COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 10, 2015 2:00 PM AGENDA

THIS MEETING MAY BE TELECAST ON PUBLIC TELEVISION OR WEBCAST ON THE CITY’S PUBLIC WEBSITE

COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 10, 2015 2:00 P.M.

AGENDA

Mayor Jaworsky in the Chair

1. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

a) July 13, 2015 – Council Meeting Page 14

Recommendation: That the minutes of the Council Meeting held on July 13, 2015 be approved as printed.

3. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES None

Council Meeting Page 1 of 409 August 10, 2015 4. CONSENT MOTION

That Consent Items (a) through (f) be approved.

a) Title: Community Cash Grant Policy Revisions Page 29 Report No.: COM2015-020 Prepared By: Lori Ludwig and Beth Rajnovich

Recommendation: 1. That Council approve report COM2015-020.

2. That Council approve the revised Community Cash Grants Policy No. M-004, attached to this report as Appendix A.

3. That Council repeal R&L01-14 Cash Grants – Late Application Policy.

b) Title: Heads and Beds Page 51 Report No.: CORP2015-069 Prepared By: Paul Grivicic

Recommendation: 1. That Council approves report CORP2015-069, and that Council requests the Minister of Finance for the Province of Ontario to:

a. Maintain the current “heads and beds” rate methodology and amend the current prescribed “heads and beds” rate used to calculate payment-in-lieu of taxes on public hospitals, universities, colleges and correctional facilities from $75 per capacity to an equivalent rate of $125 per capacity that would be raised if these public institutions used current value assessment (CVA) multiplied by residential tax rate methodology, and ensure that the “heads and beds” rate thereafter is adjusted regularly to reflect changes in CVA on public institutions and municipal tax rates;

b. or, alternatively maintain the current “heads and beds” rate methodology and index the "heads and beds" rate to the current rate of inflation, which would be $137 per capacity at the end of 2014;

Council Meeting Page 2 of 409 August 10, 2015 c. or, alternatively introduce legislative amendments to the Assessment Act and the Municipal Act, 2001, that would require payment-in-lieu amounts be calculated on equivalent taxation using full CVA multiplied by the appropriate municipal tax rates.

2. That this resolution be forwarded to the Minister of Finance, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Minister of Health and Long Term Care, Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Council of Ontario Universities, the Ontario Hospitals Association and local area Members of Provincial Parliament

c) Title: Drinking Water Quality Management System - Page 60 Management Review Report No.: IPPW2015-064 Prepared By: Paola Mendez

Information.

d) Title: 2015 Grant Update Page 66 Report No.: CORP2015-068 Prepared By: Cassandra Pacey

Information.

e) Title: Demolition Control Application - Quarterly Page 72 Report, Second Quarter Report No.: IPPW2015-073 Prepared By:

Information

f) Title: Station Area Planning – Phase 2 Consultation Page 76 Summary Report No.: IPPW2015-065 Prepared By: Adam Lauder

Information.

Council Meeting Page 3 of 409 August 10, 2015 5. STAFF REPORTS

a) Title: Advance Timing of Infrastructure Agreement Page 99 (ATOI) Westside Employment Collector Report No.: IPPW2015-076 Prepared By: Thomas Daniel

Recommendation: 1. That IPPW2015-076 be approved.

2. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign an Advanced Timing of Infrastructure Agreement with West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd., drafted to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Legal Services, for the construction of the Westside Employment Collector Road and Street ‘A’ adjacent to 924 & 930 Erb Street West, Waterloo.

b) Title: Award of RFP15-10: Infrastructure Asset Page 106 Management Analysis Report Report No.: IPPW2015-075 Prepared By: Bill Garibaldi and Cassandra Pacey

Recommendation: 1. That Council approve report IPPW2015-075.

2. That Council approves the award of contract RFP15- 10 – Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report to GM BluePlan Engineering Limited at the submitted price of $695,195.00 (plus applicable taxes).

3. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the professional consulting agreement between the City of Waterloo and GM BluePlan Engineering Limited and any other documents related to this project, subject to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Legal Services.

c) Title: Release of Funds and Approval of Terms of Page 112 Reference for the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (Waterloo West Side) Report No.: IPPW2015-078 Prepared By: Phil Hewitson

Memorandum: Audit Committee

Council Meeting Page 4 of 409 August 10, 2015 Recommendation: 1. That IPPW2015-078 be approved.

2. That Council approve un-budgeted capital funding for the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study in the amount of $100,000 from the West Side Industrial Land Account.

d) Title: Cycling Infrastructure Grant Page 130 Report No.: CORP2015-070 Prepared By: Kim Reger

Recommendations: 1. That Council approve CORP2015-070.

2. That Council endorses and approves the submission of the Waterloo Park Promenade project as the City of Waterloo’s application to the Ontario Municipal Cycling Infrastructure Program.

e) Title: Chief Administrative Officer Staffing Release Page 138 Report No.: CORP2015-074 Prepared By: Ralph Kaminski

Recommendations: 1. That Council Report CORP2015-074 be approved.

2. That Council authorize the hiring of the 6.1 FTE (full time equivalent) budgeted positions as outlined in this report.

f) Title: Award of Construction Contract - Waterloo Page 145 Service Centre Expansion & Restoration Report No.: CORP2015-059 Prepared By: Alan McGregor

Memorandum: Audit Committee

Recommendation: 1. That Council approve CORP2015-059

2. That Council approve the award of the construction contract for the Waterloo Service Centre Expansion & Restoration to Melloul-Blamey Construction Inc. in the amount of $10,490,000 (excl. HST).

Council Meeting Page 5 of 409 August 10, 2015 g) Title: Traffic and Parking By-law Amendments Page 150 Report No.: IPPW2015-072 Prepared By: Christine Koehler

Recommendation: 1. That IPPW2015-072 be approved.

2. That Traffic and Parking By-law 08-077 be updated with the amendments contained herein.

h) Title: City of Waterloo Public Art Policy Page 157 Report No.: CAO2015-015 Prepared By: Astero Kalogeropoulos

Recommendations: 1. That report CAO2015-015 City of Waterloo Public Art Policy dated August 10, 2015 be received.

2. That Corporate Policy A-018 - Public Art Policy Attached as Appendix A be approved.

3. That Council approve the creation of a Public Art Reserve Fund, and direct staff to bring forward a Public Art Reserve Fund policy for Council’s consideration as part of the annual Reserves and Reserve Funds Update report.

i) Title: 2016-2018 Budget Strategy Report Page 175 Report No.: CORP2015-047 Prepared By: Cassandra Pacey & Filipa Reynolds

Presentation: Filipa Reynolds, Director, Financial Planning

Recommendation: 1. That Council receives CORP2015-047 “2016-2018 Budget Strategy” and approves the Budget process contained within.

2. That Council approves the Capital Budget Review and Approval process Option 1 contained within CORP2015-047.

3. That Council approves the Public and Council Engagement process contained within CORP2015- 047.

Council Meeting Page 6 of 409 August 10, 2015 4. That Council receives the proposed 2016 budget schedule for information as attached in Appendix A.

5. That Council directs staff to explore various options to balance the 2016-2018 Operating Budget as described in the section “Potential Solutions for 2016- 2018 Operating Budget Balancing”

j) Title: Budget Policy Updates Page 202 Report No.: CORP2015-058 Prepared By: Cassandra Pacey

Recommendation: 1. The Council approve CORP2015-058 “Budget Policy Updates”.

2. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-010 Definition of Capital attached as Appendix A.

3. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-011 Multiple Year Budget Approval attached as Appendix B.

4. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-014 New Revenue Policy attached as Appendix C.

5. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-018 Capital Overhead attached as Appendix D.

6. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-002 Financial Requests Outside of Budget attached as Appendix E.

7. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-012 Capital Budget attached as Appendix F.

Council Meeting Page 7 of 409 August 10, 2015 k) Title: Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-11 to Remove Page 229 ‘H’ Provision at 128 King Street North.(128-138 King Street North and 6 Elgin Street) Report No.: IPPW2015-077 Prepared By: Trevor Hawkins

This Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-11 to remove a Holding (H) Provision along has been deferred to Monday, September 14, 2015.

Notice of the re-scheduled zoning by-law amendment Z-15-11 to remove a Holding (H) Provision will be provided and advertised in due course.

6. CLOSED MEETING

Recommendations: That Council hold a closed meeting for the purposes of considering the following subject matters:

a) personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees (Waterloo Award Nominations);

b) proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board (Waterloo City Centre and Manulife Financial Sports Complex and Healthy Living Centre Leaseable Space); and

c) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose (Waterloo City Centre and Manulife Financial Sports Complex and Healthy Living Centre Leasable Space).

PUBLIC COUNCIL MEETING TO RESUME AT 6:30 P.M.

7. MOMENT OF REFLECTION

8. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

9. DELEGATIONS None

Council Meeting Page 8 of 409 August 10, 2015 10. PRESENTATIONS

a) 2015 Millennium Scholarship Recipient

11. STAFF REPORTS

a) Title: Corporate Services Fees and Charges 2016 to Page 238 2018 up to CORP2015-065 at July 13, 2015 Council Meeting Report No.: CORP2015-072 Prepared By: Paul Grivicic

Recommendation: 1. That Council approve CORP2015-072.

2. That Council approve the Corporate Services Fees and Charges By-law updates, attached as Appendix A to CORP2015-072, effective as of the dates noted, and that the Fees and Charges Bylaw is updated accordingly.

b) Title: Recommended Uptown Community Page 245 Improvement Plan Report No.: IPPW2015-074 Prepared By: Janice Mitchell

Presentation: Janice Mitchell, Policy Planner

Delegation: Lynn Macaulay, The Homelessness and Housing Umbrella Group

Recommendations: 1. That Staff Report IPPW2015-074 be approved.

2. That Council approve the recommended Uptown Community Improvement Plan included as Attachment 1 to this report.

3. That Council approves capital funding for the Uptown Community Improvement Plan in the amount of $765,000, funded from the Uptown Development Reserve Fund, as approved in the 2015 Capital Budget Ref #705.

Council Meeting Page 9 of 409 August 10, 2015 4. That Council authorize the award of a single source contract to RCI Consulting for the preparation of implementation and training materials as outlined in this report, at an approximate cost of $12,000.

c) Title: Draft Museum & Collections Heritage Strategy Page 302 Report No.: COM2015-021 Prepared By: Karen VandenBrink & Beth Rajnovich

Presentation: Karen VandenBrink, Manager, Museum & Archival Collections

Recommendation: 1. That Council approve report COM2015-021.

2. That Council authorize commencement of a second phase of public consultation during August – September 2015 to facilitate feedback on Appendix A: Draft Museum & Collections Strategy.

d) Title: Leaf Collection Program Review Page 366 Report No.: IPPW2015-067 Prepared By: Roslyn Lusk

Presentation: Roslyn Lusk, Director, Transportation Services

Recommendations: 1. That Council receives IPPW2015-067 as information.

2. That Council direct staff to engage the Region of Waterloo to discuss the impact of each option to their yard waste collection program.

3. That Council direct staff to return to Council on September 21, 2015 with a recommendation based on the options set forth herein.

e) Title: Parking and Traffic Prohibition on Page 372 Emergency Accesses Report No.: IPPW2015-080 Prepared By: Joel Cotter and Roslyn Lusk

Recommendation: 1. That IPPW2015-080 be approved.

Council Meeting Page 10 of 409 August 10, 2015 2. That Council support the enactment of a by-law to prohibit parking and traffic on emergency accesses in the City of Waterloo, subject to the approval by the Director of Legal Services.

f) Title: Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-10, Removal Page 381 of Holding ‘H’ Provision – 1 Columbia Street West, 351 & 355 King Street North Report No.: IPPW2015-066 Prepared By: Sam Nabi

Recommendation: 1. That IPPW2015-066 be approved.

2. That Council approve Zoning By-Law Amendment Application Z-15-04, submitted by King & Columbia Inc., to remove the holding symbol from the lands municipally known as 1 Columbia St. W., 351 & 355 King St. N., in accordance with Section 6 of IPPW2015-066.

12. FORMAL/INFORMAL PUBLIC MEETINGS

Informal Public Meeting

a) Title: Zoning By-law Application – Z-15-08, 419, 425 Page 392 and 439-485 Avens Street Prepared By: Sam Nabi

Presentation: Sam Nabi, Junior Development Planner

Delegation: Jacqueline Hanneman, Stantec Consulting Ltd.

b) Title: Zone Change Application – Z-15-12, 275 Larch Page 394 Street Prepared By: Natalie Hardacre

Presentation: Natalie Hardacre, Development Planner

Delegation: Heather Holbrook, GSP Group

Council Meeting Page 11 of 409 August 10, 2015 Formal Public Meeting

c) Title: Zone Change Application – Z-15-07, Activa Page 396 Holdings Inc., Part of the Carriage Crossing Subdivision (58M-506) Report No.: IPPW2015-068 Prepared By: Natalie Stopar

Presentation: Natalie Stopar, Junior Development Planner

Recommendation: 1. That IPPW2015-068 be approved.

