially.

Figure 13: EMS Patient Carrying Calls per Resident by Year

EMS Patient Carrying Calls per Resident by Year

0.07 0.063 0.059 0.06 0.057 0.053 0.054 0.051 0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Figure 14: 2005 EMS Patient Carrying Calls per Resident per Year

2005 EMS Patient Carrying Calls per Resident per Year

0.3 0.285

0.25 0.233

0.2

0.15

0.1 0.063 0.041 0.043 0.05

0 <65 yrs <70 yrs All Ages >65 yrs >70 yrs

25

Region of Waterloo Public Health published “Population Health Event Projections” in May 2006. The projections presented dealt with the expected changes in population structure in the Region, i.e., the aging of our baby boomers resulting in more individuals with health service needs. Three highlights of the projections that will significantly impact EMS are:

• The coronary heart disease rate is expected to increase by 92% between 2001 and 2031; • An estimated 69% increase in cerebrovascular disease (including stroke) by 2031; and • The projected rate of seizure related hospitalizations is expected to increase by 181% by the year 2031.

Overall, a 10.4% annual increase in the top seven EMS call drivers is projected through 2031.

Today, 8.5% of the Region’s population, or just over 42,000 people, are 70 years or older, but account for over a third (38%) of the call volume. As the age demographic continues to evolve, it is predicted that those over 70 will more than triple in number in twenty-five years, to over 135,000 residents or 18.5% of the Region’s population. The aging population alone will account for over 38,400 ambulance calls annually, or more than the current total call volume. The projected total call volume in 2031 is 64,000.

Figure 15: Projected % of Population and Call Volume in those > 70 years of age

Projected % of Population and Call Volume in those > 70 Years of Age

20 45,000 18.5 40,000 38,446 15 35,000 30,000 % of Population >70 25,000 Years % 10 8.5 20,000 Estimated Call 15,000 Volume >70 Years

5 12,025 10,000 Volume Call 5,000 0 0

1 6 1 2 0 0 20062 201620212 2031

26

Figure 16: Projected Call Volume

Projected Call Volume (Population Growth and Demographic Shift)

70000 64000 60000 55995 50000 48063 40000 42308 36673 30000 31556 20000 10000 0 2006 2011 2,016 2021 2026 2031

5.0 SERVICE IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS UNDER REVIEW

As part of the ongoing development of the EMS Master Plan, staff continue to investigate innovative service delivery options in four broad categories: Managing Resource Supply and Service Demand, Redefining Performance Standards and Optimizing Response Capabilities. These options will be fully defined in the final report, but include the following:

Managing Resource Supply:

Alternate Delivery Models… Widening the use of single paramedic response units as appropriate, and investigating enhanced collaboration with other emergency services to better utilize existing resources.

Patient Care Optimization… Partnering with area hospitals to optimize existing cardiac care capabilities to improve survivability and quality of life.

Alternate Patient Delivery Pathways… Using other than crowded Emergency Departments as delivery points for non-urgent patients. Using more “treat and release” protocols to eliminate the need for transport to hospital when EMS is dispatched.

Establish Trigger Points that would prompt resource improvement discussions whenever key workload and performance levels are breeched.

27

Managing Service Demand:

Alternate Call Pathways… Diversion of low priority calls to TeleHealth for rerouting to alternate patient care services.

Revised Dispatch Protocols… Revisiting call prioritization to reduce the number of high priority calls to those involving the most critical patients.

Alternate Care Teams… Providing more advanced care for patients in Long Term Care facilities rather than transporting to and from crowded Emergency Departments.

Redefining Performance Standards:

Redefined Performance Standards and response time targets based on community need and expectations.

New Station Locations determined by ability to meet performance standards.

Optimizing Response Capabilities:

Traffic Signal Pre-Emption… Widening the use of existing Opticom technology to reduce response times.

Improved Dispatch Efficiency… Using available technology to better predict call demand, optimize vehicle location and ultimately response times; shorten dispatch processing time by optimizing dispatch processes.

Community Education to effectively reduce response times by trained individuals to zero. Strengthening the “Chain of Survival” through Public Access Defibrillators where appropriate, Citizen CPR and First Aid training, to lessen the dependence on emergency service arrival for treatment to begin.

6.0 SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS

The provision of quality Emergency Medical Services in the Region of Waterloo poses significant challenges today, and increasing challenges as growth and demographic shift impacts us in the future. EMS call volume will almost double in 30 years due to growth and aging of the population. This background paper provides an overview of the issues identified.

The remaining steps and timelines for the development of the EMS Master Plan and its recommendations, include:

• Distributing this report and the Background Paper for comment by primary stakeholders such as other emergency services, municipalities, hospitals, etc. (September 20, 2006); • Developing a matrix of potential service delivery options in preparation for response time modeling and financial analysis (October/November 2006); 28

• Response time modeling and financial analysis of potential service delivery options (November/December 2006); • Information report to Committee/Council reporting on results of modeling and requesting Public Information Session(s) to gain public input (January 2007); • Public Information Session(s) (January or February 2007), and • Final EMS Master Plan presented to Committee/Council (February or March 2007)

The final report will provide recommendations for an EMS Master Plan to deal with the twenty five year timeframe of the Regional Growth Management Strategy as part of the Human Services Plan.

29

7.0 REFERENCES

Bailey, E.D., Sweeney, T., for the National Association of EMS Physicians (2003). Considerations in Establishing Emergency Medical Services Response Time Goals. Prehospital Emergency Care: Vol. 7/No. 3.

City of Medicine Hat (2003). Medicine Hat Emergency Services Functional Study.

Canadian Health Services Research Foundation and Institute of Health Services and Policy Research, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (2004). Listening for Direction II: National consultation on health services and policy issues for 2004-2007. ISBN: 0-0689154-0-X.

Eckstein, M., Isaacs, S.M., et al, on behalf of the U.S. Metropolitan Municipalities’ EMS Medical Directors Consortium (2005). Facilitating EMS Turnaround Intervals at Hospitals in the Face of Receiving Facility Overcrowding. Prehospital Emergency Care: Vol.9/No. 3.

Federal Highway Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2006). Traffic Signal Preemption for Emergency Vehicles: A Cross-Cutting Study Putting the “First” in “First Response”.

Fischer, A.J., O,Halloran, P., et al (2000). Ambulance Economics. Journal of Public Health Medicine: Vol. 22/No. 3.

Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario (2005). Exploring Cardiac Care Issues: Waterloo Wellington LHIN Focus Group Report.

International City/County Management Association (2005). EMS in Critical Condition: Meeting The Challenge. IQ Report Vol 37/No. 5.

Kuehl, A.E. and National Association of EMS Physicians (2002). Prehospital Systems and Medical Oversight. ISBN: 0-7872-7071-7.

Legislative Assembly of Ontario (2006). Official Report of Debates (Hansard), Tuesday 23 February 2006. Standing Committee on Public Accounts. 2005 Annual Report, Auditor General: Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.

MacPhee, R.S. (2005). Utilization of Emergency Medical Services by the Elderly in Community and Institutional Settings. Doctoral Thesis.

National Academy of Sciences (2006). Emergency Medical Services: At the Crossroads. ISBN: 0-309-66216-8.

Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (2005). Improving Access to Emergency Services: A System Commitment.

Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (2006). Presentation to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts regarding the 2005 Annual Report, Auditor General of Ontario. 30

Ontario Municipal Benchmarking Initiative (2006). Presentation to the EMS Expert Panel on emergency response times in comparable call volume geography across ten Ontario municipalities.

Pons, P.T., Haukoos, J.S., et al (2005). Paramedic response time: Does it affect patient survival? Academic Emergency Medicine: 12 (7).

Region of Halton (2005). Emergency Medical Services, 10-Year Master Plan.

Region of Halton (2005). Report MO-06-05: Emergency Medical Services, 10-Year Master Plan

Region of Waterloo (2000), Emergency Medical Services in the Regional Municipality of Waterloo: Service Delivery Options and Recommendations.

Region of Waterloo (2006). Human Services & Our Growing Community, Document 1.

Region of Waterloo (2006). Report P-06-016: Interim Population Forecasts.

Region of Waterloo (2006). Report P-06-015: Year-End 2005 Population and Household Estimates.

Region of Waterloo Public Health (2005). Selected Actual and Projected Health Rates.

Region of Waterloo Public Health (2006). Population Health Event Projections.

Rothe, J.P. and the Alberta Centre for Injury Control and Research (2002). EMS in Rural/Small Urban Alberta: An Analysis of Seen-But-Unnoticed Features That Influence Patient Care.

Roush, W.R. and the American College of Emergency Physicians (1994). Principles of EMS Systems, Second Edition.

Stiell, I.G., Wells, G.A., et al (2004). Advanced Cardiac Life Support in out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest. New England Journal of Medicine: 351 (7).

United Kingdom Department of Health (2005). Taking Healthcare to the Patient: Transforming NHS Ambulance Services.

Vaillancourt, C., Stiell, I.G. (2004). Cardiac arrest care and emergency medical services in Canada. Canadian Journal of Cardiology: Vol. 20/No. 11.

31

APPENDIX “A”

Response Time Survey Summary

Compiled by the Mobile Health Services Quality Agency

32 Background

• Provincial “Places to Grow” document Region of Waterloo EMS designates ROW as a growth area. Population to reach 729,000 by 2031 Master Plan Background Paper • Regional Growth Management Strategy (RGMS) to deal with predicted growth September 19, 2006 • EMS 25 Year Master Plan as part of Human Services Plan

Background cont’d… EMS Challenges

• EMS Growth Management Working Group • Managing increased call demand driven by established to review current situation, population growth expected to exceed 1.5% a historic trends and future projections year indefinitely • Background Paper summarizing findings • Managing increased call demand and change in to Community Services Committee call type associated with a shift to an aging and September 19th and Regional Council on ailing population September 27th • Establishing and maintaining appropriate • Final EMS Master Plan in February/March response time standards in light of this growth 2007 • Working within health care system changes

1 Population Health Currently, ROW EMS is… Event Highlights • $13 million budget • Coronary heart disease rate expected to • 111.4 FTEs increase by 92% between 2001-2031 • 8 Stations, 17 ambulances, 4 ERUs • Estimated 69% increase in stroke-related • 32,000 patient calls in 2005 disease by 2031 • Call volume growth between 5-7.5% • Seizure related hospitalizations expected annually to increase by 181% by 2031 • Response Time: 13:43 90% or 16:04 90% • 10.4% annual increase projected for the including dispatch processing top 7 EMS call drivers through 2031

Aging and Ailing Baby Boomers Projected % of Population and Call Volume in those > 70 Years of Age • Today, 8.5% of the Population (42,000) is 20 45,000 70 years or older, but account for 37% of 18.5 40,000 38,446 EMS calls 15 35,000 30,000 % of Population >70 • In twenty five years, this will more than 25,000 Years % 10 triple in numbers to 135,000, or 18.5% of 8.5 20,000 Estimated Call 15,000 Volume >70 Years

the population 5 12,025 10,000 Call Volume • Those over 70 are expected to account for 5,000 more than 38,400 calls annually (20% 0 0

more than our overall current call volume) 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031

2 The Bottom Line… Projected Call Volume (Population Growth and Demographic Shift)

70000 By 2031, the Region’s population is 64000 60000 expected to grow by 50%, while EMS call 55995 50000 48063 volume is anticipated to double. 40000 42308 36673 30000 31556 20000 10000 0 2006 2011 2,016 2021 2026 2031

Health Care System Impacts Call Duration in Minutes

Med-Lift Impact Begins • Ambulances are driving farther with 110 100 102 96 patients as hospitals become centres of 93 90 89 91 89 90 excellence. Longer drives = Longer time 87 86 88 80

spent on each call. Up 22% since 2000. 70 72 67 62 64 63 62 62 63 • Hospital offload delays in 2005 accounted 60 61 59 for 58.4 lost 24 hour ambulance days. On 50 target to increase 60% in 2006. 40 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Average 90th Percentile

3 Where to from here? Next Steps and Process

• Investigating options across four broad • Background Paper to Committee/Council categories: (September 19/27) – Managing Resource Supply • Background Paper circulated to serious stakeholders (September 20) – Managing Service Demand • Opportunity for Fire/Police/Hospital input (by – Redefining Performance Standards October 1) and in reconfigured working group – Optimizing Response Capabilities • Develop matrix of potential service delivery options for modeling/analysis (October/November)

Next Steps and Process cont’d…

• Response Time Modeling and Financial Analysis (November/December) • Information Report to Council reporting on Questions? modeling and requesting public information sessions for public input (January 2007) • Public Information Session(s) (January or February 2007) • Final EMS Master Plan and recommendations to Committee/Council in February or March 2007

4 Report: PH-06-049 REGION OF WATERLOO

PUBLIC HEALTH Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: P10-80

SUBJECT: CHARGED FOOD PREMISES

RECOMMENDATION:

For information

SUMMARY:

NIL

REPORT:

The following establishment was charged under the Health Protection and Promotion Act, Ontario Food Premises Regulation 562, by staff of the Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources Division:

Name of establishment: BEN THANH SUPERMARKET 470 KING STREET EAST KITCHENER, ON

Owner/ Operator: BEN THANH SUPERMARKET LTD.

Charges: Ensure hazardous foods are stored at a temperature not higher than 4 Celsius ($460.00).

Ensure food stored in frozen state shall be frozen to a temperature not higher than -18 Celsius ($60.00)

Total Charge: $520.00

A routine inspection conducted on August 18, 2006 revealed vacuum sealed packages of meat and fish at 18 Celsius in the dairy cooler. The inspection also revealed pre-packaged cooked rice with luncheon meat at 14 Celsius on the shelf. These foods were discarded at the time of inspection (approximately 61 kg). These infractions were noted during previous routine inspections on August 14, 2006 and February 27, 2006. A re-inspection on August 21, 2006 indicated that the operator had rectified the cold holding infractions that resulted in the charge.

The re-inspection on August 21, 2006 also revealed frozen fish and meat at -2 Celsius in the meat/fish freezer. This infraction was noted during previous routine inspections on August 14, 2006 and August 18, 2006.

Two Provincial Offences Notices were issued on August 22, 2006, at which time the meat/fish freezer was empty.

DOCS #312259 Page 1 of 2 September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-049

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Focus Area 2: To Enhance Community Health and Social Well Being

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

NIL

ATTACHMENTS

NIL

PREPARED BY: Chris Komorowski, Manager, Food Safety and Infection Control

APPROVED BY: Dr. Liana Nolan, Commissioner/Medical Officer of Health

DOCS #312259 Page 2 of 2

Report: PH-06-050 REGION OF WATERLOO

PUBLIC HEALTH Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: P10-80

SUBJECT: CHARGED FOOD PREMISES

RECOMMENDATION:

For information

SUMMARY:

NIL

REPORT:

The following establishment was charged under the Health Protection and Promotion Act, Ontario Food Premises Regulation 562, by staff of the Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources Division:

Name of establishment: Euro C. Affe 75 King Street South Unit 30 Waterloo, Ontario

Owner/ Operator: Jadranka Majkic

Charges: Fail to protect food from contamination or adulteration ($245.00).

Total Charge: $300.00

A routine inspection conducted on July 13, 2006 revealed various baked goods on display (namely strudel sticks) without covers or sneeze guards. This infraction was noted during a previous routine inspection on January 25, 2005.

A Provincial Offences Notice was issued on July 13, 2006, at which time a re-inspection indicated that the operator had rectified the infractions that resulted in the charges.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Focus Area 2: To Enhance Community Health and Social Well Being

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

DOCS #312171 Page 1 of 2 September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-050

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

NIL

ATTACHMENTS

NIL

PREPARED BY: Chris Komorowski, Manager, Food Safety and Infection Control

APPROVED BY: Dr. Liana Nolan, Commissioner/Medical Officer of Health

DOCS #312171 Page 2 of 2 Report: PH-06-051 REGION OF WATERLOO

PUBLIC HEALTH Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: P10-80

SUBJECT: CHARGED FOOD PREMISES

RECOMMENDATION:

For information

SUMMARY:

NIL

REPORT:

The following establishment was charged under the Health Protection and Promotion Act, Ontario Food Premises Regulation 562, by staff of the Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources Division:

Name of establishment: Boardwalk Gaming and Entertainment Inc. (operating as Bingo Country) 1356-1382 Weber Street East Kitchener, ON

Owner/ Operator: Shamay Palmer

Charges: Store hazardous foods at internal temperature between 5 Celsius and 60 Celsius ($460.00).

Total Charge: $460.00

An inspection conducted on July 24th, 2006 revealed a malfunctioning refrigerator. Hazardous food items, including ham, tuna and gravy, were being stored above 5 Celsius. These hazardous food items were measured at 15 Celsius.

This infraction was previously noted during a routine inspection on March 28, 2006. A Provincial Offences Notice was issued on July 24th, 2006.

A re-inspection on July 25th, 2006 revealed that all infractions had been corrected.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Focus Area 2: To Enhance Community Health and Social Well Being

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-051

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

NIL

ATTACHMENTS

NIL

PREPARED BY: Chris Komorowski, Manager, Food Safety and Infection Control

APPROVED BY: Dr. Liana Nolan, Commissioner/Medical Officer of Health

DOCS #304924 Page 2 of 2 Report: PH-06-052 REGION OF WATERLOO

PUBLIC HEALTH Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: P10-80

SUBJECT: CHARGED FOOD PREMISES

RECOMMENDATION:

For information

SUMMARY:

NIL

REPORT:

The following establishment was charged under the Health Protection and Promotion Act, Ontario Food Premises Regulation 562, by staff of the Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources Division:

Name of establishment: Pioneer Bar-B-Q 25 Sportsworld Drive Kitchener, ON

Owner/ Operator: Eileen Hubercheck

Charges: Operate Food Premise Maintained in Manner Permitting Health Hazard ($460).

Maintain Hazardous Foods at Internal Temperature Between 5° Celsius and 60° Celsius ($460).

Total Charge: $920.00

A complaint investigation conducted on June 01, 2006 revealed improper cold holding of potentially hazardous foods. The foods were discarded from the malfunctioning cold holding units. A re-inspection on June 02, 2006 revealed that the initial problem had not been rectified and foods were discarded for the second time from the same cold holding units. A re-inspection on June 03, 2006, revealed that foods were stored under conditions that did not provide adequate protection against insects, pests and rodents and that food equipment was not maintained in sanitary conditions. It was also noted that soap was not provided in the kitchen hand washing basin and food handlers were not adequately washing their hands.

A Provincial Offences Notice was issued on June 27, 2006, at which time infractions that resulted in the charges were rectified.

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-052

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Focus Area 2: To Enhance Community Health and Social Well Being

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

NIL

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

NIL

ATTACHMENTS

NIL

PREPARED BY: Chris Komorowski, Manager, Food Safety and Infection Control

APPROVED BY: Dr. Liana Nolan, Commissioner/Medical Officer of Health

DOCS #312957 Page 2 of 2 Report: PH-06-055 REGION OF WATERLOO

PUBLIC HEALTH Environmental Health and Lifestyle Resources

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: P13-20

SUBJECT: TOGETHER 4 HEALTH

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

The Ontario Ministry of Health Promotion is committed to addressing the rates of preventable diseases in Ontario. The Ontario Heart Health Program is one approach the province is taking to ensure Ontarians have the healthiest choices possible wherever people live, learn, work and play. Waterloo Region’s local heart health coalition Together 4 Health was established in 1998.

Correspondence from the Ministry of Health Promotion in July, 2006 (attached) confirms funding of $94,850 for the Together 4 Health coalition or 2006. This report provides background about the provincial heart health program and outlines the 2006/2007 activities of Together 4 Health.

REPORT:

Background – Together 4 Health

Since 1990 the Province of Ontario has funded Ontario Heart Health Programs. Currently Phase II Ontario Heart Health Program – Taking Action for Healthy Living (2004-2007) has as its goal, to prevent cardiovascular disease and other chronic diseases such as Type-2 Diabetes, stroke and some forms of cancer. The goal is achieved through collaborative partnerships between ministry representatives, provincial organizations, boards of health/host agencies, other local community organizations, and volunteers who work together to implement community programs with a primary emphasis on physical activity, healthy eating and smoke-free living.

In 1997, Waterloo Region applied to the provincial government to become a heart health coalition site. Funding was granted and Together 4 Health was created in 1998. The current Together 4 Health Organizational Structure is included as an attachment to this report.

As a partnership of agencies and individuals, T4H works collectively with the people of Waterloo Region to inspire, create and celebrate a culture of wellness in communities where residents live, work and play. Together 4 Health envisions a community that embraces wellness for all through education and by creating a supportive environment for healthy lifestyle choices which include, healthy eating, physical activity, smoke-free living and stress management.

The Together 4 Health coalition coordinates a number of initiatives that community partners plan and implement in order to promote healthy lifestyle choices and chronic disease prevention in Waterloo Region. Membership on the coalition is open to all organizations and individuals in Waterloo Region who support the goals of Together 4 Health. A list of current Together 4 Health

Document #: 311152

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055 partners is attached. Together 4 Health Projects (2006-2007)

The activities of Together 4 Health are focused around three main strategies: School Healthy Eating and Physical Activity; Workplace Wellness and Community-Wide Wellness. The following is a brief description of the Together 4 Health activities current for 2006 and planned for 2007.

Active and Safe Routes to School This program aims to educate and support elementary school communities in Waterloo Region to increase the number of students using active transportation methods to get to school (e.g. walking, cycling). Activities planned and implemented by the workgroup include promotion of International and Regional Walk to School Days and iWalk Club to all schools. More specific resources provide support to nine (9) pilot schools, such as activity kits, forums, newsletters, and a parent education campaign. This current activity will continue through 2007.