2. That Council approve Zoning By-law Amendment Z- 15-07 for the lands identified on Map 1 of IPPW2015- 68, being part of Registered Plan 58M-506 (“Activa - Carriage Crossing”), in accordance with Section 7 of IPPW2015-068.

13. CONSIDERATION OF NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN AT PREVIOUS MEETING None

14. NOTICE OF MOTION None

15. COMMUNICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE None

16. REGIONAL INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

a) Region of Waterloo, Council Info – June 3, 2015 Page 407

17. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

18. NEW BUSINESS i. Delegations ii. Items removed from Consent Motion to be dealt with separately iii. Staff Reports iv. Other Business

19. QUESTIONS

Council Meeting Page 12 of 409 August 10, 2015 20. ENACTMENT OF BY-LAWS

Recommendation: That the By-laws listed below be read a first, second and third time and finally passed, numbered sequentially commencing with By-law Number 2015-043 and that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign them accordingly.

a) By-law to prohibit parking and traffic on emergency accesses in the City of Waterloo. (IPPW2015-080, August 10, 2015)

b) By-law to amend By-law NO. 2011-024, as amended, being a By-law to require the conveyance of land and or cash-in- lieu of land for park or other public recreational purposes as a condition of the development or redevelopment or subdivision of land in the City of Waterloo. By-law to expire December 31, 2019. (CAO2015-012.1, July 13, 2015)

c) By-law to amend By-law No. 08-077, a by-law to regulate traffic and parking on highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Waterloo. Repeals by-law no. 2015-032 (IPPW2015- 072, August 13, 2015)

d) By-law to designate a Community Improvement Project Area. (IPPW2015-074, August 13, 2015)

e) By-law to adopt an Uptown Community Improvement Plan. (IPPW2015-074, August 13, 2015)

f) By-law to amend By-law 1108, being a Zoning By-law controlling land use development within the City of Waterloo. Removing Holding (H) Provision at 242 and 246 Albert Street, Waterloo, GSP Group Inc., 246 Albert Inc. (Z-15-04, IPPW2015-058, July 13, 2015)

g) By-law to amend By-law 1108, being a Zoning By-law controlling land use development within the City of Waterloo. Removing Holding (H) Provision at 1 Columbia Street West, 351 King Street North, and 355 King Street North, Waterloo, SRM Architects Inc., King & Columbia Inc. (Z-15-10, IPPW2015-066, August 10, 2015)

h) By-law to confirm all actions and proceedings of Council, August 10, 2015 - Regular

21. ADJOURNMENT

Council Meeting Page 13 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 172 July 13, 2015

A meeting of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Waterloo was held on July 13, 2015 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, Ontario.

COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 13, 2015

Minutes - DRAFT

PRESENT: Mayor Dave Jaworsky, Councillor Bob Mavin, Councillor Brian Bourke, Councillor Angela Vieth, Councillor Diane Freeman, Councillor Mark Whaley, Councillor Jeff Henry, Councillor Melissa Durrell

Mayor Jaworsky in the Chair

1. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

Councillor Durrell declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Staff Report CAO2015- 016, Feasibility Report Agreement with Wilfrid Laurier & Waterloo Region District School Board due to her husband’s place of employment.

Councillor Henry declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Zone Change Application Z-15-06, 100-108 Seagram Drive & 155-163 University Avenue West, University of Waterloo due to his place of employment.

No disclosure of pecuniary interest was declared by any other member of Council at this point in the meeting.

Council Meeting Page 14 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 173 July 13, 2015

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

a) June 22, 2015 – Council Meeting

Moved by Councillor Durrell, seconded by Councillor Bourke:

That the minutes of the Council Meeting held on June 22, 2015 be approved as printed. Carried Unanimously

3. PRESENTATION: FINAL 2015-2018 COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN

a) Title: Final 2015-2018 Council Strategic Plan Video

Adam Lauder, Policy Planner reviewed the video and responded to questions from Council.

4. CONSENT MOTION

Moved by Councillor Freeman, seconded by Councillor Durrell:

That Consent Items (a) through (g) be approved.

Carried Unanimously

a) Title: Maximo Funding Release Report No.: CORP2015-057 Prepared By: Roberta Hunt

1. That Council approve CORP2015-057

2. That Council approve funding of $232,000; $79,000 from Capital Reserve Fund, $51,000 from Water Utility Reserve, $51,000 from Sewer Utility Reserve and $51,000 from Stormwater Utility Reserve as referenced in the 2015 Capital Budget Ref # 411.

Carried Unanimously

b) Title: Social Media Policy Report No.: CORP2015-062 Prepared By: Brandon Currie

1. That Council approve CORP2015-062

2. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy A-002 Social Media policy attached as Appendix A. Carried Unanimously

Council Meeting Page 15 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 174 July 13, 2015

c) Title: Indemnification Agreement – Legion Parking Lot Report No.: IPPW2015-063 Prepared By: Christine Tettman

1. That IPPW2015-063 be approved.

2. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the attached agreement between the City of Waterloo and 2425955 Ontario Inc.

Carried Unanimously

d) Title: Community Energy Investment Strategy Report No.: IPPW2015-065 Prepared By: Robyn McMullen

1. That IPPW2015-065 be approved.

2. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the Community Energy Planning Collaborative Agreement following final legal review.

Carried Unanimously

e) Title: Commissioner Special Projects Pilot Update Report No.: CORP2015-050 Prepared By: Dean Vieira

Information.

f) Title: Purchasing Award Summary – Quarter 2, 2015 Report No.: CORP2015-064 Prepared By: Tracie Bell

Information.

g) Title: Health & Safety Report – May 1, 2015 Prepared By: Briana Cunningham

Information.

Council Meeting Page 16 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 175 July 13, 2015

5. STAFF REPORTS

a) Title: Stakeholder Brand Development Exercise Phillip Street Corridor Report No.: CAO2015-018 Prepared By: Sheldon Pereira

Sheldon Pereira, Stakeholder Relationships Manager introduced Mr. Adam Ballew, Spear Street Capital.

Adam Ballew, Spear Street Capital reviewed the report and responded to questions from Council.

Moved by Councillor Henry, seconded by Councillor Durrell:

1. That CAO2015-018 be approved.

2. That Council endorse the brand concept “Idea Quarter” for the Phillip Street area of Waterloo

Carried Unanimously

Having previously declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Staff Report CAO2015- 016, Feasibility Report Agreement with Wilfrid Laurier & Waterloo Region District School Board, Councillor Durrell left the meeting (Time: 3:20 pm).

b) Title: Feasibility Report Agreement with Wilfrid Laurier & Waterloo Region District School Board Report No.: CAO2015-016 Prepared By: Sheldon Pereira

Sheldon Pereira, Stakeholder Relationships Manager, Ulrike Gross, Executive Director, Real Estate and Development, Wilfrid Laurier University and Matthew Gerard, Superintendent of Business and Treasurer of the Board, Waterloo Region District School Board reviewed the report and responded to questions from Council.

Moved by Councillor Henry, seconded by Councillor Vieth:

1. That CAO2015-016 be approved, including the Memorandum of Understanding (Attachment ‘A’).

2. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (Attachment ‘A’) agreement between City of Waterloo, Wilfrid Laurier University and Waterloo Region District School Board, substantially in the form attached hereto and to the satisfaction of the Director of Legal Services at the City of Waterloo.

Council Meeting Page 17 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 176 July 13, 2015

3. That capital funding for the Feasibility Study detailed in the Memorandum of Understanding (Attachment ‘A’) in the amount of $100,000, funded from the Capital Reserve Fund, be approved contained within capital project ref #702 in the 2015 Approved Capital Budget.

Carried (Councillor Durrell absent for the vote) 6 Voting in Favour 1 Voting in Opposition (COUNCILLOR WHALEY)

Councillor Durrell returned to the meeting. (Time: 3:34 pm)

c) Title: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application Z-15-04 Removal of Holding Provision for 242-246 Albert Street Report No.: IPPW2015-058 Prepared By: Sam Nabi

Moved by Councillor Vieth, seconded by Councillor Whaley:

1. That IPPW2015-058 be approved.

2. That Council approve Zoning By-Law Amendment Application Z-15- 04, submitted by 246 Albert Inc., to remove the holding symbol from the lands municipally known as 242 & 246 Albert Street, in accordance with Section 6 of IPPW2015-058.

Carried Unanimously

d) Title: Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-05, Lifting of Holding Provision for 321 Spruce Street, Report No.: IPPW2015-061 Prepared By: Natalie Hardacre

Moved by Councillor Freeman, seconded by Councillor Henry:

1. That IPPW2015-061 be approved.

2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-05 be approved.

3. That the Holding Provision be removed from the lands identified on Map 1 attached hereto.

Carried Unanimously

Council Meeting Page 18 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 177 July 13, 2015

e) Title: Update on Significant Budget Variances Report No.: CORP2015-063 Prepared By: Paul Hettinga

Information.

f) Title: Parkview Cemetery Development Project - Award of Tender RFT15-08 Report No.: COM2015-016 Prepared By: Bryce Crouse

Memorandum: Audit Committee

Moved by Councillor Whaley, seconded by Councillor Henry:

1. That Council approve report COM2015-016.

2. That Council approves the award of tender RFT15-08 Parkview Cemetery Development Project to TDI International Ag Inc. doing business as Eco Blue Systems who submitted the lowest price of $753,555 (plus applicable taxes).

3. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the contract documents for Tender RFT15-08 between the City of Waterloo and TDI International Ag Inc. doing business as Eco Blue Systems and any other documents related to this project.

Carried Unanimously

g) Title: Award of RFP15-09: Northdale Streetscape Master Plan and Reconstruction Report No.: IPPW2015-032 Prepared By: Mike Lupsa

Memorandum: Audit Committee

Moved by Councillor Henry, seconded by Councillor Freeman:

1. That IPPW2015-032 be approved.

2. That Council approves the award of contract RFP15-09 – Northdale Streetscape Master Plan & Reconstruction Project to IBI Group, at the submitted price of $784,975 (plus applicable taxes).

Council Meeting Page 19 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 178 July 13, 2015

3. That capital funding for the Northdale Streetscape Master Plan & Reconstruction Project in the amount of $375,000, funded from the Capital Reserve Fund, be approved as per the 2015 Approved Capital Budget ref #702.

4. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the professional consulting agreement between the City of Waterloo and IBI Group and any other documents related to this project, subject to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Legal Services.

Carried 7 Voting in Favour 1 Voting in Opposition (Councillor Mavin)

6. CLOSED MEETING

Moved by Councillor Henry, seconded by Councillor Freeman:

That Council hold a closed meeting for the purposes of considering the following subject matters:

a) the security of the property of the municipality or local board (Waterloo North Hydro);

b) labour relations or employee negotiations (City of Waterloo Employees);

c) personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees (City of Waterloo Employees);

d) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose (Waterloo North Hydro Shareholders’ Agreement); and,

e) a matter in respect of which a council, board, committee or other body may hold a closed meeting under another Act [Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act – s. 10, Third Party Information, s. 11, Economic & Other Interests – Waterloo North Hydro).

Carried Unanimously

Council Meeting Recessed. (Time: 3:51 p.m.) Council Meeting Reconvened. (Time: 6:36 p.m.)

PRESENT: Mayor Dave Jaworsky, Councillor Bob Mavin, Councillor Brian Bourke, Councillor Angela Vieth, Councillor Diane Freeman, Councillor Mark

Council Meeting Page 20 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 179 July 13, 2015

Whaley, Councillor Jeff Henry, Councillor Melissa Durrell (arrived at 6:38 p.m.)

Mayor Jaworsky in the Chair

7. MOMENT OF REFLECTION

The Mayor opened the meeting with a moment of reflection.

8. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

No disclosure of pecuniary interest was declared by any member of Council at this point in the meeting.

9. STAFF REPORTS

a) Title: Economic Development Fees and Charges 2016-2018 Report No.: CAO2015-017 Prepared By: Tracy Suerich

Moved by Councillor Whaley, seconded by Councillor Henry:

1. That report CAO2015-017 be approved.

2. That Council approve the Economic Development Fees and Charges for 2016-2018, attached as Appendix A to this report CAO2015-017, effective as the dates noted, and that the Fees and Charges By-Law is updated accordingly.

Carried Unanimously

Councillor Durrell arrived at the meeting. (Time: 6:38 p.m.)

b) Title: Community Services Fees & Charges 2016-2018 Report No.: COM2015-019 Prepared By: Leta Bulgin

Moved by Councillor Henry, seconded by Councillor Bourke:

1. That COM2015-019 be approved.

2. That Council approve the Community Services Fees and Charges for 2016-2018, attached as Appendix A to this report COM2015- 019, effective as of the dates noted, and that the Fees and Charges by-law is updated accordingly.

Council Meeting Page 21 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 180 July 13, 2015

Carried Unanimously

c) Title: Corporate Services Fees & Charges 2016-2018 Report No.: CORP2015-065 Prepared By: Paul Grivicic

Eleanor Grant spoke in opposition to the $54 fee for the Collections Trip Administration Fee. Ms. Grant advised this further burdens those residents who may already be financially strained. Ms. Grant proposed bringing this fee in line with the cities of Kitchener, Cambridge and Waterloo North Hydro.