Playground Activity Leaders in Schools (PALS) Adapted from Peel Health, this leadership program aims to increase physical activity in 5-13 year olds and decrease bullying by encouraging all children to participate in playground activities at recess regardless of their gender, size or ability. Teacher champions and selected student leaders receive training and are provided with ongoing support to run this program. Twelve schools piloted the program in 2005/06 and an additional 14 schools are implementing the PALS program in their schools in 2006/07. The workgroup is exploring ways to further expand and sustain the program in elementary schools across Waterloo Region. This current activity will continue through 2007.

Healthy Choices This program aims to support the development of a healthy secondary school environment by supporting changes to foods offered in the school cafeteria and vending machines. In 2005/06 school year, the Waterloo Catholic District School Board, in collaboration with Public Health and the secondary school food service provider, created a new food/nutrition policy. Promotion and implementation of this new policy, along with activities to educate the school community about how to make healthy food choices will be the focus for the 2006/07 school year. This current activity will continue through 2007.

Beautiful Minds Beautiful Minds is a program to promote better understanding of mental health issues. This awareness initiative is targeted at youth, teachers, parents and the general community. Fully trained volunteer speakers share their personal stories about living with mental illness through classroom presentations. Students, parents and teachers are provided with resources to connect them to local agencies and organizations and to inform them, their children and their students about the benefits of choosing a healthy lifestyle and using positive coping strategies. This current activity will continue through 2007.

Passport to Health This program aims to increase vegetable and fruit consumption, milk consumption and physical activity among children participating in select Nutrition for Learning sites across Waterloo Region. Interested sites voluntarily administer the program. Training and resource support is provided by Together 4 Health. The Passport to Health program also promotes the benefits of local food buying practices. It is a fun program for children and encourages family involvement. This activity was piloted through one time funding from the Ministry of Health Promotion in 2006. The program will continue with Together 4 Health funds through 2007.

ProjectHealth In 2006, the ProjectHealth Toolkit was created to support workplace wellness providers (e.g. Document #: 311152 Page 2 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055 occupational health and safety personnel and human resources staff), in their efforts to promote healthy lifestyles to employees within their workplaces. The ProjectHealth Toolkit contains information about how to create a healthy workplace and provides suggested activities and resources that can be used to promote healthy eating, physical activity, tobacco-free living and stress management. Ongoing supports, such as regular networking meetings, email bulletins, and consultations will provide credible information to workplace wellness providers which they can use to continue to plan and implement programs in their respective workplaces through 2007.

Active Cambridge Active Cambridge, a new initiative of the provincial Active 2010 program, is a comprehensive strategy to increase participation in sport and physical activity throughout Cambridge. The vision is to see bridges built between those providing physical activity opportunities and those who desire to participate in them. Community outreach will help identify community champions and community needs and two (2) public forums will begin to build community connections. Together 4 Health is one of the community partners that supports these events. Together 4 Health is one of the community partners that supports these events. Ongoing media promotion will raise awareness about the project and the value of being physically active. This current activity will continue through 2007.

Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Network The Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Network of Waterloo Region is made up of health professionals, organizations and individuals who are involved in and/or interested in cancer prevention and early detection issues and activities in Waterloo Region. Together 4 Health supports the work of this group by providing funds to increase the number of education presentations to the community-at-large on the topics of cancer prevention risk reduction (ie. healthy eating, physical activity and tobacco control). A section on the Together 4 Health website is also maintained to educate the community and health professionals. This current activity will continue through 2007.

Walkable Communities Six Central West Ontario heart health coalitions (Brant County, Haldimand and Norfolk Counties, Halton Region, Niagara Region, Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph, and Region of Waterloo) have partnered to implement the WalkON project. WalkON promotes walking for transportation, health and recreation. Information is provided through a website and resource kits. Community and professional supports are offered through the website, education sessions & resources, and workshops. These are intended to support the development of local activities that promote pedestrian traffic in their communities.

The Pedestrian Charter Working Group promotes and facilitates the implementation of recently adopted Pedestrian Charters in the Region of Waterloo and the cities of Cambridge and Kitchener. The working group is exploring opportunities to raise awareness about the Pedestrian Charters, monitor and document implementation activities and identify and share relevant research and best practices.

WalkON and the Pedestrian Charter Initiatives will continue in 2007.

District Stroke Centre A new initiative for 2007 will involve Together 4 Health partnering with the District Stroke Centre to plan and implement a primary prevention project addressing the risk factors for stroke and cardiovascular disease. In addition, Together 4 Health will be providing support to the annual stroke conferences and will be providing a section on the Together 4 Health website to educate the community and health professionals about stroke prevention.

Document #: 311152 Page 3 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

Next Steps – Planning for Sustainability In order to ensure ongoing heart health program funding, a Continuation Working Group of the Ontario Heart Health Network, has been established. The role the Continuation Working Group is to promote the efforts and key messages of the Ontario Heart Health Project – Taking Action of Healthy Living to all community partners at the local, regional and provincial level to ensure funding for the program continues past December 31, 2007. In addition, this group will document how the Ontario Heart Health Project – Taking Action of Healthy Living has been successful in chronic disease prevention efforts.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

The activities of the Together 4 Health Coalition contribute to the goal of enhancing community health and social well being (Focus Area #2).

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The funding for Together 4 Health and its projects comes from the Ontario Ministry of Health Promotion, as part of the Ontario Heart Health Program-Taking Action for Healthy Living. Staff support for Together 4 Health is provided by the Region of Waterloo Public Health. Further support is provided by the in-kind contributions of time and resources from the coalitions’ partners.

The Ontario Heart Health Program has a provincial budget of $3.4 million per year, which is distributed to communities across Ontario based on an equity funding formula. Communities are required to provide $2 of in-kind contributions for every $1 in funding. The Board of Health is accountable to the Ministry of Health Promotion for the funding.

In Waterloo Region, Together 4 Health receives $94,850 annually to allocate to community initiatives, as confirmed in the letter sent by the Ministry of Health Promotion in July 2006. The coalition’s in-kind contributions of staff time and resources are summarized in the chart below. Public Health contributes the staff time of one Public Health Planner to coordinate the coalition and relevant public health staff to work on projects that meet the Mandatory Health Programs and Services Guidelines as their in-kind contribution. Community partners actively involved in the coalition contribute significant amounts of time and other resources as in-kind support for T4H projects.

Chart 1 Coalition In Kind Contributions Public Health Community Partners In-kind time 1900 hours 2032 hours In-kind resources* $8,018.08 $19,383.38 * Includes: transportation, communication (mailing and courier costs), donated media services, program materials, resources and supplies, teacher release time and meeting space.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

NIL

ATTACHMENTS: Together 4 Health Organizational Structure. List of Together 4 Health Partners (organize by workgroup). Letter from Ministry of Health Promotion – funding confirmed.

PREPARED BY: Shelley Bolden, Public Health Planner/Together 4 Health Coordinator Amanda Kroger, Manager, Lifestyle Resources Team

Document #: 311152 Page 4 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

APPROVED BY: Dr. Liana Nolan, Commissioner/Medical Officer of Health

Document #: 311152 Page 5 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

Document #: 311152 Page 6 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

Document #: 311152 Page 7 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

Together 4 Health Community Partners

Active and Safe Routes to School • City of Kitchener • City of Waterloo • Ministry of Transportation • Region of Waterloo Public Health • Run for Life • W.T. Townsend Public School • Waterloo Catholic District School Board • Waterloo Region District School Board • Waterloo Regional Police Services

Playground Activity Leaders in Schools • John Sweeney Catholic Elementary School • Region of Waterloo Public Health • Waterloo Catholic District School Board • Waterloo Region District School Board • Winston Churchill Public School

Healthy Choices • ARAMARK Catering Inc. • Region of Waterloo Public Health • Resurrection High School • St. Benedict High School • St. David High School • St. Mary’s High School • Waterloo Catholic District School Board

Beautiful Minds • Canadian Mental Health Association • Centre of Addiction and Mental Health • Community Members • Community Mental Health Clinic • Grand River Hospital • Lutherwood • Mood Disorder Association • Region of Waterloo Public Health • Schizophrenia Society of Waterloo Region • Self Help Alliance • The Mental Health and Wellness Network • Waterloo Region Assertive Community Treatment Team (ACTT) Team

Document #: 311152 Page 8 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

• Waterloo Region Homes for Mental Health • Waterloo Catholic District School Board • Waterloo Region District School Board • Waterloo Region Police Services

Project Health • Canadian Diabetes Association • Ontario Service Safety Alliance • Region of Waterloo Public Health • Safe Communities on the Grand • The Mental Health and Wellness Network • University of Waterloo Health Services

Active Cambridge • Active Living Resource Centre for Ontarians with a Disability • City of Cambridge • Ministry of Health Promotion • Region of Waterloo Public Health • Run for Life • Social Planning Council of Cambridge and North Dumfries • YMCA of Cambridge

Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Network* • Kitchener Public Library • University of Waterloo, Department of Health Studies & Gerontology • Grand River Hospital • Region of Waterloo Public Health

* This is not a full list of Network partners but only represent the active partners on the Network participating in T4H activities.

Walkable Communities WalkON • Choices 4 Health (Halton) • Community Heart Health Network (Wellington, Dufferin, Guelph) • Health Action (Haldimand-Norfolk) • Healthy Living Brant • Healthy Living Niagara • Together 4 Health (Waterloo)

Pedestrian Charter Working Group • Central Frederick Neighbourhood Association • City of Cambridge Document #: 311152 Page 9 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

• City of Kitchener • City of Waterloo • Community citizens • Independent Living Centre • John MacDonald Architect • Region of Waterloo Planning, Housing and Community Services • Region of Waterloo Public Health • University of Guelph • University of Waterloo

Passport to Health • Canadian Diabetes Association • Nutrition for Learning • Region of Waterloo Public Health

Together 4 Health Steering Committee • Canadian Cancer Society • Canadian Diabetes Association • District Stroke Centre • Grand River Hospital • Heart and Stroke Foundation • Region of Waterloo Public Health • St. Mary’s Hospital • The Mental Health and Wellness Network • Waterloo Catholic District School Board • Woolwich Community Health Centre

Document #: 311152 Page 10 of 10

September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-055

Document #: 311152 Page 11 of 10

Report: PH-06-057

REGION OF WATERLOO

PUBLIC HEALTH Communicable Disease, Dental and Sexuality Resources

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE: P03-30

SUBJECT: 2005-2006 INFLUENZA SEASON SUMMARY

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

The annual circulation of influenza viruses can be responsible for significant illness within communities each year. Public Health programs aim to reduce the incidence of influenza by the promotion of annual influenza immunization for all persons over the age of 6 months and through the implementation of outbreak control measures and recommendations when influenza spread is detected within a long term care home or hospital. The 2005-2006 Influenza season was considered to be a milder season than that of 2004-2005, with fewer outbreaks and laboratory confirmed cases detected.