Moved by Councillor Freeman, seconded by Councillor Durrell:

1. That Council approve CORP2015-065.

2. That Council approve the Corporate Services Fees and Charges for 2016-2018, attached as Appendix A to CORP2015-065 effective as of the dates noted, and that the Fees and Charges By-law is updated accordingly, save and except for the Water Bill Reprint Fee, Shut Off Fee and Collections Trip Administration Fee which is deferred to the August 10, 2015 meeting after further review and comparisons to neighboring municipalities for Council’s consideration.

Carried 7 Voting in Favour 1 Voting in Opposition (Councillor Mavin)

d) Title: Integrated Planning and Public Works Fees & Charges 2016-2018 Report No.: IPPW2015-060 Prepared By: Cameron Rapp

Moved by Councillor Vieth, seconded by Councillor Bourke:

1. That IPPW2015-060 be approved.

2. That Council approve the Integrated Planning and Public Works Fees & Charges for 2016-2018, attached as Appendix A to this report IPPW2015-060, effective as of the dates noted, and that the Fees & Charges by-law is updated accordingly.

Carried Unanimously

Council Meeting Page 22 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 181 July 13, 2015

e) Title: City of Waterloo Brand Audit Report No.: CORP2015-067 Prepared By: Megan Harris

Megan Harris, Director, Communications & Marketing, introduced Amanda Downey, and Jasmin Mulaosmanovic, MBA Students, Wilfrid Laurier University.

Amanda Downey and Jasmin Mulaosmanovic reviewed the report and responded to questions from Council.

Moved by Councillor Durrell, seconded by Councillor Vieth:

1. That CORP2015-067 be received for information.

2. That the brand audit report attached as Attachment A be received for guidance for future brand and visual identity exercises.

Carried 7 Voting in Favour 1 Voting in Opposition (Councillor Mavin)

Having previously declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Zone Change Application Z-15-06, 100-108 Seagram Drive & 155-163 University Avenue West, University of Waterloo Councillor Henry left the meeting (Time: 7:48 pm).

10. FORMAL/INFORMAL PUBLIC MEETINGS

Informal Public Meeting

a) Title: Zone Change Application Z-15-06, 100-108 Seagram Drive & 155-163 University Avenue West, University of Waterloo Prepared By: Natalie Hardacre

The Chair advised that the Informal Public Meeting was the first opportunity to inform Council and the public of the application and emphasized that no decision would be made by Council at this meeting.

Natalie Hardacre, Development Planner provided Council with a brief overview of the zone change application advising that the applicant is proposing to rezone the property from ‘Multiple Residence -25 (MR-25)’ to ‘Universities -25 (BI-25) to recognize the existing university student residences on site.

Glenn Scheels, GSP Group spoke in support of the application and responded to questions from Council.

Council Meeting Page 23 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 182 July 13, 2015

As no one else was present to speak to the application, the Chair concluded the Informal Public Meeting and indicated that staff will review the issues and report back to Council at a later date.

Councillor Henry returned to the meeting. (Time: 8:10 pm)

Councillor Vieth left the meeting. (Time: 8:10 pm)

11. STAFF REPORTS Continued…

a) Title: Parkland Dedication By-law and Policies Report Report No.: CAO2015-012.1 Prepared By: Ryan Mounsey

Ryan Mounsey, Manager of Expansion & Retention Services reviewed the report and responded to questions from Council.

Councillor Vieth returned to the meeting. (Time: 8:13 pm)

Moved by Councillor Durrell, seconded by Councillor Whaley:

1. That Council approve report CAO2015-012.1.

2. That Council refer a city-wide “Parks Strategy Study” to the 2016- 2018 budget process.

3. That Council Eliminate cash-in-lieu of parkland fee(s) for any industrial use in the City of Waterloo.

4. That Council direct staff to re-evaluate the industrial cash-in-lieu of parkland fee prior to December 2019 with recommendations provided back to Council.

5. That Council reduce the Uptown cash-in-lieu of parkland fee for infill housing by approximately 33% from 0.15 hectare per 300 units to 0.10 hectare per 300 units.

6. That Council cap the Uptown cash-in-lieu of parkland fee for infill housing to a maximum of 15% of land value, or as conveyance of land, based on current market value by qualified land appraiser. 7. That Council eliminate Uptown cash-in-lieu of parkland fees for any new office building and/or any office with non-residential use located within a mixed-use building.

8. That Council direct staff to re-evaluate Uptown cash-in-lieu of parkland fees fee prior to December 2019 with recommendations back to Council.

Council Meeting Page 24 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 183 July 13, 2015

9. That Council amend the Parkland Dedication By-law 011-92 (as amended by By-law No. 2011-098) with following principles:

a. Amend the Uptown Alternative Rate for any residential project from 0.15 ha per 300 units to 0.10 ha per 300 units until December 2019;

b. Notwithstanding the above, in no case shall the cash-in-lieu of parkland payment represent more than 15% of the value of the land in The Uptown as determined by a qualified Land Appraiser to December 2019, or maximum 15% of lot area as land conveyance for parkland purposes.

c. Notwithstanding any provision in The Parkland Dedication By- law, that any Uptown office building, or non-residential portion of an Uptown mixed use building, shall be exempt from parkland dedication fee until the end of December 2019. For the purpose of this By-law, an office use shall be any Group D Building as defined in the Ontario Building Code, a mixed use commercial building shall also include any Group E or Group A2 Building as defined in The Ontario Building Code if located on the ground floor of a multi-storey building or as similar uses established in the Zoning By-law.

d. The Uptown shall be defined as the Urban Growth Centre.

e. Notwithstanding any provision in the Parkland Dedication By- law, all industrial development and any required cash-in-lieu fee shall be exempt from the parkland dedication by-law to December 2019. For the purpose of this by-law, an industrial use shall be any Group F Building as defined in the Ontario Building Code or as similar uses established in the Zoning By- law.

Carried Unanimously

Councillor Freeman left the meeting. (Time: 8:35 pm)

Council Meeting Page 25 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 184 July 13, 2015

12. FORMAL/INFORMAL PUBLIC MEETINGS Continued…

Formal Public Meeting

a) Title: Uptown Community Improvement Plan: Report for Consultation at Formal Public Meeting Report No.: IPPW2015-053.1 Prepared By: Janice Mitchell

Olga Smith, City Clerk advised that notice was advertised in the Waterloo Chronicle on June 17, 2015, and was mailed on June 16, 2015, to public agencies, and on June 17, 2015, to all persons who requested further notice. No Informal Public Meeting was held.

Janice Mitchell, Policy Planner reviewed the report and responded to questions from Council.

Councillor Freeman returned to the meeting. (Time: 8:39 pm)

Councillor Bourke left the meeting. (Time: 8:40 pm) Councillor Bourke returned to the meeting. (Time: 8:46 pm)

As there was no one else present to speak to the application, the Chair concluded the formal public meeting.

Information.

13. NEW BUSINESS iv. Other Business

Councillor Freeman wanted to make Council and Staff aware of some trail issues, specifically trail maintenance, sidewalks that have been removed from trails and large trees on both culverts on Lexington that are impairing pedestrian visibility and need to be scaled back. Councillor Freeman would like staff to walk some of the trails to see what needs to be improved.

Councillor Durrell reminded Council about the Jazz festival and Open Streets happening this weekend which will include Bike Valet for the first time.

14. ENACTMENT OF BY-LAWS

Moved by Councillor Henry, seconded by Councillor Freeman:

That the By-law Nos. 2015-037, 2015-038, 2015-039, 2015-040 and 2015-042 be read a first, second and third time and finally passed and that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign them accordingly.

Council Meeting Page 26 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 185 July 13, 2015

Carried Unanimously

a) By-law No. 2015-037 By-law to impose fees and charges on persons (Repeals By-law 2015-001) (CAO2015-017: Economic Development 2016-2018 Fees and Charges Update, CORP2015-065: Corporate Services 2016-2018 Fees and Charges Update, IPPW2015-060: Integrated Planning and Public Works 2016-2018 Fees and Charges Update and COM2015-019: Community Services 2016-2018 Fees and Charges Update, July 13, 2015)

b) By-law No. 2015-038 By-law to amend By-law 1108, being a Zoning By-law controlling land use development within the City of Waterloo. Removing Holding (H) Provision at 321 Spruce Street (lot consolidation 319 and 321 Spruce Street), Waterloo, IBI Group, First On Campus Development Inc. (Z-15-05, IPPW2015-061, July 13, 2015)

c) By-law No. 2015-039 By-law to authorize the execution of a Density Bonusing Agreement between The Corporation of the City of Waterloo and 2208254 Ontario Inc. as a condition of development at 128 King Street North, Waterloo, ON (IPPW2014-081.1, June 16, 2014, Zoning Amendment By-law No. 2014-069)

d) By-law No. 2015-040 By-law to authorize the execution of an agreement between The Corporation of the City of Waterloo and Comprint Systems Incorporated ("DataFix") to provide for Voter List Management Services for a term to end on December 31, 2018. (CORP2013-053, November 25, 2013)

f) By-law No. 2015-042 By-law to confirm all actions and proceedings of Council, July 13, 2015 – Regular

Council Meeting Page 27 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes Page 186 July 13, 2015

Moved by Councillor Freeman, seconded by Councillor Vieth:

That the By-law No. 2015-041 be read a first, second and third time and finally passed and that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign it accordingly.

Carried Unanimously

e) By-law No. 2015-041 By-law establishing (Widening) a public highway in the City of Waterloo known as Seagram Drive. 165 University Avenue West, Parts 1 & 2, 58R-18566; S/T 391113. University of Waterloo. (SP-15-10, June 15, 2015)

15. ADJOURNMENT

Moved by Councillor Freeman, seconded by Councillor Vieth:

That the meeting adjourn. (Time: 9:09 p.m.)

Carried Unanimously (Councillor Henry absent for the vote)

READ AND APPROVED, August 10, 2015

Mayor

City Clerk

Council Meeting Page 28 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Community Services

STAFF REPORT Community Programming & Outreach Services

Title: Community Cash Grant Policy Revisions Report Number: COM2015-020 Author: Lori Ludwig, Manager, Community and Neighbourhood Services & Beth Rajnovich, Policy and Performance Analyst Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: Community Cash Grant Policy M-OO4 Cash Grant Application Ward No.: City Wide

Recommendation:

1. That Council approve report COM2015-020

2. That Council approve the revised Community Cash Grants Policy No. M-004, attached to this report as Appendix A.

3. That Council repeal R&L01-14 Cash Grants – Late Application Policy.

A. Executive Summary A new Community Cash Grants Policy was first implemented in the 2014 grants cycle. Based on experience with the 2014 and 2015 grant cycles, the Community Cash Grants Advisory Committee and staff have identified a need for minor revisions to the policy that will provide greater clarity for both applicants and the advisory committee. The changes include clearer definitions and requirements for grant applications. The recommended changes do not affect the purpose, scope, principles or general approach of the cash grant policy/program. Additionally, section 6.0 of the policy, outlining how late grant applications will be handled, has been updated. This allows for R&L01-14 Cash Grants – Late Application Policy to be repealed. The way in which late applications will be handled according to the updated community cash grant policy (M- 004) is consistent with the practice outlined in R&L01-14 Cash Grants – Late Application Policy.

Council Meeting Page 29 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Community Services

B. Financial Implications None

C. Technology Implications None

D. Legal Considerations Legal Counsel has reviewed this report and did not identify any significant issues.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

The community cash grant program supports a strong community by providing resources for community led initiatives. An easy to understand cash grant policy and application process aligns with corporate excellence by making the program user- friendly, accessible, accountable and transparent.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic CCRS2013-008

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Lori Ludwig July 28, 2015

Author: Beth Rajnovich July 29, 2015

Director: Jim Bowman (Acting) Commissioner: Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 30 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Community Services

Community Cash Grant Policy Revisions COM2015-020

A Cash Grant Policy M-004 was approved at Council (CCRS2013-008) on April 15, 2013. Staff and the Community Cash Grant Advisory Committee have been working with the new policy for both the 2014 and 2015 grant cycles. Through the grant review process we have gathered feedback from both applicants and advisory committee volunteers. The policy changes being proposed in this report will provide further clarity and understanding for applicants and the advisory committee about what is and is not eligible for funding under the cash grants policy, and what information needs to be included with grant application submissions.

The changes include: • Changing the name of the grant program from Community, Culture and Recreation Cash Grants to Community Cash Grants. • Capital Asset Expense: Most capital asset expenses are not eligible for a cash grant. However, to best support community organizations it is important to allow some capital expenditures for equipment required by groups to provide core services/community programs. Clarifying that equipment is not considered a capital asset for the cash grants program will help groups financially and clarify decision-making by the advisory committee. • Developing organizations/Start-up organizations: Groups need to be formed for at least a year to apply for a grant. • Removal of the requirements that a 10% minimum of total grant funds will be allocated to each of the four funding categories to provide greater flexibility to award grants based on merit. Retained the requirement that grant funds be allocated across all 4 funding categories if there are successful applications. • Professionally Reviewed Financial Statements: Needed to clarify that if the total grant funding requested by an organization is over $7500 then professionally reviewed financial statements are required as part of the application submission. For 2015 and 2016, both operating and project grants are capped at $5000 per organization. This means that an organization can seek a total of $10,000 per year. • Project Grants: required broader definition to help applicants understand the difference between a project and regular operating activities/programs of the organization. • Expenses related to Seminars, Conferences, Workshops and Tours: historically these types of activities or expenses have not been eligible for grants. Including them in a listing within the policy under ineligibility will create clarity for the applicant and the advisory committee.

Council Meeting Page 31 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Community Services

• Addition of the following: Any activity related to election campaigning for federal, provincial, municipal or school board candidates, including promotional activities and advertising. • Section 6.0 of the policy, outlining how late grant applications will be handled, has been updated. This allows for R&L01-14 Cash Grants – Late Application Policy to be repealed. The way in which late applications will be handled according to the updated community cash grant policy (M-004) is consistent with the practice outlined in R&L01-14 Cash Grants – Late Application Policy.

Council Meeting Page 32 of 409 August 10, 2015 CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: Community Cash Grants Policy Policy Category: Municipal Services Policy No.: M-004 Department: Community Services Approval Date: April 15, 2013 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Beth Rajnovich – Policy & Performance Analyst Lori Ludwig, Manager, Community & Neighbourhood Services Attachments: Appendix A – Community Cash Grant Application Related Documents/Legislation: CCRS2010-045, CCRS2013-008 Key Word(s): Grants

POLICY STATEMENT:

The City of Waterloo provides Community Cash Grants to support eligible organizations and community projects that encourage participation in a wide spectrum of interest areas encompassing recreation and sports, arts/culture/heritage, festivals and neighbourhoods that align with City’s goals.

PURPOSE: The Community Cash Grants Policy facilitates strategic community investment, as noted in the CCRS Community Investment Strategy, approved December 13, 2010 (CCRS2010-045). The Community Cash Grants program is one way the City of Waterloo recognizes the important role not-for-profit and community organizations play as providers of programs and services that help create a healthy, creative and resilient community. The Community Cash Grants Policy establishes the principles and criteria to be used to review, assess and recommend grant funding to help financially support these organizations.

Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date: July 23, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date: August 5, 2015

Council Meeting Page 33 of 409 August 10, 2015

POLICY NUMBER: M-004 Page 2

DEFINITIONS:

Affiliated Organization – a community organization that has entered into a formal relationship with the City to support a mutual interest to provide recreation, sports, arts/culture/heritage, festivals and neighbourhood programs and services, in accordance with City’s goals.

Affiliation Service Agreement - a formal agreement entered into by an Affiliated Community Organization and the City of Waterloo that specifies mutual expectations and benefits to the respective parties.

Capital Asset Expenditure: A capital asset is a physical item (the exception being software) with a long term use lifespan, typically more than three years. Capital assets include purchase of land, building, building renovations, machinery, leaseholds, and vehicles. Asset general maintenance (painting, mechanical maintenance, replacement of existing parts) is not a capital asset expense unless it increases the value of the specific asset. Equipment needed for core services/community programs are not considered capital assets. Funds from operating and project grants cannot be used for capital asset expenditures.

Community Cash Grants Advisory Committee – a Council appointed committee of community members with the mandate to assess applications to the Community Cash Grants program and make recommendations on distribution of the grant funds to Council as detailed in its Terms of Reference.

Developing Organizations - applicants who fall into one of the two following categories: A) Start-up Organizations: Organizations newly formed within the past three years and have been operating for at least one year prior to the close of the grant application period; B) Organizations in Transition: Established organizations or organizations undergoing a substantial change in direction or transformation over the next 1-3 year in order to enhance organizational resiliency.

Foundational Operating Grants – a type of operating grant that can be awarded to eligible affiliated organizations that have entered into a Service Agreement with the City of Waterloo.

Non-Affiliated Organization– a not-for-profit or community organization that has not entered into an Affiliation Service Agreement with the City.

Operating Grants – funds to be used for operating costs which may include but are not necessarily limited to rent, insurance, telephone, equipment for core services/community programs, equipment maintenance, salaries of professional or administrative staff, programs, services, volunteer recruitment, recognition, in-house training, screening, and office supplies/equipment.

Council Meeting Page 34 of 409 August 10, 2015

POLICY NUMBER: M-004 Page 3

Project Grants – funds that support one-time, temporary or innovative endeavors with a specific objective that is completed in a specific timeframe with a clear beginning and end date. Projects must be different from or in addition to current core services or programs.

Service Club – a voluntary not-for-profit organization where members meet regularly to perform charitable works either by direct hands-on efforts or by raising money to support individuals or other organizations.

SCOPE:

This policy applies to: • All applicants to the Community Cash Grants Program • Staff responsible for the delivery of the Community Cash Grants program • Members of the Community Cash Grants Advisory Committee

POLICY COMMUNICATION:

This policy will be communicated by means of: • Posting on the City of Waterloo website; • Posting on the City of Waterloo intranet accessible by staff; • Providing a copy to all staff involved in the delivery of the grant program; • Including the website location for the policy in all grant program information distributed to the public; • Provide a copy of the policy to all organizations requesting an application for the grant program. Applicants will be required to indicate on the grant application form that they have reviewed the policy; • It is the applicant’s responsibility to be proactive in seeking out grant application information and submission deadlines.

POLICY:

1.1 Grant Program Principles

The Community Cash Grants are intended to support and encourage: • Opportunities that help create a healthy, creative and resilient community; • Diversity of opportunity in sports and recreation, arts/culture/heritage, festivals, and neighbourhoods; • Provision of services that are accessible and inclusive; and • Resiliency, innovation and growth of community organizations.

Council Meeting Page 35 of 409 August 10, 2015

POLICY NUMBER: M-004 Page 4

2.0 General Grant Parameters

2.1 Application for Community Cash Grants will be available on an annual basis to eligible organizations whose programs, services or projects benefit the community in one or more of the following four (4) funding categories: • Recreation and sports • Arts, culture, and heritage • Festivals • Neighbourhoods

2.2 Grant funds will be allocated within each of the four funding categories provided there are successful applications.

2.3 Grants will be available to support operating expenses and/or project expenses.

2.4 Grants to support developing organizations and/or for projects are considered a priority.

2.5 A dollar based cap per grant may be established by staff annually based on available funding.

2.6 Grant funds must be used as per the grant application. Any significant changes must be discussed with the appropriate City of Waterloo Staff Liaison. Failure to do so may result in ineligibility for future funding or the need to reimburse the grant funding.

2.7 Grant funds will typically be awarded in one lump sum payment. At the discretion of the Grants Advisory Committee, organizations may be awarded funds by installments, with a reporting requirement prior to release of the next installment.

2.8 Grants should not be considered as automatically renewable in subsequent years.

2.9 Submission of a grant application does not guarantee an organization will receive full or partial funding.

3.0 Conditions

3.1 Affiliated organizations that receive Foundational Operating Grant support through an Affiliation Service Agreement are eligible to apply for project funding only.

Council Meeting Page 36 of 409 August 10, 2015

POLICY NUMBER: M-004 Page 5

3.2 Organizations requesting a grant(s) totaling $7,500 or more must provide, at a minimum, a professionally reviewed financial statement for the previous year with the grant application and must show proof of incorporation or proof of incorporation under an umbrella organization such as a provincial sport body.

3.3 Grant recipients must acknowledge the support of the City of Waterloo on all printed materials that relate to the grant request or as determined by staff.

3.4 Project Grant Recipients must complete a status report and submit to the City of Waterloo within 6 months of project completion or prior to the next grant cycle. Failure to do so may make the organization ineligible to apply for a grant for the next year.

3.5 All grant opportunities are contingent on the allocation of funding as part of the city’s budget process.

4.0 Eligibility Criteria

4.1 To be eligible for a Community Cash Grant, organizations should: • Be organized for a minimum of one (1) year; • Operate as a not-for-profit or community organization under the leadership of a volunteer board of directors or executive committee, elected by the general membership, or as a Registered Charity; • Demonstrate a benefit to residents of Waterloo; • Hold regular board or committee meetings with recorded minutes; • Carry public liability insurance; • Keep accurate volunteer and participant records; • Carry out volunteer screening and other risk management measures to help ensure volunteer and public safety; • Demonstrate funding or revenue from at least one source other than the City of Waterloo; • Have less than two years equivalent operating budget in unreserved cash; • Be in compliance with all applicable legislation, regulations and bylaws for the Government of Canada, The Province of Ontario, and the City of Waterloo. (eg. Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA), Human Rights Code, Occupational Health & Safety Act); • Submit a completed application form, providing all of the requested information and all supporting material by the application deadline ; • Submit a status report for any Project Grant received in the previous year within the required timelines.

4.2 The following are not eligible to apply for a Community Cash Grant:

Council Meeting Page 37 of 409 August 10, 2015

POLICY NUMBER: M-004 Page 6

• An organization that acts as a funding body, or makes grants to another organization; • An organization that is the responsibility of a higher level of government, education, or precluded under the Municipal Act; • Commercial businesses or For Profit Organizations; • Service Clubs, Educational Institutions, Political Organizations; • Religious organizations seeking funds for activities that serve primarily their membership and/or their direct religious purposes; • Individuals.

4.3 The following may make an application ineligible for a Community Cash Grant: • Currently in financial arrears with the City of Waterloo; • Liabilities exceed assets for a period of two or more years; • Operating loss for two consecutive years; • Affiliated Organization that does not meet the requirements of their service agreement; • Non-compliance with legislation, city by-law and/or policy; • Submission of an incomplete application.

4.4 Grants will not be available to support the following: • Capital expenses; • Operating or capital deficits; • Retroactive project expenses; • Endowments funds; • Charitable Events • Expenses associated with the travel to, attendance at, or related to the registration fees for seminars, conferences, workshops, or tours. • Projects or services that are the same as those provided by the City of Waterloo. • Any activity related to election campaigning for federal, provincial, municipal or school board candidates, including promotional activities and advertising.

5.0 Application Assessment

5.1 Grant applications will be assessed based on the following: • Funding request merit; • Organization’s profile; • Finances; • Benefit to the community.

5.2 Grant applications will be assessed by the Community Cash Grants Advisory Committee established according to the Committee Policy.

5.3 Grant applications will be scored using an assessment tool.

Council Meeting Page 38 of 409 August 10, 2015

POLICY NUMBER: M-004 Page 7

5.4 The assessment tool scoring process will provide additional points for applications for developing organizations and project funding requests as these requests are a priority for funding.

5.5 The assessment tool will be used by the Grants Advisory Committee to begin assessment of the grant applications. However, scores awarded by use of the assessment tool are not to be considered as the sole factor on which grant decisions will be made. A minimum score of 50% (averaged across the Grants Advisory Committee) will be required to be considered for final funding recommendations and how much funding to award, based on a broad range of factors to ensure the grant funds are used to achieve the program goals.

6.0 Late Submission of Grant Applications

6.1 Applications submitted after the grant deadline will not be accepted or entertained by the Community Cash Grants Advisory Committee.

7.0 Appeals

7.1 In order to appeal the recommendations made by the Grants Advisory Committee to Council, organizations must register as a delegation by contacting the Clerk’s Office at 519-747-8549 or by email at [email protected] no later than 10:00am on the Monday of the Council Meeting at which the recommendations will be presented to Council.

7.2 Applicants wishing to appeal the Grants Advisory Committee’s recommendation will be heard by Council at the Council Committee meeting on the same night that the grants report is presented to Council.

7.3 Decisions of City Council are final.

COMPLIANCE:

In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 39 of 409 August 10, 2015

CASH GRANT APPLICATION

SUBMISSION DEADLINE for Grant Application Packages is 2:00 p.m. Tuesday December 1, 2015. Submit one hardcopy of your application and all appendices and attachments to: Community Services Department 1st Floor, City Hall 100 Regina St. S P.O. Box 337 Station Waterloo Waterloo ON N2J 4A8

Note: Your application will be reviewed by a committee of community members. Please make sure to provide sufficient information in response to each question, within the maximum number of words allowed. Incomplete applications or applications with insufficient information may not be considered. Additionally, any additional information or pages attached to the application, beyond the requested appendices, will not be considered by the committee.

To the extent that the ensuing information constitutes personal information as defined in the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter M.56 as amended, the information is subject to provisions of that Act and will be used for the purposes indicated or implied by this form. Questions about the collection of personal information should be directed to the City Clerk, Waterloo City Centre, 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, Ontario, N2J 4A8, telephone (519) 886-1550 TTY 1-866-786-3941.