REPORT:

Central to the annual Influenza control program is the provision of free influenza vaccine for all persons in Ontario over the age of 6 months through the Universal Influenza Immunization Program. Last fall, Public Health distributed 183,000 doses of vaccine, resulting in an estimated coverage rate of 38% for the population of Waterloo Region. Residents accessed the free vaccine through physicians (66%), workplace programs (13%), Public Health community clinics (12%), long term care facilities (6%) or university/college clinics (3%).

The Big Shot Challenge is an annual campaign designed specifically to increase staff immunization rates in long term care homes. A number of studies have underlined the importance of immunizing the caregivers of vulnerable elderly to reduce the number and severity of influenza outbreaks within closed residential settings. Since 2000, the rate of staff immunization within nursing homes and homes for the aged has been reportable to the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care as part of the Long Term Care Influenza Protocol requirements. In Waterloo Region, rest and retirement homes also voluntarily participate in the promotion and reporting of their staff and resident influenza immunization rates.

This past year the region wide staff immunization rate in the 48 participating homes was 88%, with a range of 55% to 100%. Three homes achieved a staff immunization rate of 100%, while twenty eight homes reported rates of between 90 to 99%, meeting the Public Health goal of a minimum 90% staff immunization rate.

The overall rate of immunization for residents in the participating homes was 92%.

Page 1 of 3 September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-057

Surveillance of influenza activity within the community is now a year-round activity for Public Health. Information collected at the local level is reported weekly during the season through the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care to Public Health Agency of Canada to assist in the characterization of each influenza season and to aid in the tracking of circulating influenza viruses. Surveillance data is also communicated on a regular basis to hospitals and long term care homes within the Region to assist them in their control measures and response during the influenza season.

The annual incidence of influenza varies widely and it is difficult to predict the impact of a particular virus strain on the disease. The 2005/2006 influenza season started relatively early with the first detection of Influenza A in the community in mid November. However, activity didn’t peak until February/March as the predominant circulating strain changed from Influenza A to Influenza B. Cases and outbreaks of influenza continued to be reported into April. As in the prior season, a new strain of Influenza emerged and circulated (B/Malaysia) which was not well-matched to the strain contained in the vaccine for the season. Illness due to this particular strain of influenza was predominantly experienced by school-aged children and young adults.

A total of 90 cases of laboratory confirmed Influenza A and B were reported last season in Waterloo Region compared to 335 reports during the preceding season. Only influenza cases that have been confirmed by laboratory testing are reportable in Ontario. Most testing for influenza occurs either in hospitals or in long term care home settings. The actual burden of illness is much higher in the community as most influenza cases are not confirmed by laboratory testing.

During the 2005/2006 Influenza season, 2 long term care homes had outbreaks of Influenza A declared after laboratory confirmation of Influenza A illness in residents. This is a significantly lower number of outbreaks from the previous season when there were 26 Influenza A and 3 Influenza B outbreaks declared in these homes. In the 2005/2006 season there was one death due to a rare complication of influenza in a child compared to the 2004/2005 season with16 deaths in elderly residents of homes associated with Influenza A outbreaks in the previous season.

Updated respiratory illness outbreak guidelines were compiled and distributed by the Communicable Disease Control Program to all long term care and retirement/rest homes in Waterloo Region during October 2005. These guidelines include a number of best-practice and reference documents from both provincial and national health authorities. In the last season, 50 investigations were initiated in response to reported respiratory illness activity, with 24 (non- influenza) outbreaks and 2 influenza outbreaks declared. Communicable Disease Control Staff from Public Health assist with coordination of laboratory investigations and advice on infection prevention and control measures. Outbreak progress and status is monitored and communicated on a daily basis (including weekends) during the season, which assists hospitals, EMS, agencies and other facilities in making decisions on admission or discharge of residents and deployment of staff.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

This report relates to Strategic Focus Area #2: Enhance Community Health and Social Well Being.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

This program is carried out within existing resources.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

DOCS #316391 Page 2 of 3 September 19, 2006 Report: PH-06-057

NIL ATTACHMENTS

NIL

PREPARED BY: Naideen Bailey, Manager of Communicable Disease Control Programs Lesley Rintche, Manager Immunization & Vaccine Preventable Disease Chris Komorowski, Manager Food Safety & Infection Control

APPROVED BY: Dr. Liana Nolan, Commissioner/Medical Officer of Health

DOCS #316391 Page 3 of 3 REGION OF WATERLOO REPORT: SS-06-052

SOCIAL SERVICES Social Planning, Policy and Program Administration

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: REQUESTS FOR PURCHASE OF SERVICE AGREEMENTS

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo enter into a purchase of service agreement, on a trial basis, for the provision of per diem for emergency and transitional shelter for prenatal and postnatal women (postnatal up to 90 days maximum) ages 16-25 from October 1, 2006 to December 31, 2007 with the following agencies:

a) Society of St. Vincent De Paul Kitchener Particular Council carrying on business (c.o.b.) as The Special Works Conference of St. Louise De Marillac (Marillac Place); and

b) Cara’s Hope Maternity Home as outlined in Report SS-06-052, dated September 19, 2006.

SUMMARY:

Nil

REPORT:

1.0 Background The provincial Emergency Shelter Program is a funding mechanism which allows municipalities to enter into purchase of service agreements with operators to fund eligible clients under the Ontario Works Act on a per diem basis. The Province has set a maximum per diem rate of $39.15 which is cost shared on an 80/20 basis with the Province. A further 2% increase was announced in the Provincial budget however the details have not yet been provided to Consolidated Municipal Service Managers (CMSMs).

Marillac Place and Cara’s Hope submitted applications over 2005/2006 to be considered for an emergency shelter purchase of service agreement. Both are maternity home programs that currently maintain themselves solely through fundraising efforts. The only provincially funded maternity home program in Waterloo Region is St. Monica House Inc. which provides a maternity home for prenatal and postnatal youth ages 12-15 and supportive housing for young women ages 16 and over. Marillac Place and Cara’s Hope provide emergency and transitional shelter services to a different age group, namely ages 16-25. As there are no other funding sources from the Province or the Region for Marillac Place and Cara’s Hope, and based on the fact that the majority of their residents are Ontario Works clients experiencing homelessness who would otherwise be provided per diem at one of the other emergency shelters within Waterloo Region, it was determined that they should be considered for funding under the emergency shelter per diem.

Neighbouring municipalities have funded similar homes using the emergency shelter per diem. DOCS# 312822 Page 1 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-052

Since March 2005, the County of Wellington has funded Michael House Pregnancy Care Centre under this funding mechanism.

2.0 Applications A standard, multi-phased application process exists for all agencies applying for an emergency shelter purchase of service agreement. First, agencies must submit a completed application form and supporting documentation (i.e., governing documents, by-laws, list of board members, annual report, audited financial statements, per diem request form, policies and procedures, satisfactory health and fire inspections, and an insurance certificate). Once the application has been reviewed and is identified as complete, a site visit is conducted to assess how the agency meets expectations under the Region’s Emergency Shelter Guidelines. Once completed, the purchase of service review group (which includes Region staff as appropriate to the application – in this case representatives from Social Services, Finance, Public Health and Planning, Housing and Community Services) utilizes a standardized review form to assess applications. The group reviews the applications against the Emergency Shelter Guidelines and for organizational strength and viability. The group then provides a recommendation to the Director of Social Planning, Policy and Program Administration for consideration. Recommendations are then brought forward to Council for approval.

2.1 Marillac Place Marillac Place is a Special Works Conference of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul (Kitchener Particular Council). It originally opened in 1987 in Kitchener as a women’s shelter and had an emergency shelter purchase of service agreement in the early 1990’s with the Region. Marillac Place experienced financial problems due to low occupancy and in 1992 closed as a women’s shelter and reopened as a home for single mothers with babies. Today, they can serve up to 10 prenatal and postnatal women age 16-25 with their children (total 21 people at any one time) and can accommodate children up to the age of two years (i.e., can serve a mother and new baby and young toddler if needed). Length of stay guideline is from pregnancy and up to one year following birth, however, average length of stay is seven months (range between 3 months and a year). Average occupancy is 80-90% and in 2005 they served 35 young mothers and their children of whom they identified 90-100% were experiencing homelessness.

While staying at Marillac, residents are required to further their education if they have not yet received high school equivalency. The majority of residents are involved in the Region’s Learning, Earning and Parenting Program (LEAP). Those who have graduated high school are required to participate in a minimum of five community programs to develop life and parenting skills. In addition, residents adhere to a curfew and rising time, meet weekly with staff to review goals and are responsible for chores, meal preparation, and participating in a weekly parenting program and resident’s meeting at Marillac. Public Health, through Family Visitors, meets with residents once their baby is born and makes referrals as appropriate to the Region’s Health Babies, Healthy Children’s program and other community programming.

2.2 Cara’s Hope Cara’s Hope was founded in 2002 and opened a maternity home in Cambridge in August 2004 (the maternity home component of service has been closed since the end of 2005 due to lack of funding). They serve prenatal and postnatal women ages 15-24. The current home has four bedrooms that can house one pregnant woman and three women and their babies (total of seven people at any one time). Their length of stay guideline is from pregnancy until babies are three months old but extensions are considered on a case-by-case basis. The average length of stay is six and a half months. In 2005 they served fourteen women and eleven babies. Ten of the fourteen women were identified as experiencing homelessness.

DOCS# 312822 Page 2 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-052

While staying at Cara’s Hope, residents are strongly encouraged to further their education if they have not yet received high school equivalency. The majority of residents become involved in the Region’s Learning, Earning and Parenting Program (LEAP). Those who have graduated high school are required to participate in at least one community program to develop life and parenting skills. In addition, residents adhere to a curfew and rising time, participate in weekly in-house programs on parenting and life skills (as part of the life skills program they are involved in activities such as budgeting, chores and meal preparation), meet weekly with their primary care worker to discuss their goals, and participate in a weekly resident’s meeting. Public Health, through Family Visitors, meets with residents once their baby is born and makes referrals as appropriate to the Region’s Health Babies, Healthy Children’s program and other community programming. Public Health has also been invited to facilitate one of the sessions within their weekly parenting program.

3.0 Recommendation Marillac Place is recommended for a purchase of service agreement to receive per diem for emergency and transitional shelter subject to submission of a satisfactory fire and health inspection and certificate of insurance (although provided in the original application they are now out of date and must be resubmitted).

Cara’s Hope is recommended for a purchase of service agreement to receive per diem for emergency and transitional shelter. Information regarding their policies was provided during their site visit but their policy and procedure manual was in the process of being revised. In order to maintain their purchase of service agreement, they will be required to submit a completed set of policies and procedures as identified in the Emergency Shelter Guidelines by December 29, 2006.