FINAL CHECKLIST: to ensure you have provided/attached all requested information Your application package should include the following: ☐ Completed Application Form ☐ Board of Directors/Executive Committee Information as appendix as appendix ☐ Year-end Financial statements as appendix. ☐ Detailed Operating and/or Project Budget as an appendix, if applicable ☐ Signed Application Verification Form

For Office Use Only Date Application Received: Time Received: Signature of Receiver:

Section 1: Contact Information Organization Name

Website Address

Council Meeting Page 40 of 409 August 10, 2015

Organization Name

Primary Contact Person’s Name & Position

Mailing Address

City & Postal Code

Telephone Number Daytime: Evening:

Email Address

Secondary Contact Person’s Name & Position

Telephone Numbers Daytime: Evening:

Email Address

Section 2: Grant Request Information IMPORTANT NOTE: The maximum amount of funding a group can receive for either an operating or a project grant is $5000 for the 2016 grant cycle. Requests in access of $5000 for either an operating or a project grant will not be considered. As it is possible to apply for both an operating and a project grant, the total maximum amount any one organization can request is $10,000. See conditions 3.2 listed in Community, Culture and Recreation Cash Grant Policy (if grant total is $7500 or more). 1. Please indicate if your request is for: ☐Operating Grant ☐Project Grant ☐Both

2. Grant Request Amount: Operating $ + Project $ = TOTAL $

3. Type of activity provided by your organization:

☐Recreation/Sports ☐Arts, Culture & Heritage ☐Festival ☐Neighbourhood

4. Is your organization a “Developing Organization”: ☐Yes ☐No See definition listed in Community, Culture and Recreation Cash Grants Policy (newly formed within 3 years and have been operating for at least 1 year or undergoing significant transformation). If yes, please indicate how your organization meets the definition of a “Developing Organization” (100 words or less or 765 characters) 9

Council Meeting Page 41 of 409 August 10, 2015

5. Describe what services you provide to the community through your activities, projects and events. Include information on the demographics served by your activities, projects and events, and the future goals of your organization. (400 words or less or 2400 characters)

6. Is your organization a: (check all that apply)

☐Registered Charity ☐Not For Profit ☐Insured with Public Liability Note: you may be required to submit additional documentation regarding your status if your application is successful. Section 3: Funding Request Overview

Depending on your grant request, please answer either or both questions 7 and 8.

Council Meeting Page 42 of 409 August 10, 2015

7. Operating Funding Requests: Provide a brief (500 words or less or 3000 characters) description of how the grant will assist your organization. Include details outlining how the operating grant will assist you to attain your goals and objectives.

8. Project Funding Requests: Below, provide a name for your proposed project and a brief (800 words or less or 4800 characters) description. Include a brief timeline/work plan. (Also see Section 5, item 17 for submission of a project budget).

Project Name:______Project Description: (not required if only requesting an Operating Grant)

Council Meeting Page 43 of 409 August 10, 2015

Section 4: Organization’s Profile 9. What year was your organization established? ______

10. Is your organization directed by an elected volunteer board of directors or executive committee?

☐Yes ☐No If yes, please provide a list of names and positions for all directors or executive committee members as an appendix. 11. Describe how your organization accommodates or subsidizes the cost of participation for residents with low incomes? (100 words or less or 765 characters)

12. Are the services, programs and/or events provided by your organization accessible to persons with disabilities? ☐Yes ☐No

If yes, please describe. If no, please explain. (100 words or less or 765 characters)

13. How do you keep staff, volunteers and community members safe at events or activities your organization runs as well as during the day-to-day operation of your organization? (100 words or less or 765 characters)

Council Meeting Page 44 of 409 August 10, 2015

14. Do you have paid staff? ☐Yes ☐No If yes, how many staff do you have? ______

Full-time? ______Part-time? ______15. Do you have volunteers (not including Board Members/Executive Committee members)?

☐Yes ☐No If yes, how many volunteers do you have? ______

Council Meeting Page 45 of 409 August 10, 2015

Section 5: Finances 16. Attach your organization’s year-end financial statements (income statement and balance sheet) as an appendix. You must provide the most recent year-end financial statements available. If your organization does not have financial statements, contact your staff representative at the City of Waterloo to discuss an alternate way to provide the required financial information.

17. If your request is for an operating grant you must also provide an operating budget for the upcoming fiscal year. If your request is for a project grant you must provide a project budget including a specific breakdown of revenues and expenses directly associated with the project. If you are unsure of how to structure a project budget, contact your staff representative at the City of Waterloo to discuss how you can provide the required budget information.

18. If your organization is requesting a project grant:

Is the project intended to be: ☐ One year only ☐Ongoing/Annual

If you intend to continue this project in future years, indicate how you will build the project funding into your operating budget in future years. (100 words or less or 765 characters)

Please note: Project funding is intended to provide one-time funding. Organizations must consider how to make the project sustainable without a grant from the City of Waterloo in future years, if the project is to be ongoing/annual.

19. Your Organization should not rely only on the City of Waterloo for funding. Do you have other funders or sponsors? ☐Yes ☐No

Council Meeting Page 46 of 409 August 10, 2015

20. If yes, please list in the table below any other groups, businesses, agencies, municipalities and/or other levels of government from whom you are requesting cash or in kind support or who are currently providing funding/in-kind support and the value or amount of the support.

Name Cash Amount In Kind Amount Received or Requested Funder, Sponsor or Cash In Kind Received or Agency Requested

Funder, Sponsor or Cash In Kind Received or Agency Requested

21. If no, please explain why you are not able to access other funding and how your operational needs will be met (100 words or less or 765 characters)

22. Does your organization partner or collaborate with other organizations? ☐Yes ☐No

Council Meeting Page 47 of 409 August 10, 2015

23. If yes, please list in the table below other groups or organizations with whom you are currently collaborating/partnering or plan to collaborate/partner and describe the partnership and timelines. Partner/Collaborator Purpose of Partnership or Timelines Collaboration (describe) (begin/end proposed dates)

Partner/Collaborator Purpose of Partnership or Timelines Collaboration (describe) (begin/end proposed dates)

24. If no, please explain why? (100 words or less or 765 characters)

Section 6: Benefit to the Community 25. Please indicate where the participants (direct participants or audience members) you serve reside (check all that apply):

☐Waterloo ☐Kitchener ☐Region ☐Other 26. Approximately how many do you serve annually? Direct Participants: ______Audience Members:______

Council Meeting Page 48 of 409 August 10, 2015

27. Describe how your organization’s activities benefit the Waterloo community (300 words or less or 2292 characters). Although your response is not limited to the following, please consider such factors as: Engages citizens/community Reaches a diverse population (age, ethnicity, individuals with barriers to participation) Improves community and individual health and/or quality of life. Has an economic impact on the community Builds community, including collaborations and partnerships Program or service provided is unique - not duplicated by another organization

28. Identify the specific criteria you will use to evaluate your program/project/event results and describe how you will measure success (100 words or less or 765 characters)

Council Meeting Page 49 of 409 August 10, 2015

Section 7: APPLICATION VERIFICATION By signing this form, I acknowledge the following: ☐ I have read, understood and agreed with all statements and information provided to the City of Waterloo in this grant application. ☐ I have read and understand the Community, Culture and Recreation Services Cash Grants Policy. ☐ I have read and understand the City of Waterloo may contact other groups and organizations listed on this application form in particular other funding agencies or groups to verify information. ☐ I have read and understand this application form is submitted in confidence to the City of Waterloo with the acknowledgement that it may be reviewed by members of the Cash Grants Advisory Committee, staff or Council of the City of Waterloo as needed. Records may be subject to release as required by other legislation and in particular the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. ☐ I am authorized to make an application on behalf of this organization.

Signing Officer Signature: Date:

Signing Officer Name:

Position: Group Name:

Council Meeting Page 50 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Revenue & Accounting

Title: Heads and Beds Report Number: CORP2015-069 Author: Paul Grivicic Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: Appendix A – Comparison of current methodology versus a proposed methodology Appendix B – Inflationary impact on Heads and Beds rate Ward No.: All

Recommendation:

1. That Council approves report CORP2015-069, and that Council requests the Minister of Finance for the Province of Ontario to:

a) Maintain the current “heads and beds” rate methodology and amend the current prescribed “heads and beds” rate used to calculate payment-in-lieu of taxes on public hospitals, universities, colleges and correctional facilities from $75 per capacity to an equivalent rate of $125 per capacity that would be raised if these public institutions used current value assessment (CVA) multiplied by residential tax rate methodology, and ensure that the “heads and beds” rate thereafter is adjusted regularly to reflect changes in CVA on public institutions and municipal tax rates;

b) or, alternatively maintain the current “heads and beds” rate methodology and index the "heads and beds" rate to the current rate of inflation, which would be $137 per capacity at the end of 2014;

c) or, alternatively introduce legislative amendments to the Assessment Act and the Municipal Act, 2001, that would require payment-in-lieu amounts be calculated on equivalent taxation using full CVA multiplied by the appropriate municipal tax rates.

Council Meeting Page 51 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

A. Executive Summary

The Province provides payment-in-lieu (PIL) entitlements to municipalities for all public institutional properties, provincially owned or controlled, located within the municipal jurisdiction as an alternative to the real property tax. Public institutional properties include public hospitals, universities, colleges and correctional institutions. The Province provides a prescribed per capacity rate, referred as the “heads and beds” rate. In 1987 the prescribed per capacity rate was set at $75 per head/bed (i.e. per post- secondary student), and has not changed since 1987.

This report proposes that Council request the Minister of Finance to amend the prescribed “heads and beds” rate to either:

1. Maintain the current “heads and beds” rate methodology and adjust the rate from $75 per capacity to an equivalent rate of $125 per capacity that would be raised if these public institutions used current value assessment (CVA) multiplied by the residential tax rate, and adjust the amount regularly to reflect changes in CVA and the municipal tax rate, or 2. Maintain the current “heads and beds” rate methodology and index the “heads and beds” rate to the current rate of inflation, which would be $137 per capacity at the end of 2014, or 3. Introduce legislative amendments that would actually use the full CVA multiplied by the appropriate municipal tax rate to determine the total payment in lieu of taxes.

B. Financial Implications

A change in the provincially prescribed capacity rate for “heads and beds” could generate additional annual revenues of $847,055 per year for the City. Accordingly, this report proposes that the Provincial government be requested to amend the current “heads and beds” rate used to calculate the PIL levy for provincial public institutions to at least $125 per capacity, or make legislative changes that would facilitate using CVA multiplied by the appropriate municipal tax rates.

C. Technology Implications

None

D. Legal Considerations

Staff did not seek legal advice.

Council Meeting Page 52 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

Corporate Excellence – Employ fiscally responsible practices and policies that ensure a balanced social, cultural, economic, and environmental approach. The heads and beds rate has not changed since 1987. Costs associated with heads and beds capacity are absorbed by the general tax base. Regular increases to the rate will assist in offsetting increasing annual costs.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

FS2012-034 – Heads & Beds-Payment-in-Lieu – June 18, 2012

Council Meeting Page 53 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Paul Grivicic, CPA, CA Director: Paul Hettinga, CPA, CA Commissioner: Keshwer Patel, CPA,

CGA Finance: Keshwer Patel, CPA, CGA

CAO

Council Meeting Page 54 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

Heads and Beds CORP2015-069

Under the Assessment Act, public hospitals, universities, colleges of applied arts and technology, and correctional institutions are exempt from paying property taxes. However, section 323 of the Municipal Act, 2001, allows municipalities to annually raise a payment in lieu of taxes on such institutions. As such, the Province provides a payment-in-lieu (PIL) entitlement to be paid to a municipality for all public institutional properties, provincially owned or controlled, located within the municipal jurisdiction as an alternative to the real property tax.

Municipalities annually raise PILs on such institutions by multiplying the capacity of each institution by a specified "heads and beds" rate. Capacity is determined by the institution based on their own annual census taken in November. This capacity amount is approved by the Province and forwarded to municipalities annually by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Once the Province has approved the capacity for its institutional properties, a municipality may calculate the provincial PIL using the "heads and beds" rate. The PILs are funded and paid by the provincial government through the respective institution.

The "Heads and Beds" rates are specified in O.Reg.384/98. The "heads and beds" rate was last changed in 1987 from $50 per capacity to the following:

- $75.00 for each provincially rated hospital bed (public hospitals); - $75.00 for each full time student (universities & colleges); and - $75.00 for each resident place (correctional institutions)

Inflationary pressures of any sort have not been reflected in the “heads and beds” rate since the rate has not changed in approximately 28 years.

In 2015, based on the current “heads and beds” rate of $75 per capacity, local public institutions contributed approximately $3.5 million in municipal PIL revenue. This revenue is proportionately distributed between the City of Waterloo and the Region of Waterloo. The City's share is $1,263,289. See Appendix A for details.

Appendix A compares the 2015 amounts received as PIL revenue using the current “heads and beds” rate versus the equivalent taxation amount that could have been raised using an alternative methodology, that being current value assessment (CVA) multiplied by the municipal tax rate. It is assumed that for the purpose of calculating equivalent taxation the applicable tax rate would be the current residential tax rate with no provincial education taxes payable.

Council Meeting Page 55 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Corporate Services

If the Minister of Finance amended the “heads and beds” rate to an equivalent rate using the methodology described above, municipal PIL revenue from the local provincial public institutional properties would be $5.8 million in 2015. The City’s share would be $2,110,344, thereby potentially generating at least an additional $847,055 in revenue in 2015 and for each year thereafter.

As part of the analysis in Appendix A, staff determined that in order to generate equivalent PIL revenue the current prescribed “heads and beds” rate would have to increase from $75 to $125 for 2015.

By adjusting the “heads and beds” rate to an equivalent amount using the alternative methodology, the rate itself would vary from municipality to municipality. However, these annual amendments would be made with relative ease as it would only require changes to the current O.Reg.384/98, not legislative changes.

Appendix B illustrates the inflationary impact of the heads and beds rate. Starting in 1987 at a rate of $75 per capacity, the amount is inflated on an annual basis based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). If the $75 per capacity amount was inflated annually using CPI, the amount would be $137 per capacity at the end of 2014. In general, this provides the dollar impact of not inflating the rate considering the rate is still $75 per capacity.

The Province could introduce amending legislation to enshrine within the Assessment Act and the Municipal Act, 2001, the principal that the PIL amounts for provincial public institutional properties be calculated on the basis of equivalent taxation using the CVA multiplied by the appropriate municipal tax rate. This approach would eliminate the need to establish prescribed rates by regulation each year. However, the legislative process is subject to provincial priorities.

This report proposes that Council request the Minister of Finance to amend the prescribed “heads and beds” rate to either:

Council Meeting Page 56 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Corporate Services

The “heads and beds” rate should be adjusted regularly to reflect changes in either the current value assessment on public institutions and municipal tax rates or CPI. City staff has estimated that if revenue were based on a property’s current value assessment multiplied by the residential tax rate, the City of Waterloo would receive additional revenue of $847,055 per year and for each year thereafter.

Council Meeting Page 57 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Corporate Services

CORP2015-072 – Appendix A – Comparison of current rate and PIL versus using CVA multiplied by Residential Tax Rate

Revenue Based on Heads and Beds Rate Revenue Based on CVA x Residential Tax Rate* Equivalent Rate Capacity (# Exempt Assessment Capacity (# students) Rate Total CVA Tax Rate* Total Difference students) Rate Total Institution Conestoga College 815 $75 $61,125 5,867,500 0.964693% $56,603 ($4,522) 815 $56,603 University of Waterloo 32,651 $75 $2,448,825 419,467,781 0.964693% $4,046,576 $1,597,751 32,651 $4,046,576 Wilfrid Laurier University 12,986 $75 $973,950 177,956,212 0.964693% $1,716,731 $742,781 12,986 $1,716,731 46,452 $3,483,900 603,291,493 $5,819,911 $2,336,011 46,452 $125 $5,819,911

City Portion Conestoga College 36.2608% $22,164 5,867,500 0.349805% $20,525 ($1,640) University of Waterloo 36.2608% $887,963 419,467,781 0.349805% $1,467,319 $579,357 Wilfrid Laurier University 36.2608% $353,162 177,956,212 0.349805% $622,500 $269,338 $1,263,289 603,291,493 $2,110,344 $847,055

*residential Tax Rate for the Upper and Lower Tier, no education component

Council Meeting Page 58 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Corporate Services

CORP2015-072 – Appendix B – Inflationary Impact on Heads and Beds Rate

Year CPI CPI Inflation Rate Inflated Heads and Beds Rate 1987 68.5 $75.00 1988 71.2 3.94% $77.96 1989 74.8 5.06% $81.90 1990 78.4 4.81% $85.84 1991 82.8 5.61% $90.65 1992 84.0 1.45% $91.97 1993 85.6 1.90% $93.72 1994 85.7 0.12% $93.83 1995 87.6 2.22% $95.91 1996 88.9 1.48% $97.33 1997 90.4 1.69% $98.98 1998 91.3 1.00% $99.97 1999 92.9 1.75% $101.72 2000 95.4 2.69% $104.45 2001 97.8 2.52% $107.08 2002 100.0 2.25% $109.49 2003 102.8 2.80% $112.56 2004 104.7 1.85% $114.64 2005 107.0 2.20% $117.16 2006 109.1 1.96% $119.46 2007 111.5 2.20% $122.09 2008 114.1 2.33% $124.93 2009 114.4 0.26% $125.26 2010 116.5 1.84% $127.56 2011 119.9 2.92% $131.29 2012 121.7 1.50% $133.26 2013 122.8 0.90% $134.46 2014 125.2 2.00% $137.14

average 2.27%

Data source: Statistics Canada – CPI Canada http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/econ46a-eng.htm

Council Meeting Page 59 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Water Services

Title: Drinking Water Quality Management System – Management Review Report Number: IPPW2015-064 Author: Paola Mendez Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: DWQMS Attachments: None Ward No.: City-Wide

Recommendation:

For Information

A. Executive Summary

As per Element 20 of the Drinking Water Quality Management Standard (the Standard), under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 2002, Top Management of the Operating Authority (Water Services) is required to report the results of the Management Review to the Owner (City of Waterloo Mayor/Council) on an annual basis. Top Management is defined as the highest level of management within the Operating Authority that makes decisions and recommendations regarding the Quality Management System (QMS) and is comprised of the Commissioner of IPPW, the Executive Operations Officer, the Director of Water Services and the Manager of Water Operations.

The 2015 Management Review was conducted on June 22, 2015, reviewing the period of January 1 to December 31, 2014. The Standard provides a set of specific components of the drinking water system that are to be reviewed to provide an opportunity to identify areas that can be improved to ensure the ultimate goal is being met – providing safe drinking water to our consumers. Additionally, the review provides an opportunity to satisfy the requirements of Element 21 – Continual Improvement. As per the Standard, Top Management is required to identify deficiencies, which can be defined as anything deemed inadequate in quality.

The results of the Management Review are provided on page 4 of this report; there were no deficiencies identified. Opportunities for improvements, best management practices and recommendations are captured as action items. Action items are then

Council Meeting Page 60 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works assigned to a staff member to be completed within a defined timeline and are assigned a priority ranking for urgency of completion.

B. Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with receiving this report for information.

C. Technology Implications

There is no technology implications associated with receiving this report for information.

D. Legal Considerations

Staff did not seek legal advice

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

The Management Review is intended to provide service excellence and continual improvement of our Quality Management System within the City’s water distribution system. It is linked to the Strategic Pillars: • Strong Community • Corporate Excellence

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

Since 2010, the Management Review has been reported annually to Council. The last report was IPPW2014-088.

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Paola Mendez Director: Denise McGoldrick Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance:

CAO

Council Meeting Page 61 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Drinking Water Quality Management System – Management Review IPPW2015-064

Section 1: Background The Municipal Drinking Water Licensing Program, under the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002 and Ontario Regulation 188/07, requires operating authorities of drinking water systems to develop a Quality Management System (QMS) and obtain accreditation to demonstrate conformance with the Drinking Water Quality Management Standard (the Standard). The City of Waterloo, Water Services is an accredited operating authority and operates under a Municipal Drinking Water Licence and Drinking Water Works Permit.

Element 20 of the Standard requires that the Top Management of an operating authority shall: • ensure that a management review is conducted at least once every twelve months, • consider the results of the management review and identify deficiencies and action items to address the deficiencies, • provide a record of any decisions and action items related to the management review including the personnel responsible for delivering the action items and the proposed timeline for their implementation, and • report the results of the management review, the identified deficiencies, decisions and action items to the Owner.

As per the Standard, the purpose of the Management Review is to evaluate the continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the QMS within the City’s distribution system and that includes consideration of:

a) Incidents of Regulatory Non-Compliance, b) Incidents of Adverse Drinking Water Tests, c) Deviations from Critical Control Point Limits and Response Actions, d) Efficacy of the Risk Assessment Process, e) Results of Internal and External Audits, f) Results of Emergency Response Training and Testing, g) Operational Performance, h) Raw Water Supply and Drinking Water Quality Trends, i) Follow-up Action Items from Previous Management Reviews, j) Status of Action Items Identified Between Management Reviews, k) Changes that could Affect the QMS,

Council Meeting Page 62 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

l) Consumer Feedback, m) Resources Needed to Maintain the QMS, n) Results of Infrastructure Review, o) Operational Plan, p) Staff Suggestions, and q) Recommendations.

The Management Review was conducted on June 22, 2015, reviewing the period of January 1 to December 31, 2014. It was conducted by the Commissioner of IPPW, Executive Operations Officer, the Director of Water Services, the Water Quality Specialist and the DWQMS Coordinator.

In preparation of the meeting the 2015 Management Review Summary Report was generated following the Standard. To obtain a copy of this report, please contact Paola Mendez at [email protected] or 519-886-2310 x30300.

Section 2: Results of the 2015 Management Review

The information presented in the 2015 Management Review Summary Report was reviewed by Top Management during the management review meeting. The information was evaluated for its continued suitability, adequacy and effectiveness as it relates to the QMS. Deficiencies, action items and recommendations were noted and discussed.

Through the evaluation of the 2015 Management Review Summary Report, the Top Management Team determined the QMS continues to be suitable, adequate and effective to ensure the delivery of safe drinking water.

Highlights of 2015 Management Review

The following items are highlights of the 2015 Management Review: • A final inspection rating of 100% was received for the drinking water distribution system via an unannounced inspection by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change on October 16, 2014; • On November 12 and 13, 2014 a third party on-site re-accreditation audit was conducted; no non-conformances were identified for the DWQMS; • In 2014 Water Services adopted the use of the Emergency Management Ontario’s Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment model for the DWQMS risk assessment; • All action items identified via the 2014 Management Review have been completed; • The use of benchmark indicators and key performance indicators (KPI) to evaluate Water Services’ operational performance was incorporated this year. Top Management reviewed all the KPIs analyzed by the National Water and Wastewater Benchmarking Initiative and selected the metrics that best depicted Water Services’ operational performance;

Council Meeting Page 63 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• A comprehensive Asset Management Plan (AMP) has been initiated and will incorporate a water distribution master plan. The AMP is scheduled to be completed by late 2016 and will set out project and or program changes that are anticipated to positively impact the water distribution system; • InfraMap is a mobile data collection product that Water Services implemented, in late 2013, to digitally capture inspection and maintenance activities in the field; • Maximo is being used to catalogue all drinking water quality concerns and it allows the Water Services Customer Service staff to generate service requests. It is expected to be used for more timely water quality data/trend analysis and reporting; • Water Services continues to apply resources towards succession planning to minimize risk to the operation of key drinking water system infrastructure; • Water Services has recently expanded the QMS program into the Sanitary Operations. To meet the demands of the DWQMS program, the DWQMS Coordinator position was generated as a one-year contract; this position will handle the requirements of the DWQMS; • A study is being completed by a consultant to review Water Services’ rate structure. A long term sustainable Financial Plan, in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act, is also under development in conjunction with the rate study; • Water Services conducts an annual infrastructure review to determine if the current programs, infrastructure condition and budgets are adequate to operate and maintain the drinking water distribution system. Based on available information, Top Management has determined Water Services’ current programs, infrastructure condition and budgets are adequate. Budgetary needs are communicated to Council through the Capital and Operating budget process; • The DWQMS Operational Plan was re-endorsed by Top Management in September 2014 due to major changes during the 2014 Operational Plan review; it will require Top Management re-endorsement in 2015 due to a change in personnel; • The DWQMS Operational Plan was re-endorsed by Council on February 2015 to recognize new Council members, as a result of the municipal election in Fall 2014.

Deficiencies

No deficiencies were identified during the 2015 Management Review.

Council Meeting Page 64 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Action Items and Recommendations

The following action items were identified during the 2015 Management Review:

AIR # Action Item Assigned To Proposed Priority (yy-#) Timeline Ranking 15-34 Add Bacteriological as a hazardous P. Mendez, 2015 High event and Critical Control Point to the (DWQMS Operational Risk Assessment Coordinator) Plan Review 15-35 Create a formal process to ensure P. Modak December Medium Emergency Response training for new (Water Services 2015 Water Services staff is delivered and Program recorded. Coordinator) 15-36 Communicate the NWWBI report D. McGoldrick December Low results with staff. (Water Services 2015 Director) 15-37 Include confirmed key performance P. Mendez 2016 Low indicators from the NWWBI report in (DWQMS Management the Operational Performance section of Coordinator) Review the Management Review. 15-38 Ensure data from the Drinking Water L. Martin 2015 for 2014 Low Quality tests (THM and Total Coliform) (Infrastructure NWWBI Data is included in the forms sent to NWWBI Technician) and N. Collection Glauser (Water Quality Specialist)

15-39 Determine an appropriate methodology P. Modak Fall 2015 Medium to cross-reference any modifications to (Water Services the drinking water system with the Program completed Form 1's to ensure no gaps Coordinator) exist. 15-40 Include both Form 1 Process and the P. Modak (Water Fall 2015 Medium QMS Awareness training for Services Program Engineering Services. Coordinator) and P. Mendez (DWQMS Coordinator)

15-41 Review the Backflow Prevention W. Matthews Fall 2015 High Program report. Need clarification (Backflow regarding program status and Prevention Officer) statistical analysis.

Council Meeting Page 65 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Financial Planning & Purchasing

Title: 2015 Grant Update Report Number: CORP2015-068 Author: Cassandra Pacey Meeting Type: Finance & Strategic Planning Committee Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: NA Attachments: NA Ward No.: City Wide

Recommendation:

Information

A. Executive Summary During the June 18, 2012 FSP meeting, Council approved a Grants Policy that recommended bi-annual status update reporting to Council. The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update of 2015 grant applications, the status of those applications and provide information related to grants.