The recommendation is to fund residents pre-natal and up to a maximum of 90 days post-natal, after which time those who are eligible would receive the room and board rate under Ontario Works. These two organizations will be expected to follow the Region’s Emergency Shelter Guidelines with exception of allowance for planned rather than emergency intakes. The ability of these organizations to adhere to the Emergency Shelter Guidelines and remain financial viability will be assessed throughout this trial period. A report will be brought to Council in the fall of 2007 with a recommendation on whether or not to continue funding these agencies on an annual basis.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Entering into a Purchase of Service Agreement for Emergency Shelter services with Marillac Place and Cara’s Hope addresses the Region’s Corporate Strategic Plan, Focus Area 2 to enhance community health and social well-being by improving accessibility to housing and reducing homelessness.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Emergency Shelter per diem is cost shared with the Province of Ontario on an 80/20 basis. As emergency shelters are funded under the Ontario Works program, there is no maximum expenditure for the program.

During the fifteen month trial period, the incremental costs between the emergency shelter per diem and Ontario Works benefits are projected to be $230,000 (net Regional Share = $46,000). If approved by Regional Council, this will form part of the 2007 base budget for Income Support Payments.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

DOCS# 312822 Page 3 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-052

Planning, Housing and Community Services, Public Health and Finance participated on the Purchase of Service Review Committee and have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

PREPARED BY: Marie Morrison, Manager, Social Planning

APPROVED BY: Michael Schuster, Commissioner Social Services

DOCS# 312822 Page 4 of 4 REGION OF WATERLOO REPORT: SS-06-053

SOCIAL SERVICES Social Planning, Policy and Program Administration

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: CONSOLIDATED HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION PROGRAM (CHPP)

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Provincial Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP), as detailed in Report SS-06-053, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Grant pre-budget approval for the allocation of one-time grants for January 1 to December 31, 2007 to the following community agencies subject to 100% funding from the Province:

Cambridge Kiwanis Village Non-Profit Housing – Supportive Housing $ 51,453 Cambridge Shelter Corporation – Welcome Aboard Drop-in $ 15,000 House of Friendship – Supportive Housing $ 243,015 K-W YWCA – Supportive Housing $ 162,046 Lutherwood - Rent Bank and Eviction Prevention $ 65,500 Lutherwood – Families in Transition $ 47,786 Reaching our Outdoor Friends – Outreach and Direct Support $ 30,424 Total $ 615,224

b) Request an increase in the CHPP allocation in the 2007 provincial budget submission to reflect actual community program and implementation costs under the CHPP Program Guidelines and Performance Measures; and

c) Request the Province reconvene the original provincial CHPP data working group to review and further refine data collected under CHPP.

SUMMARY:

A report was brought forward to Council in April 2006 (SS-06-016) outlining the Province’s new Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP) and recommending actions for local program implementation. This report provides an update regarding implementation of CHPP and recommended funding for community programs in 2007.

REPORT:

1.0 Background Beginning in 1999, following the release of the Provincial Task Force on Homelessness, the Province designated the Region as a consolidated municipal service manager (CMSM) for homelessness to administer several grant programs aimed at homelessness prevention. Under this designation, Social Services administered the Provincial Homelessness Initiative Fund (100% Province funded), the Off the Street-Into Shelter funding, and the Emergency Hostel Redirection funding (both 80/20 cost-shared between the Province and Region respectively). Without any accompanying legislation, program guidelines, or funding beyond the grants themselves, CMSMs DOCS# 312801 Page 1 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-053 were not able to fully realize their service manager role. Following consultation with CMSMs in 2004/2005, the Ministry of Community and Social Services (the Ministry) announced the Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP) to support the development of the CMSM role effective January 1, 2006.

To maximize CMSM flexibility to address community needs, the existing grant programs and the Supports to Daily Living program were consolidated under a single program. To clarify expectations under CHPP, the Province released CHPP Program Implementation Guidelines and Performance Measures which outlined significant new responsibilities for planning, research, administration and evaluation. The CHPP policy direction is a complementary component of the Province’s overall strategy to respond to homelessness. The policy recognizes that ending homelessness requires the efforts of many toward prevention and emergency relief, re-housing, and stabilizing households in permanent accommodation. Other provincially funded components include the supply of affordable housing, funding for emergency shelter and domiciliary hostel beds, housing loss prevention programs, and supports to vulnerable households. The specific objectives of CHPP include: • To improve access to and connect households that are experiencing homelessness with the system of community services; • To support household experiencing homelessness to obtain and keep longer-term housing; and • To assists households at risk of homelessness to maintain housing.

CHPP is funded 100% by the Province based on an amount equal to the Region’s 2005 provincial allocation. While the Ministry recognized and provided for administrative costs, these were funded from within the overall allocation.

2.0 CHPP Update and Progress on Local Implementation

It was identified that 2006 would be a transition year in terms of implementing the CHPP within the Region of Waterloo. A number of activities have been undertaken to address the new responsibilities under CHPP in the areas of research and planning, administration, and evaluation as outlined below.

2.1 Research and Planning The Province has put an emphasis on supporting effective planning and management of the service system through research and the development of system plans. In this regard, the Region has produced a draft report, Understanding the Housing Stability System for Adults in Waterloo Region’s Urban Areas and will be completing, over the fall of 2006, reports on youth, older adults, rural, and economic-based homelessness (SS-06-048). These backgrounder reports will be synthesized into an overall System Plan for Housing Stability to be presented to Council in mid 2007.

As a condition of funding, it was identified that the Region would also need to undertake a regular count of the local homeless population. In December 2005, the Province indicated further information regarding expectations and methods to conduct the count would be forthcoming; however, further information from the Province is not expected until after October 2006. Counting numbers of people who are homeless is a complex task with a multitude of possible approaches. Each of these approaches has its own set of limitations and requires varying degrees of resources. In the interim, a low resource but relatively effective count was conducted through the research for Understanding the Housing Stability System for Adults in Waterloo Region’s Urban Areas. This count revealed that over the last reported year, 2,653 individuals used emergency shelter services of which approximately 292 people (11%) experienced persistent homelessness. These numbers provide an update to the last count which took place in 1999 and estimated that between 1,500 and

DOCS# 312801 Page 2 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-053

2,000 people used emergency shelters and other identified residential services in that year.

2.2 Program Administration With regard to program administration, the CHPP Program Implementation Guidelines require that the Region develop a seamless program of support services to connect individuals and families to community resources and assist households experiencing or at-risk of homelessness to find and keep stable living arrangements. In order to fulfill this requirement, it has been identified through the draft report, Understanding the Housing Stability System for Adults in Waterloo Region’s Urban Areas, that there is a need to support the full range of services within the housing stability system (i.e., emergency shelters, transitional and supportive services, transitional housing and supportive/supported housing); therefore, there is a need to fund programs under all three objectives of the CHPP. It was highlighted that non-specific supportive/supported housing is in greatest demand and is the most effective route to ending homelessness for those requiring assistance to maintain housing stability.

Programs currently funded address all three objectives of the CHPP with a particular emphasis on non-specific supportive/supported housing. Although these programs are funded one-time for 2006 in recognition of the transition year to implement CHPP, all of these programs have been receiving funding from the Region over the past five to fifteen years to address issues of homelessness. These programs have being proven effective and are ones on which the community now relies.

In the past report to Council on CHPP, it was identified that the Region would be required to shift its existing strategy of providing multi-year grant funding for projects to the development and ongoing administration of programs. In this regard, staff requested letters of interest from existing CHPP funded agencies in order to be considered for on-going program funding. An analysis of the funding requirements reveals a shortfall of approximately $55,000 to maintain the existing programs. Staff has also calculated an overall shortfall of $340,000 to address sustainability concerns and necessary program enhancements. Therefore, while the Province provided an annualized 2% increase to CHPP of $13,066 (effective July 31, 2006 so pro-rated as $6,533 for 2006), the total funding available for programs under the CHPP does not cover the costs necessary to provide “a seamless program of support services” or even continue to fund current programs. As such, programs have been recommended for one-time funding again in 2007 mostly at the same or lesser amounts than in 2006 (program descriptions are provided in Appendix A). Although all programs are vitally important, where reallocations have occurred, they have followed the local priority to place greater emphasis on desperately needed non-specific supportive/supported housing. In order to address the under funding of all programs, it is recommended that the Region request an increase to the CHPP allocation in the 2007 provincial budget submission to reflect actual community program and implementation costs under the CHPP Program Guidelines and Performance Measures.

2.3 Evaluation Under the CHPP, the Region is required to collect and report quarterly on a set of ten data elements which support the six performance measures identified in the CHPP Program Implementation Guidelines and Performance Measures. Staff has worked with agencies to develop and implement tools to collect required data. There remain some inconsistencies across the Province with the data, and as such, it is recommended that the original provincial working group to be reconvened to evaluate and further refine data collection for 2007.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Implementing the Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program is consistent with the Region’s

DOCS# 312801 Page 3 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-053

Corporate Strategic Plan, Focus Area 2 to enhance community health and social well-being.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The 2007 allocation from the Province under CHPP is anticipated to be $666,345 which is funded entirely by the Province of Ontario. Of this amount, 10% or $66,635 is required to fulfill the Region’s Service System Manager role for the Program. With the Region’s ongoing contribution of $15,514 a total of $615,224 should be available for community programs in 2007.

Without additional provincial funding, there will be a projected minimum shortfall of $54,276 and a maximum shortfall of $336,606 between available and required funding for CHPP community programs in 2007. The minimum shortfall represents the amount needed to maintain programs at their existing level; the maximum shortfall represents the amount requested by the agencies to address sustainability issues (e.g., increased costs of operating since funding levels were first set between 1990-2001) and enhancements (e.g., additional staffing to address increased demands in service and safety issues of working alone in a high-risk environment). It is recommended that the Region request the actual costs of the implementation of the CHPP Guidelines and Performance Measures from the Province within the 2007 provincial budget submission.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Staff from Financial Services has reviewed this report. Staff from Legal Services will assist in the service contract process.

ATTACHMENTS

Appendix A – Program Descriptions

PREPARED BY: Marie Morrison, Manager Social Planning

APPROVED BY: Michael Schuster, Commissioner Social Services

DOCS# 312801 Page 4 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-053

APPENDIX A PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS

Cambridge Kiwanis Non-Profit Housing Corporation – Supportive Housing This program provides supportive housing through 20 units at the Bridges (adults) and 8 spaces at Cambridge Kiwanis Village (four-2 bedroom units for youth). Landlords are also recruited from the private rental market to transition residents (as they are ready) to more independent living situations. An Ontario Trillium Foundation grant supported approximately half of the funding for this program over the past two years but is no longer available. As such, the program seeks minimum funding to cover staffing costs and requests funding to cover the full costs of the program.