As of July 2015, the City of Waterloo has applied for 18 grants with a total budgeted value of $4,333,856 and a grant potential of $1,818,459. Of the 18 applications applied to by July 2015, the City of Waterloo has been successful in 12. The 12 applications have resulted in $556,889 in funding being received from grant organizations with a total budgeted value of $1,161,067. In addition to the grants that have been applied for, staff continue to research and review grant opportunities.

Full details on the 2015 application grants can be found in Appendix A. This information includes: • Grants programs under review • Grant applications funding that is pending • Grant applications where submissions that are pending • Successful grant applications • Grant Programs the City of Waterloo is ineligible to apply for

Council Meeting Page 66 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

As well as application grants, the City of Waterloo is projected to receive funding transfer grants in the amount of $3,545,092 from the Federal and Provincial governments. Details on the programs the funding is applied to (e.g. Federal Gas Tax) can be found in Appendix B.

Throughout the year, staff becomes aware of opportunities to apply for grant funding to supplement or provide additional services above and beyond the parameters of the operating and capital budgets. In an effort to provide guidance to the organization in addressing grant application scenarios in a dynamic environment, the Grants Policy was created and approved by Council. Staff will employ the Grants Policy as a key reference tool when reviewing future grant opportunities. As grants move forward throughout the organization, they will be tabled before the appropriate approval authority as established within the policy. 40090 B. Financial Implications

The departments successful in applying for and receiving grant funding are Community Services, Corporate Services and Integrated Planning & Public Works as identified in Table 1.

Table 1: Successful YTD 2015 Grant Funding Department Applied Divisions Impacted Grant Funding Awarded Community Services Community Programming & Outreach $142,963 Community Services Environment & Parks Services $16,415 Corporate Services Facilities and Fleet $19,511 Integrated Planning & Public Growth Management* $90,000 Works Integrated Planning & Public Active Transportation $288,000 Works Total Grant Funding $556,889 Note: The Growth Management Grant was for Community Energy Investment Strategy and is a joint application between the Region of Waterloo, Cities of Kitchener, Cambridge, Waterloo and area utilities that include LDCs, Union Gas and Kitchener Utilities. The City of Waterloo's contribution to the application is $10,000.

C. Technology Implications NA

Council Meeting Page 67 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

E. Link to Strategic Plan/Economic Vitality (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development) This project links to the following pillars within the strategic plan: . Multi-modal Transportation . Infrastructure Renewal . Strong Community . Environmental Leadership . Corporate Excellence

F. Previous Reports on this Topic FS2012-032, Grant Policy - June 18, 2012 FS2012-044, 2012 Grant Update - October 4, 2012 FS2012-048, Grant Policy Update - October 15, 2012 CORP2013-016, 2013 Grant Status Updates – September 16, 2013 CORP2014-012, Grant Policy Update – February 10, 2014 CORP2014-030, 2014 Grant Status Update – April 14, 2014 CORP2015-022, 2015 Grant Status Update – March 23, 2015

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Cassandra Pacey Director: Filipa Reynolds Commissioner: Keshwer Patel Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 68 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

Appendix A – 2015 Application Grants NA Budget Budget Capital 120020 Capital Capital Capital Capital Ref 817 Ref Operating Operating Operating & Project 110014 Project 110014 Project 120049 Project within 2016-2018 within 2016-2018 Project 110014 & 110014 & Project To be accomodated To be accommodated

$4,511 $4,785 Operating $8,212 Operating $4,123 $8,470 Operating $80,000 Operating $16,300 Operating $10,000 $15,000 Operating $75,062 $19,990 Operating $10,904 Operating $220,000 $152,297 $994,492 $720,000 $600,000 $116,007 $3,020,492 $1,161,067 $1,426,000 Total Budget Source Funding $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 $9,995 $2,726 $4,390 $11,915 $10,000 $25,062 $81,063 $130,000 $102,973 $604,178 $497,246 $432,000 $951,000 $360,000 $1,808,246 $2,515,397 $4,333,856 $4,511 $4,785 $4,385 $9,995 $8,178 $3,822 $4,123 $8,470 $5,000 $80,000 $90,000 $10,000 $50,000 $34,943 $49,323 $556,889 $497,246 $288,000 $475,000 $240,000 $1,212,246 $1,818,459 Grant Funding City Contribution City Activity Transportation Vehicles Assistive Devices Playground accessibility Bluevale at Collegiate Energy - Plan in Rink the Management Park Dehumidification CanadaTrans Trail Resurfacing Canadian Gallery ClayThe & Glass Project Renovation Planting Reserve Environmental Localized Indicators for Measuring the Success of Waterloo's Age-Friendly Action Plan Community Energy Strategy Investment Water Audit Use CanadaTrans Trail through Waterloo Park Park Diamond AmenitiesRIM Ball Planting Project Grove Memorial Part Time Summer Heritage Position Summer Part Time Waterloo Earth 2015 Day Event Waterloo Earth 2015 Day Event Positions Camp Part Time Energy Audit Report Funding Agency Funding Federal Government Waterloo Wellington Local Health Integration (LHIN) Network Waterloo Wellington Local Health Integration (LHIN) Network and SocialEmployment Development Canada Ministry of Energy Federal Government Ministry of Resources Natural and Forestry Region ofRegion Waterloo Federal Government Federal Government EcoConnextionsCN Province of Ontario Government of Canada Government ofRegion Waterloo Days Tree TD of Canada Government Waterloo Hydro North Waterloo Hydro North Department CORP - F&F CORP COMM-CP&O COMM-CP&O COMM-CP&O CORP-F&F IPPW-Growth Management IPPW-Active Transportation COMM-EP&S COMM-EP&S COMM-EP&S COMM-EP&S COMM-CP&O COMM-CP&O COMM-EP&S COMM-EP&S CORP-HR CORP-F&F CORP-F&F 2 3 Grant Program Canada Cultural Spaces Fund Youth CanadaYouth Jobs Fund Community Environment Days Tree TD JobsCanada Summer Waterloo Wellington Local Integration Health Network (LHIN) - Transportation Grant Waterloo Wellington Local Integration Health Network (LHIN) - Assistive Device Grant Enabling Accessibility in Communities ofRegion Waterloo WET Program Ontario’s Municipal Energy Plan Program Canada Infrastructure Program 150 (CIP 150) Canada Infrastructure Program 150 (CIP 150) Canada Infrastructure Program 150 (CIP 150) Greening Our Community Planting Events Land Stewardship & Habitat Restoration Program Age-Friendly Community Planning Grant Grant Status Pending Pending Pending Successful Successful Successful Successful Successful Successful Successful Successful saveONenergy Successful saveONenergy Successful Successful Successful Application Application Unsuccessful Unsuccessful Unsuccessful Successful TotalSuccessful Pending Total TotalUnsuccessful ValueTotal of Grant Applications 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2014 1 3 4 6 7 9 2 5 8 10 2015 11 2015 12 2015 14 2015 15 2015 17 2015 18 2015 16 2015 13 2015 Grant Year 2015 Application Based Grants Based 2015 Application

Council Meeting Page 69 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

Appendix A – 2015 Application Grants Continued NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Capital Ref 817 Ref $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $903,700 $903,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $578,700 $578,700 $3,094,097 $5,237,556 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $325,000 $2,143,459 Waterloo Park Promenade NA NA NA ActivitiesMuseum Planting Events NA NA NA Asset Management Asset Province of Ontario Federal Government Federal Government Federal Government Province of Ontario Evergreen Cityworks Federal Government FCM Federal Government FCM IPPW-Engineering Services CAO COMM-EP&S COMM-CP&O CAO IPPW-Growth Management CAO CAO CAO CAO Ontario Municipal Cycling Infrastructure Program Building Through Communities Arts & Heritage Programs Parks Sites Canada National Grant Operating Community Museum and Pay Equity Grants We are Cities: Community Innovation Grant DisasterNational Mitigation Program, Intake 1 Building Canada Fund, Provincial-Territorial Infrastructure Component FCM - Asset Management Plan -FCM Management Asset Pending Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible Submission Under Review Under ReviewUnder - FCM Green Municipal Fund ReviewUnder Canada 150 - Programming Submission Pending Total Pending Submission Ineligible Total Under Review Total Total Grand 2015 2015 2015 A B C 20 2015 19 2015 2122 2015 23 2015 2015 2425 2015 2015 Includes City Funding, Federal Funding sources Reserve), In-Kind (e.g. Tax Services Gas and contributions from grant application partners. Enabling AccessibilityThe City and the Collegiate in is Communities of Bluevale a joint initiative the Waterloo, between and Elmira. Community Energy StrategyThe is Investment a joint application of Region the Waterloo, between Cities of Kitchener, Cambridge, Waterloo and area utilities include that LDCs, and Kitchener Gas Union Utilities. City The of Waterloo's contribution application the to is Submissions Pending Submissions Ineligible Grants Note: 1 2 3 $10,000.

Council Meeting Page 70 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Corporate Services

Appendix B – 2015 Funding Transfer Grants $387,240 $184,378 $131,623 $120,434 2015 YTD 2015 YTD Expenditures Total Budget 1 $0 $2,860,216 $6,727,792 $0 $556,348 $163,100 $767,976 $197,092$127,345 $237,092 $167,345 $487,537 $4,032,629 $7,431,033 City Contribution $40,000 $40,000 $604,876 $556,348 $2,860,216 $3,545,092 Funding Transfer Funding Total Value of Funding Transfers Funding of Total Value City Activity Gas Tax Rebate Reserve Rebate Tax Gas Integration (LHIN) Local Health Network ARC Wing 404 Ontario Infrastructure Communities Fund Reserve 3 3 3 2 Grant Program Federal Gas Tax Fund Tax Federal Gas Integration (LHIN) Local Health Network Elderly Persons Funding Transfer Elderly Persons Funding Transfer Ontario Infrastructure Communities Fund - Program Funding Federal Government of Canada Federal Government Province of Ontario - Ministry of Health Province of Ontario - Ministry of Health Province of Ontario - Ministry of Health Funding Agency Funding Province of Ontario - Ministry of Infrastructure Includes municipal funding contribution revenues and budgeted Funding Transfer Tax per as MunicipalGas the Transfer Funding for Agreement Funds from Tax Funds. Transfer prior the Gas of Tax Federal years Gas is being utilized in 2015. and Elderly LHIN PersonsThe Transfer funding Province the follow of Ontario's fiscal year ending March 31st. As a result, expenditures are reported be timing 2015/2016 will and the on that based is that an estimate 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Year Note: 1 2 3 confirmed during second the quarter of 2015.

Council Meeting Page 71 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Building Standards

Title: Demolition Control Applications – Quarterly Report Q2 Report Number: IPPW2015-073 Author: Lynn Balfour Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: IPPW2015-073 Attachments: None Ward No.: City Wide

Recommendation:

That Council receive report IPPW2015-073 for information.

A. Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to keep Council informed on the number and type of demolition control applications approved by the Chief Building Official and the anticipated type of redevelopment for the properties. In 2013 Council approved Bylaw 2013-14 being a bylaw to designate the entire city as a demolition control area for the purposes of preventing the premature demolition and reduction of residential building stock, and as permitted by the Section 23.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended, to delegate the authority to approve demolition control applications to the Chief Building Official.

B. Financial Implications None

C. Technology Implications None

D. Legal Considerations None

E. Link to Strategic Plan

This supports the Strong Community priority of the Strategic Plan by protecting against premature loss of housing stock and long-term vacant residential lots.

Council Meeting Page 72 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

F. Previous Reports on this Topic IPPW2015-043 Demolition Control Applications – Quarterly Report

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Lynn Balfour

Director: Ralph Kaminski

Commissioner: Cameron Rapp

Finance: NA

CAO

Council Meeting Page 73 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Demolition Control Applications – Quarterly Report Q2 IPPW2015-073

In accordance with the provisions of Bylaw 2013-14 being a bylaw to establish a Demolition Control Area, the following demolition control applications were approved by the Chief Building Official during the period April 1 – June 30, 2015.

File No. Property Date of To be To be Constructed DC2015 Address Approval Demolished 2015 04 418 Lexington April 20 1 Unit 2 Units Road (Single Detached) (Single Detached) 05 346 Lexington May 27 1 Unit 2 Units Road (Single Detached) (Single Detached) 06 465 Bridge Street May 27 1 Unit 2 Units West (Single Detached) (Single Detached) 07 202 Macdonald May 27 1 Unit 1 Unit Place (Single Detached) (Single Detached) 08 162 Esson Street June 29 1 Unit 1 Unit (Single Detached) (Single Detached) 09 114-116 Union St June 29 2 Units 33 Units East (Semi Detached) (Terraced) 10 112 Union Street June 29 1 Unit See Above East (Single Detached) 11 118 Union Street June 29 1 Unit See Above East (Single Detached) 12 113 Moore Ave June 29 1 Unit See Above South (Single Detached) 13 115 Moore Ave June 29 1 Unit See Above South (Single Detached) TOTAL 11 Units 41 Units

Council Meeting Page 74 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 75 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Growth Management

Title: Station Area Planning - Phase 2 Consultation Summary Report Number: IPPW2015-065 Author: Adam Lauder Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: PS-12-09 Attachments: Attachment 1: Phase 2 Consultation Summary - Consultant Report (Urban Strategies) Ward No.: City-Wide

Recommendation:

INFORMATION

A. Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to summarize the consultation efforts that have occurred for Phase 2 of the Station Area Planning project and identify key milestones moving forward.