Cambridge Shelter Corporation – Welcome Aboard Welcome Aboard is a drop-In that is open seven days a week providing a safe indoor place for over 100 homeless and low income individuals each day. Programs include a daily meal program, showers, laundry facilities, weekly medical and foot care clinic, literacy counseling, addiction support groups, identification clinics, assistance with accessing drug and alcohol treatment, job and volunteer placements, assistance with accessing and maintaining housing, mailbox, dedicated phone lines, message centre as well as assistance with food, clothing and furniture. Welcome Aboard is the only centre in Cambridge offering daily services to people experiencing homelessness. CHPP funding currently assists with 17% of the operating expenses for this program and they are seeking sustainability funding that would amount to 63% of their operating expenses.

House of Friendship – Supportive Housing The House of Friendship provides supportive housing to a total of 85 units through Cramer House, Eby Village, and Charles Village. Cramer House was established in 1985 and provides supportive housing to nine single men in a shared living environment. Eby Village opened in May 1990 and is a 56 unit, nine-story apartment building designed to serve 64 single male and female adults. Charles Village opened in 2005 designed to serve 20 single male and female adults (including two barrier-free units). They are seeking minimally to sustain the 3% one-time increase they have had over the past three years (the only increase in funding since 1990) and to further increase their allocation by 3%.

K-W YWCA – Supportive Housing Lincoln Road is an innovative non-profit housing project for women and their children established in 1989. Lincoln Road Apartments provide supportive housing for single women and women-led families who have experienced persistent difficulty finding and maintaining adequate housing. It is comprised of 45 units, four of which are wheelchair accessible. They are seeking minimally to sustain the 3% one- time increase they have had over the past three years (the only increase in funding since 1990) and to further increase their allocation by 15% to add an additional part-time support worker and to increase the Child and Parent Program from 20 hours to 30 hours per week.

Lutherwood – Rent Bank and Eviction Prevention Program The Rent Bank and Eviction Prevention Program was established in 2002 with a goal of preventing homelessness through the provision of information and advocacy, and a fund to assist tenants with rent and rental arrears. Eligible applicants can access up to $1,200 in an interest-free loan with a lenient repayment strategy. Beyond arranging loans, the Rent Bank Coordinator spends a significant amount of time linking tenants to available resources in the community and advocating with landlords, property management companies and other community partners to prevent homelessness. CHPP funding supports the operating costs of the program and Provincial Rent Bank funding and loan repayments support the loan fund. Additional funding within this program would allow for enhanced staffing which would provide the capacity to double the number of loans to households each year and assist a greater number of households through other efforts to maintain housing stability.

DOCS# 312801 Page 5 of 6 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-053

Lutherwood – Families in Transition Program The Families in Transition (FIT) Program provides support to families experiencing homelessness across the Region of Waterloo in accessing safe affordable housing and comprehensive social services. Individual case management is provided by the Support Worker to identify individual family goals and help families gain stability and develop skills for independent living. The FIT Program not only provides clients with support in housing but also works with family members on education, parenting, employment, work preparation, childcare, transportation and health issues. Additional funding within this program would address changes to the staffing structure as a result of adding an additional part-time staff to the program.

Reaching Our Outdoor Friends (ROOF) Youth Street Outreach and Direct Support The OSIS Youth Outreach Program first began in October of 2001 and offers street outreach services across the Region of Waterloo in order to assist youth in moving from the street into emergency, transitional or permanent housing. The Direct Support Program is designed to ensure continued activity aimed at supporting absolute homeless youth and extended support for youth integrating into short-term shelter and medium-term housing. Additional funding is immediately needed to maintain the existing one FTE for each program (outreach and direct support). Additional funding beyond this immediate need was requested to ensure program stability and sustainability. For safety reasons, two rather than one outreach staff is required and staff resources need to be enhanced in order to retain qualified and experienced staff.

DOCS# 312801 Page 6 of 6 REGION OF WATERLOO REPORT: SS-06-054

SOCIAL SERVICES Social Planning Policy and Program Administration

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: CHANGES TO THE DOMICILIARY HOSTEL PROGRAM PER DIEM

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem as outlined in Report SS-06-054, dated September 19, 2006:

a) Increase the per diem between June 1 and December 31, 2006 up to $45.00 subject to Domiciliary Hostel Program operators’ commitment to comply with the Domiciliary Hostel Program minimum standards and subject to 100% funding by the Province of Ontario;

b) Increase the 2006 Operating Budget for Income Support Programs by $298,809 gross and $0 net; and

c) Forward the 2007 Domiciliary Hostel Program per diem rate to Budget Committee of the Whole for consideration during the 2007 Operating Budget process.

SUMMARY: Nil

REPORT:

Under the Ontario Works Act (1997), municipalities are able to contract with local operators to provide permanent accommodation and some supports to daily living for those with physical, developmental or psychiatric needs. Under the Regulations, persons who live in such homes and who qualify for assistance may have a per diem amount paid on their behalf by the Region. Funding is provided under the Province’s Domiciliary Hostel Program (Program). This is a capped program and the Province sets the maximum per diem. The Program is cost shared on an 80/20 basis. The Region currently has a purchase of service agreement with 15 operators.

In June 2006, the Province announced the maximum per diem rate would increase from $41.20 to $45.00 (SS-06-045). The Province indicated it will fund 100% of the per diem increase for the period June 1 to December 31, 2006 and outlined the following options for Consolidated Municipal Service Managers (CMSMs) with regards to its distribution: 1) Increase the per diem up to $45 effective June 1, 2006; 2) Not increase the per diem in June 2006; 3) In light of new provincial requirement to develop and implement standards for the Program, increase the per diem once the new expectations of standards has been confirmed. In this regard a per diem up to $45 retroactive to June 1, 2006 can be paid out to those operators who commit to minimum standards in their 2007 service contract (see letter from Province attached as appendix A).

Staff is recommending the third option that the Region pay out the increased per diem based on the DOCS#310460 Page 1 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-054 availability of funding and the number of operators who have signed their 2007 purchase of service agreement indicating their compliance/intention to comply with the new standards.

As indicated in the letter from the Province, the Region’s 2006 allocation from the Province for the per diem increase at 100% is $234,967 and the per diem increase at 80% in 2007 is $322,240. Both the 100% allocation for 2006 and the ongoing allocation were based on 2005 projected days of care. On September 13, 2006, following further negotiations, staff received word that the Province has approved up to an additional $239,089 in one-time funding to respond to the impact of the increased per diem and to respond to the Region’s previous request (SS-06-11) for additional funding based on the forecasted increase in days of care.

The one time allocation will address the subsidy shortfall in 2006 however given the number of eligible clients in the Program has and continues to exceed the 2005 projected days of care, staff project an ongoing shortfall. Staff will bring forward the per diem rate issue for Council’s consideration as part of the Region’s 2007 budget process.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Providing domiciliary hostel services is consistent with the Region’s Corporate Strategic Plan, Focus Area 2: to Enhance Community Health and Social Well-Being.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Region’s original 2006 allocation from the Province to cover the per diem increase at 100% is $234,967 based on 2005 projected days of care. A further one-time funding allocation of up to $239,089 ($63,842 for the increased per diem and $175,247 for increased service demands) has recently been announced. The amount paid out to domiciliary hostel operators is dependant on the amount of funding available from the Province and the number of eligible operator who agree to comply with program standards.

With the increased fiscal funding from the Province of $175,247 mentioned above, it is projected that the overall Domiciliary Hostel Program budget will not be over budget at year end.

The Region’s annualized allocation from the Province to cover the per diem increase at 80% in 2007 is $322,240 for a projected shortfall of $86,850 based on 2005 actuals and the first 5 months of 2006. This issue will be forwarded to the 2007 budget process for consideration.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Finance was consulted in the preparation of this report and will assist in determining the disbursement of the 2006 per diem increase.

ATTACHMENTS

Appendix A: Letter from the Province

PREPARED BY: Lynn Randall, Director Social Planning, Policy and Program Administration Marie Morrison, Manager Social Planning

APPROVED BY: Michael Schuster, Commissioner, Social Services

Docs#310460 Page 2 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-054

APPENDIX A LETTER FROM PROVINCE

Docs#310460 Page 3 of 4 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-054

Docs#310460 Page 4 of 4 REGION OF WATERLOO REPORT: SS-06-057

SOCIAL SERVICES Employment & Income Support

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: PROVINCIAL CHANGES TO SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

On June 9, 2006 the Provincial government announced a number of changes to the Ontario Works (OW) program. These largely pertain to eligibility and treatment of assets and provide clarification regarding current policies.

REPORT:

1.0 Background Since December 2004 the government has introduced a number of changes aimed at revising the OW legislation. A number of reports presented during this period have informed Committee on these changes (eg. the delivery of Intake Services, treatment of earned income, elimination of liens, sponsorship deductions). The June 2006 changes are in keeping with this series of reforms and generally reflect the direction set out in the government’s report “Review of Employment Assistance Programs in Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Programs” (December 2004). Ms. Deb Matthews, Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Community and Social Services and author of this report, visited the Region as part of a second round of consultation related to this report on June 26, 2006 (see memorandum to Community Services Committee, dated July 4, 2006)

2.0 Eligibility and Benefit Changes All legislative revisions introduced were effective June 9, 2006. The following is a summary of the eligibility and benefit changes. • The level of an Ontario Works recipient’s benefits is maintained for the first three months while in a temporary residential program for the treatment of substance abuse to assist them in maintaining their community residence. The Administrator (i.e. the Region) has the discretion to extend this period or reduce benefits based upon individual circumstance (eg. projected length of stay). • Applicants for Ontario Works who voluntarily quit or are fired from employment are no longer subject to a temporary period of ineligibility. The Region of Waterloo has always applied a test of reasonableness (ie. why did you quit? was the action reasonable?) in these situations and therefore there is no change to current policy. • The asset level for a recipient’s vehicle has increased from $5,000 to $10,000. This increase has also been applied to a second vehicle determined a necessity for employment assistance activities. This change will allow more recipients to remain eligible without having to dispose of their vehicles. • The earnings of dependent adults (ie. the adult child of an Ontario Works recipient) who are attending secondary school full time and the amount paid to a dependent adult under a training program are exempt as assets. These assets are further exempt upon graduation if

DOCS#313572 Page 1 of 2 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-057

the dependent adult will use these funds for post secondary education. • Personal loans used for the purchase of household items that are necessary for the health or well being of recipients are exempt as income (eg. groceries, clothing and furniture). • Dependent children who have finished secondary school are eligible for Other Employment and Employment Assistance Activities Benefits up to a maximum of $253.00, to enable participation in a training program or to obtain employment.

3.0 Regulation Amendments for Clarification Current OW regulations were amended to clarify that the number of recipients of the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) in the service delivery area of a Consolidated Municipal Services Manager, is to be included in the calculation of the cap on cost sharing for non-health related discretionary benefits. Previously only Ontario Works recipients were recognized in determining the maximum amount the Province would cost share (Provincial share is $7.00 per recipient).

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

These changes support the Corporate Strategic Plan, Focus Area 2 to enhance community health and social well being.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Region cost shares social assistances benefits with the Province (80% Provincial and 20% Municipal). Changes to eligibility and assets have the potential to allow more applicants to become and remain eligible (eg. change in vehicle asset limit, dependent asset levels). The inclusion of ODSP recipients in the non-discretionary benefit cap increases the amount of non-health related benefits the Province will cost share, thereby reducing the necessity to use 100% municipal funds. To date there has been no issue of remaining within the cap.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Finance has reviewed this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

PREPARED BY: Cathy Bossenberry, Manager, Income Support Services David Dirks, Director, Employment and Income Support

APPROVED BY: Michael Schuster, Commissioner, Social Services

DOCS#313572 Page 2 of 2 REGION OF WATERLOO REPORT: SS-06-058

SOCIAL SERVICES Employment & Income Support

TO: Chair Jane Brewer and Members of the Community Services Committee

DATE: September 19, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: ONTARIO WORKS YEAR 2: FOCUSED REVIEW FINAL REPORT

RECOMMENDATION:

For information.

SUMMARY:

The Province conducted a “focused” review of the Ontario Works (OW) program, as follow-up to four areas identified as problematic in its 2004 Ontario Works Compliance Review (see Report SS- 05-055, dated October 18, 2005). The purpose was to determine whether improvement has occurred in the areas identified.

REPORT:

1.0 Background Staff value such reviews, as a means to ensure the integrity of service delivery and identify areas for training and policy development. In fact Social Services, Employment & Income Support (E&IS), which administers the OW Act, has successfully reintroduced its own case file audit process to further strengthen service delivery. The Ontario Works Act with its supporting regulations and Provincial directives is extremely complex and presents significant challenges to fairly and consistently deliver in an easy comprehensible manner to vulnerable people.

In 2003 the Province introduced a new Ontario Works Compliance Review and Performance Management Model. It consists of a two-year cycle of review and follow-up. The intent is to monitor consistent compliance to the Ontario Works Act, regulations and Provincial directives.

Year “1” of the cycle was completed by the Province in its 2004/2005 fiscal year (i.e. April to March). Provincial staff conducted a comprehensive review of both the financial and employment assistance components of the Ontario Works program as delivered by individual Consolidated Municipal Services Managers (CMSM’s). Each CMSM was asked to prepare an action plan, responding to the findings and recommendations of the review.

In Report SS-05-055, (dated October 18, 2005), staff summarized the key findings, the financial implications and the proposed follow-up from the Year “1” review. The Year “2” reviews were conducted in the Province’s 2005/2006 fiscal year. They have focused on the action plan of each CMSM to determine whether the recommendations from Year “1” have been addressed.

2.0 Key Findings In their focused review Provincial staff looked at files from the month of March 2005. Four areas were identified for this review: • Are Participation Agreements for OW participants being fully completed? • Are appropriate reasons for “deferring” a recipient from participation in the OW program noted and the necessary documentation collected? • Are the notes in the Provincial technology/database clear and complete? DOCS#314505 Page 1 of 2 September 19, 2006 Report: SS-06-058

• Is emergency assistance being issued according to the legislation? This was a very positive review, as the Region was found to be in compliance. Those files requiring corrective action have been returned to the appropriate staff for follow-up. In one instance a file was missing the necessary medical documentation to support a deferral from the program. “Notes” remain a challenge. As part of the division’s Service Path Redesign, E&IS is considering a common notes template to simplify the recording process and ensure an easy-to-read reference to better assist staff, as they support vulnerable participants.

Provincial staff will return in the Fall of 2006, to review progress on the provision of required information to Ontario Works participants. This was the fifth area identified in the 2004 Compliance Review.

3.0 Findings of Additional Review Regional staff asked the Province during its focused review to assist by examining the implementation of a policy introduced by the division in 2005. This is always an option offered by the Province, and it has been used on other occasions in the past.

Specifically, the Province was asked to provide feedback on the closing of files, when the person is no longer receiving Ontario Works. The interest was not compliance with Provincial standards, rather Employment and Income Support has introduced procedures and processes not only to ensure that a case is closed according to legislation, but also to ensure that; • Those leaving Ontario Works for employment have been informed of the benefits available to them (e.g., child care, bus subsidy, employment start-up funds, assistance with drug and dental costs); and • The appropriate notes and codes have been entered in the Provincial technology for the purposes of achieving Provincial targets in the areas of employment and earnings as part of the new Outcome Funding Model.

Files from the October, November and December 2005 period were reviewed. Provincial staff provided valuable feedback in terms of the successes, areas requiring attention in future training and possible enhancements to the management of terminations. These will be incorporated into the division’s planned follow-up with staff on this initiative.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

The delivery of Ontario Works is consistent with the Region’s Corporate Strategic Plan, Focus Area 2 to enhance community health and social well being. The review of service delivery integrity through an audit process fosters operational effectiveness and efficiency, which supports Focus Area 5 of the Corporate Strategic Plan.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Nil OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Nil ATTACHMENTS

Nil

PREPARED BY: David Dirks, Director, Employment & Income Support

APPROVED BY: Michael Schuster, Commissioner, Social Services DOCS#314505 Page 2 of 2

MEDIA RELEASE: Friday, September 15, 2006, 4:30 p.m.

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE COMMITTEE AGENDA

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 9:00 a.m. Regional Council Chamber 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario

1. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT

2. DELEGATIONS

3. REPORTS - Finance a) F-06-060 2006 Fall Debenture Issue 1

REPORTS – Office of the Chief Administrator

b) CA-EM-06- 001 New Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act 3

REPORTS – Corporate Resources c) CR-FM-06-014 Pre-Budget Approval for Vehicle Procurement for 2007 7

4. INFORMATION/CORRESPONDENCE

5. OTHER BUSINESS

6. NEXT MEETING

7. MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION (IF REQUIRED)

8. ADJOURN

316095 Report: F-06-060 REGION OF WATERLOO

FINANCE DEPARTMENT Treasury Services

TO: Chair T. Galloway and Members of the Administration and Finance Committee

DATE: September 20, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: 2006 FALL DEBENTURE ISSUE

RECOMMENDATION:

For Information

SUMMARY:

The Region of Waterloo is in the process of finalizing its fall debenture issue. This report addresses the planned process for issuing debentures during the municipal election period.

REPORT:

The Region of Waterloo, under the authority of By-law 95-020, is currently planning its 2006 debenture issue which will be completed this fall. The standard required process is to launch the debenture issue (which includes finalizing the interest rates and committing the issue for sale), have Council approve the borrowing by-laws and close the issue (which involves exchanging the debenture certificates for the monetary proceeds). Once the amounts to be debentured are finalized and the relevant documentation is prepared, this process occurs over a relatively short period of time.

Based on current planning, the debenture by-laws and reporting on the details of the debenture issue are scheduled for the October 25th Council meeting. In the event that market conditions are not favourable at that time or if there happened to be any delays in the process, the alternative date would be November 29th. These dates fall during the election period (October 25th) or before the inaugural (November 29th), a time during which Council’s actions relating to financial liabilities are restricted under the Municipal Act unless certain specific conditions are met. In order to pass debenture by-laws at the October 25th meeting, three-quarters of the existing Council will need to have had their nomination certified or have been acclaimed. To pass debenture by-laws at the November 29th meeting, three-quarters of the existing Council will have to have been elected.

To ensure that the existing Council can approve the debenture by-laws regardless of the status of the nominations or the election, a by-law “ to delegate authority to the outgoing Council to pass by-laws to authorize the issue of debentures” will be included in the September 27th Regional Council agenda. Although it is possible that the by-law will not be necessary, it is a cautionary action and is supported by the Region’s independent fiscal lawyer whose opinion is required to market a debenture issue. This is the same procedure that was followed during the last election period in the fall of 2003.

The by-law will be very specific as it will include upper limits or caps on the amount to be debentured, the term of the debentures and the cost of the funds (interest rates). Participants in the issue are expected to include the Region, the Cities of Kitchener and Waterloo and the Waterloo Region District School Board and the issue is expected to be in the range of $45 to $55 million including $15 to $20 million for the Region and $15 to $20 million for the School Board. The Region has previously approved the inclusion of the Waterloo Region District School Board (2000) and the Waterloo Catholic District School Board (2003) in its debenture issues. The term of the issue is not expected to exceed 20 years and the upper limit for the cost of funds will be determined in consultation with the Region’s fiscal agents when the by-law is finalized for September 27th. Page 1 of 2

September 20, 2006 Report: F-06-060

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

One of the objectives of the Corporate Strategic Plan is to maintain financial stability. The Region’s capital financing program, excellent credit rating and prudent use of debenture financing assists in meeting this objective.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Current “all-in” average ten year rates for high quality municipal issues are approximately 4.50% as compared to 4.41% for the 2005 debenture issue and 4.61% for the 2003 issue. In the absence of any world shocks, it is expected that rates will not change significantly over the next few weeks.

Debt costs associated with the Regional portion of the debenture issue will be included in the 2007 base budget.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Council and Administrative Services staff assists with the passing of the required by-laws.

ATTACHMENTS: Nil

PREPARED BY: A. Hinchberger, Director of Financial Services, Treasury & Tax Policy

APPROVED BY: L. Ryan, Chief Financial Officer

314547 Page 2 of 2 Report: CA-EM-06-001 REGION OF WATERLOO

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR Emergency Measures

TO: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Administration and Finance Committee

DATE: September 20, 2006 FILE CODE: D29-00, L11-20/EMCPA

SUBJECT: NEW EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND CIVIL PROTECTION ACT

RECOMMENDATION:

For information

SUMMARY:

On June 20, 2006, Bill 56, an Act to amend the Emergency Management Act, the Employment Standards Act, 2000 and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 received Royal Assent becoming the new Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. The Act amends the definition of emergency to include danger caused by disease or health risk.

The new legislation is a comprehensive strategy for Provincial emergency powers, which is more consistent with legislation that already exists in other Canadian provinces and worldwide. The Province advises that the new powers are much easier for emergency management officials, as it enables the Government of Ontario to act quickly, decisively, and in the best interest of the people of Ontario.

REPORT:

The primary purpose of the Act is to provide emergency powers to the Province (Lieutenant Governor in Council and to the Premier) to deal with emergencies. The purpose of the power to make emergency orders is to promote the public good by protecting the health, safety and welfare of the public in a manner that respects the rights of individuals. Limitations are placed on the orders. The power to issue orders exists when a Provincial emergency has been declared to exist.

Highlights of the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act

Criteria for Declaration of a Provincial Emergency The Act provides that an emergency may be declared by an order of the Lieutenant Governor in Council or the Premier, if in the Premier’s opinion the urgency of the situation requires an immediate order. An order of the Premier that declares an emergency is terminated after 72 hours unless it is confirmed by an order of the Lieutenant Governor in Council. To declare a provincial emergency throughout Ontario or any part of it may be made, if in the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor Council or the Premier, the following criteria are satisfied:

1. There is an emergency that requires immediate action to prevent, reduce or mitigate a danger of major proportions that could result in serious harm to persons or substantial damage to property.

Page 1 of 4 September 20, 2006 Report: CA-EM-06-001

2. One of the following circumstances exists: i. The resources normally available to the Government of Ontario or an agency, board or commission or other branch of the government, including existing legislation, cannot be relied upon without the risk of serious delay. ii. The resources referred to above may be insufficiently effective to address the emergency. iii. It is not possible, without the risk of serious delay, to ascertain whether the resources referred to above can be relied on.

Emergency Powers and Orders Orders may be in respect to many matters, including:

1. Implementing any emergency plans. 2. Regulating or prohibiting travel or movement to, from or within any specified area. 3. Evacuating individuals and animals and removing personal property from a specified area and making arrangements for the adequate care and protection of individuals and property. 4. Establishing facilities for the care, welfare, safety and shelter of individuals, including emergency shelters and hospitals. 5. Closing any place, whether public or private, including any business, office, school, hospital or other establishment or institution. 6. To prevent, respond to or alleviate the effects of the emergency, constructing works, restoring necessary facilities and appropriating, using, destroying, removing or disposing of property. 7. Collecting, transporting, storing, processing and disposing of any type of waste. 8. Authorizing facilities, including electrical generating facilities, to operate as is necessary to respond to or alleviate the effects of the emergency. 9. Using any necessary goods, services and resources within any part of Ontario, distributing, and making available necessary goods, services and resources and establishing centres for their distribution. 10. Procuring necessary goods, services and resources. 11. Authorizing, but not requiring, any person to render services of a type the person is qualified to render. 12. Requiring that any person collect, use or disclose necessary information. 13. Prohibiting charging unconscionable prices for such goods, services and resources. 14. Taking such other actions or implementing such measures considered necessary in order to prevent, respond to or alleviate the effects of the emergency.

Generally, orders are effective as of when they are made but may be retroactive to a date in the order. Orders are effective for 14 days and, during a declared emergency, may be renewed for 14- day periods. Declared emergencies are terminated 14 days or earlier after the day they are declared but may be extended by the Lieutenant Governor in Council for one period of 14 days. The Assembly may extend emergencies for periods of up to 28 days.

Powers of the Premier (a) In a Provincially declared emergency within the jurisdiction of a municipality, the Premier may direct and control the administration, facilities and equipment of the municipality. (b) In a Provincially declared emergency anywhere in Ontario, the Premier may require any municipality to provide such assistance as he/she considers necessary to an emergency area that is not within the jurisdiction of the municipality, and may direct and control the provision of such assistance.

Conflict with Legislative Instruments

DOCS #303891 Page 2 of 4 September 20, 2006 Report: CA-EM-06-001

In the event of conflict between an order and any statute, regulation, rule, by-law, other order or instrument of a legislative nature, the order prevails unless statute, regulation, rule, bylaw, other order or instrument of a legislative nature specifically provides that it is to apply despite the Act. Except to the extent that there is a conflict with an order, nothing in the Act shall be construed as abrogating or derogating from the powers of the Chief Medical Officer of Health. The rights of a person to bring an application for judicial review are preserved. Despite the general provision, an exception to this is the Occupational Health and Safety Act or the regulation made under it prevails.

Protection from Action No action can be instituted against a member of council, an employee or a municipality, an employee of a local services board, an employee of a district social services administrative board, a minister of the Crown, a Crown employee or any individual acting pursuant to this Act or an order made under it for anything done in good faith in the actual or intended exercise or performance of any power or duty under this Act or an order made under it for neglect or default in the good faith exercise or performance of such a power or duty.

Compensation, General The Province may authorize payment of the cost of providing any assistance that arises under this Act or as the result of an emergency.

Compensation, Individual Loss of Property The Province may authorize reasonable compensation to a person for loss of any real or personal property as a result of making an order.

Compensation for Municipalities Lieutenant Governor in Council may by order authorize the payment of the costs incurred by a municipality in respect or an order made under this Act out of funds appropriated by the Assembly.

Implications for the Region of Waterloo The Act does not provide for any additional powers to the Regional Chair, as Head of Council, nor Mayor of a local municipality, during a declared municipal emergency.

The main implications for the Region pertain to the Emergency Powers and Orders that may come into force during a provincially declared emergency. These represent operational decisions that will now emanate from the Province. The Region and local municipalities may become the tools of the Province to carry out such orders, as the Province would not have their own resources. Orders such as evacuations, travel restrictions, establishing mass care facilities, closure of places and construction would likely have a direct impact on the Region, as we will be required to implement and operationalize these actions. The Province has the authority to direct such resources, as ours would not be ours to direct and control. The Province is now able to compel the Region to respond to Provincial emergencies anywhere in Ontario.

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

To ensure that our emergency measures are adequate to handle natural disasters and potential crisis situations.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: NIL

DOCS #303891 Page 3 of 4 September 20, 2006 Report: CA-EM-06-001

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Corporate Resources (Legal Services) were consulted in the preparation of this report. This report will be circulated to the Regional Emergency Planning Advisory Committee, the Community Pandemic Influenza Plan Steering Committee, and the Emergency Management Program Committee.

ATTACHMENTS: NIL

PREPARED BY: Marg Verbeek, Manager, Emergency Measures

APPROVED BY: Mike Murray, Chief Administrative Officer

DOCS #303891 Page 4 of 4 Report: CR-FM-06-014 REGION OF WATERLOO

CORPORATE RESOURCES Facilities Management and Fleet Services

TO: Chair Tom Galloway and Members of the Administration and Finance Committee

DATE: September 20, 2006 FILE CODE:

SUBJECT: PRE-BUDGET APPROVAL FOR VEHICLE PROCUREMENT FOR 2007

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the pre-budget expenditure of $3,004,000 for the purchase of 42 vehicles scheduled for procurement in 2007 as set out in the 2006 10 Year Capital Plans of various departments to be funded from the appropriate vehicle/equipment reserve funds.

SUMMARY:

Nil

REPORT:

In September 2003, Regional Council approved a vehicle procurement cycle which called for the tender of vehicles in the fall of the preceding year with delivery for most vehicles occurring during the January - May timeframe of the year of procurement. Specialized vehicles with longer delivery times will be delivered throughout the year. This change was approved to ensure that vehicles are delivered in a timely manner to meet operational requirements in the year they are due for replacement. This change in the cycle also results in reduced tender costs and allows the vehicle deliveries and conversions to be scheduled to fit the availability of staff resources. Thus those vehicles slated for replacement in 2007 would normally be tendered in the fall of 2006 for delivery in early 2007.

The 2006 approved capital budget identified the need to potentially replace 62 vehicles in 2007 valued at $5,052,000 based on an average useful service life determined from previous fleet history, utilization rate, and physical condition of vehicles in the different programs. The procurement cycle for 2007 was initiated in May 2006 and as part of the process, Regional staff completed a detailed evaluation of the vehicles to determine if any of the vehicles could be deleted from the establishment due to changing operational requirements or if their purchase could be deferred due to better than anticipated mechanical condition or lower than expected utilization. As a result of this review, staff determined that 1 vehicle could be eliminated and 18 vehicles could be deferred for one or more years for a total deferred expenditure of $1,608,000. The 18 vehicles deferred include: 5 vehicles from Waste Management ($684K), 3 vehicles from Transportation Operations ($563K), 4 vehicles from Water Operations ($140K), and 6 vehicles from Facilities Management ($198K).

As a result of this evaluation, the revised 2007 vehicle procurement plan is for 44 vehicles at an estimated cost of $3,444,000. As Council has already approved the pre-budget expenditure of $440,000 for two snow plows in June 2006, this report requests the pre-budget approval for the remaining 42 vehicles with a value of $3,004,000.

The list of the 42 vehicles to be replaced in 2007 is shown in Appendix A. All of these vehicles are being replaced due to high kilometers, heavy off road usage or higher than normal maintenance requirements in the previous year.

Page 1 of 3 September 20, 2006 Report: CR-FM-06-014

CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:

The procurement of these vehicles will ensure the Region gets the best value for the tax dollars with which it is entrusted and supports focus area #5 in the Strategic Focus, “Ensure operational effectiveness and efficiency”.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Funding for the purchase of replacement and new vehicles will be provided from existing vehicle and equipment reserves set up for this purpose or other specific capital funds approved as part of the budget process. The revised capital plans for vehicle and equipment costs for 2007, which is $1,608,000 lower than those contained in the 2006 budget forecast, will be updated as part of the 2007 budget submission. Tenders for the vehicles will be processed as set out in the purchasing by- law.

OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:

Finance and Environmental and Transportation Services have reviewed this report and their comments included as appropriate.

ATTACHMENTS

Appendix A –2007 Vehicle Procurement List

PREPARED BY: Ken Noonan, Director Facilities management and Fleet Services

APPROVED BY: Gary Sosnoski, Commissioner. Corporate Resources

Docs #310793 Page 2 of 3 September 20, 2006 Report: CR-FM-06-014

APPENDIX A SUMMARY – 2007 VEHICLE PROCUREMENT PLAN

Waste Management Pick-ups 10 $237,000 Vans 1 $ 40,000 Riding Mowers 2 $ 60,000 Loaders 2 $570,000 Dozer 1 $800,000 Sub-total 16 (1) $1,751,000 (1)

Emergency Medical Services Ambulances 3 $330,000 Support Vehicles 3 $130,000 Sub-total 6 $460,000

By-Law Enforcement Cars 2 $ 58,000 Sub-total 2 $ 58,000

Transportation Operations Pick-ups 3 $ 84,000 Van 1 $ 27,000 Aerial truck 1 $205,000 Sub-total 5 (2) $316,000 (2)

Water Operations Pick-ups 5 $175,000 Sub-total 5 (3) $175,000 (3)

Lab Van 1 $ 35,000 Trailer 1 $ 10,000 Sub-total 2 $ 45,000

Facilities Vans 3 $111,000 Sub-total 3 (4) $111,000 (4)

Sunnyside Bus 1 $ 88,000 Sub-total 1 $ 88,000

TOTAL $3,004,000

Notes: (1) Original request in 2006 was for replacement of 21 vehicles. Five vehicles with an estimated cost of $684,000 deferred to subsequent years (2) Original request in 2006 was for replacement of 8 vehicles. Three vehicles with an estimated cost of $563,000 deferred to subsequent years. (3) Includes four new vehicles approved as part of the 2006 budget for new staff. Four vehicles with an estimated cost of $140,000 deferred to subsequent years (4) Original request in 2006 was for replacement of 9 vehicles. Six vehicles with an estimated cost of $198,000 deferred to subsequent years.

Docs #310793 Page 3 of 3