Consultation efforts to date have included stakeholder interviews to understand land use visions for major land holdings, followed by a public launch and community roundtable workshop in April, 2015, and a visioning workshop / public open house in June, 2015.

Through this consultation, comments have focussed on methods to increase the vibrancy of employment areas, improve pedestrian/cyclist/auto connections within Station Areas, to help Station Areas continue to transition to interesting urban areas, and to support the City’s economic development objectives.

Future key milestones include tabling of Draft Station Area Plans (end of 2015), additional public consultation, work on any Official Plan Amendment(s), District Plan Amendment(s) and Zoning By-law Amendment(s) as well as proposed Final Station Area Plans (end of 2016).

Council Meeting Page 76 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

B. Financial Implications There are no financial implications associated with this report. Council has previously approved funding for this phase. Should Council approve Station Area Plans, such Plans may have financial implications associated with Plan implementation.

C. Technology Implications There are no technology implications associated with this report.

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Strategic Priority Area: Multi-Modal Transportation contains an objective: “Create ION station area hubs” and example initiative “Complete ION station area plans”.

Strategic Priority Area: Economic Development contains an objective “Capitalize on ION rapid transit to increase business expansion around station hubs” and example initiative “Leverage opportunities at Columbia/Phillip hub through station area planning”.

This project will deliver Station Area Plans for Council consideration.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic IPPW2014-096 Station Area Planning – Phase II Terms of Reference

IPPW2014-076 Station Area Planning – Phase I Existing Conditions Consultant Report

IPPW2013-010 Station Area Planning – Phase I Terms of Reference

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Director: Commissioner: Finance:

CAO

Council Meeting Page 77 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Station Area Planning - Phase 2 Consultation Summary IPPW2015-065

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Project Background

With the Region of Waterloo constructing the ION line in Waterloo, which is intended to be operational in 2017, the City has responded by launching a Station Area Planning project. This project is designed to maximize the benefits of ION while managing and directing the associated growth and change that areas around the ION stops will undergo.

This project has been divided into 3 phases, with phase 1 (analysis of existing conditions) having been completed in 2014. Phase 2 of this project will deliver Station Area Plans as well as implementing Official Plan Amendment(s), District Plan Amendment(s), Zoning By-law Amendment(s) as appropriate, for Council consideration by the end of 2016. Phase 3 is intended to identify an implementation strategy and will involve the identification of Capital, Operating and Development Charge projects that are recommended to achieve the intent of the Station Area Plans.

The overall goal of the project is to create and deliver a planning framework and implementation program for 5 Waterloo Station Areas that supports intensification, economic development and efficient use of the City’s infrastructure/services in a manner that effectively engages stakeholders.

1.2 What is a Station Area

A Station Area is centred around an ION stop, and generally includes lands within a 10 minute walk from the stop (being about 800 metres). Phase I of this project involved an assessment of Station Area boundaries. Staff sees a need for 2 boundaries, being: 1. Study Area: The Study Area includes neighbourhoods that are adjacent to Conceptual Station Areas, will likely generate transit trips and therefore should feature a high degree of connectivity to the Station Area. These neighbourhoods have been studied for the purposes of enhancing connections in the future. Further, by identifying these neighbourhoods as within the study’s parameters, staff will be looking to understand if there is a need to mitigate impacts that future development may present.

Council Meeting Page 78 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

2. Conceptual Station Area: The Conceptual Station Area includes lands that staff believes should be considered for growth or change in response to ION. Staff notes that “change” may not mean intensification and, depending on context could include improvements to streetscapes, re-sizing of blocks, or City investment to provide additional amenities. This is particularly true for existing parks (such as Waterloo Park) or existing low density areas.

See Map 1 for greater detail regarding these boundaries. At the conclusion of Phase II, Council will consider designating Final Station Area boundaries in the Official Plan.

Map 1 – Draft Station Area Boundaries

Council Meeting Page 79 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

1.3 What is Station Area Planning

Station Area Planning is the process of understanding the strengths, opportunities and aspirations for lands surrounding Station Areas in supporting and taking advantage of ION and managing potential changes resulting from development. A Station Area Plan is a Council-approved document that establishes a broad growth strategy for achieving transit-supportive areas around stations.

Station Area Plans typically include the following topics: • Context – Analysis of existing conditions, identification of issues/challenges • Vision – A statement that signifies the community’s aspirations for the area, as well as conceptual plans that illustrate the desired built form, streets, public spaces, etc. • Development Concept – Recommended actions to achieve the vision, including land use and built form directions, and strategies to protect existing stable neighbourhoods. • Public Realm Guidelines – Identification of priority areas for public realm improvements. • Mobility Strategy – A strategy to enhance pedestrian, cyclist, transit and auto access, and development of a parking strategy to support the vision. • Implementation Strategy – Recommendations for phasing of improvements, strategic partnerships to help achieve the vision, and key policy directions that will help achieve the vision.

1.4 Phase Two Milestones

On August 11, 2014 Council approved a Terms of Reference (ToR) for Phase 2 of this project. The ToR identified a number of key milestones, being:

1. Public Launch & Public Consultation: 2 significant public consultation events have taken place in this phase. On April 7, 2015 approximately 80 members of the public attended a Community Roundtable Workshop at Knox Presbyterian Church. On June 16, 2015 approximately 40 stakeholders attended a day-long visioning workshop at Luther Village. Attendees included major landowners, developers, both Universities, the Waterloo Region District School Board, members of Committees of Council, the Region of Waterloo, business leaders as well as community organizations. Further, approximately 40 members of the public attended a Public Open House in the evening on June 16.

2. Completion of Draft Station Area Plans: The Draft Station Area Plans are being worked on now, and are anticipated to be tabled with Council by the end of 2015. Tabling of the Drafts will be followed by additional public consultation and subsequent refinements to the Station Area Plans.

3. Completion of Final Station Area Plans: Proposed Final Station Area Plans are anticipated to be presented to Council by late 2016. This would result in a

Council Meeting Page 80 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

new/modified framework for Station Areas being considered by Council 1 year before ION is operational, and will provide the public and landowners with a degree of certainty moving forward.

4. Completion of Implementing Official Plan Amendment(s), District Plan Amendment(s), Zoning By-law Amendment(s) as appropriate: Station Area Plans are required to be implemented via policy and regulations. These policies and regulations will be brought forward for Council consideration at the same time as the proposed Final Station Area Plans.

The City has hired Urban Strategies to assist with this phase of work. Urban Strategies has worked with municipalities to develop Station Area Plans throughout North America. More recently, they worked with the Region of Waterloo on the completion of the Community Building Strategy, which is a community readiness strategy to prepare the Region for ION. As such, in addition to being technical experts in Station Area Planning, Urban Strategies has in-depth local knowledge that is being applied.

2.0 Consultation Summary

There has been a significant amount of community engagement in the project to date. Below is a summary of key discussions that have taken place.

2.1 Creating vibrant employment areas

The community is increasingly seeking to work in areas that are vibrant, connected, with convenient access to amenities. Some desired improvements that were noted to achieve such employment areas include: • Allowing uses such as medical clinics, daycare centres, drycleaner depots, restaurant/pub/coffee shops and convenience stores. Workers appear to be looking for amenities within a 5 minute walk of their workplace. Having local access to such uses would avoid lengthy automobile trips to meet day-to-day needs. In many cases, the 2012 Official Plan permits such uses, with work being needed to include such permissions in the Zoning By-law (through either the Comprehensive Zoning By-law project, or Station Area Planning’s implementing Zoning By-law Amendment).

• Ensuring that active transportation connections are improved to allow for alternative transportation modes to be comfortable, convenient and competitive with auto trips.

• In some key locations, permitting residential uses on employment properties. Comments have been received from the Waterloo Innovation Network (who own, among other sites, properties in the NW corner of Phillip and Columbia Streets) and representatives of 580 Weber St N (the former NCR site) that residential uses should be permitted on employment lands to facilitate the development of multi-storey, mixed-use developments. Both parties were putting forward a vision

Council Meeting Page 81 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

of a continuation of the employment uses on the property that is complemented by an introduction of residential uses, rather than a complete conversion of the properties to residential uses only. The Official Plan framework currently does not permit residential uses in employment areas.

2.2 Improving Connections

The community noted a desire for enhanced connections throughout the Station Areas to ensure that pedestrians and cyclists can access nearby destinations, surrounding neighbourhoods and places of work. Key areas of focus include: • Adding sidewalks where none exist today (e.g. Seagram Drive from the rail line to the entrance of the University of Waterloo. Today there are no sidewalks on either side of the road in this section). The City’s Active Transportation section will be seeking to identify a sidewalk improvement strategy for Council consideration in the future, with Seagram Drive sidewalks being one identified missing link.

• Enhancing the cycling and trail network throughout Station Areas, including furthering the Laurel Trail northerly along the ION line.

• Looking at mid-block connections to reduce travel distances between the ION stops and surrounding lands. Some Station Areas, such as around the R&T Station, have large block sizes and fewer roads/ connections that link key destinations. To enhance mobility, stakeholders noted that large blocks should be reduced.

2.3 Placemaking & Public Realm Improvements

The community also noted a desire for Station Areas to be interesting urban areas that are enjoyable to be within. Opportunities to create safe, comfortable and inviting places that were noted include: • Facilitating mixed-use, multi-storey developments in close proximity to ION stops. In many situations, the current Official Plan framework supports such development, whereas to date, the market has not been able to deliver such built form in all locations.

• Retaining and enhancing existing parks, open spaces and streets.

• Exploring opportunities to generate additional arts and cultural assets within Station Areas. The majority of such assets are currently located in Uptown Waterloo, whereas the community expressed an interest for assets to be located in other areas as well.

Council Meeting Page 82 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Integrated Planning & Public Works

2.4 Economic Development

The ION will stop within a number of important employment and institutional areas. Over 350 hectares of employment/institutional land is located within the 5 draft station area boundaries. The community expressed a desire for the City to capitalize on ION to help strengthen these areas and facilitate connections between the varied stakeholders and business sectors located here. There was specific interest in helping to ensure that the R&T Park and Phillip Street employment corridor gets reinvigorated and becomes more urbanized through actions or mechanisms identified in Station Area Plans.

With the only ION stop located within a park, comments also were received that the city should use this new opportunity to update and implement the Waterloo Park Master Plan. Specific examples include making better use of the park’s frontage on Seagram Dr, enhancing connections throughout the park, and promoting the area as a cultural and recreational hub.

Finally, the community noted that the presence and location of other regional-scale destinations, such as the universities, Uptown Waterloo and Conestoga Mall should be promoted through the development of Station Area Plans.

3.0 Next Steps

With the bulk of the up-front consultation having taken place for this phase, attention has now turned to developing Station Area Plans. The Draft Station Area Plans will be tabled with Council late 2015/early 2016. Staff and our Consultants will prepare the Draft Station Area Plans based on inputs that include feedback received, professional experience, best practices and the local context. Additional public consultation will take place based on the Drafts, with Final Station Area Plans anticipated to be before Council for consideration by the end of 2016. Implementing regulations (Official Plan Amendment(s), District Plan Amendment(s), Zoning By-law Amendment(s), as appropriate) will be brought forward for Council consideration with the Final Station Area Plans.

Council Meeting Page 83 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Attachment 1:

Phase 2 Consultation Summary - Consultant Report (Urban Strategies)

Council Meeting Page 84 of 409 August 10, 2015 197 Spadina Avenue, Suite 600 tel 416 340 9004 Toronto, ON Canada M5T 2C8 fax 416 340 8400 www.urbanstrategies.com [email protected]

City of Waterloo Station Area Planning Phase 2 Consultation Summary

Stakeholder Interviews, Project Launch and Visioning Workshops

July 2015 The City of Waterloo Station Area Planning Study involves the development of Station Area Plans for five ION stations outside of Uptown Waterloo: Laurier-Waterloo Park, University of Waterloo, Research and Technology, Northfield, and Conestoga. The Station Area Plans are being prepared to guide future change around the new ION stations, and to encourage intensification, improved mobility, economic development, and community building.

Overview of Phase 2 Consultation Activities As part of the initial public consultation and station area visioning processes, the consultant team carried out a series of key stakeholder interviews. During February and March, the project team met with approximately 15 stakeholders with interests across all five station areas.The interviews were designed to obtain input on important issues, opportunities and aspirations for lands around the ION stations, allowing participants the opportunity to highlight and discuss additional topics that the station area planning process should explore.

On April 7, the officialProject Launch and Community Roundtables took place at Knox Presbyterian Church. The evening consultation session began with visitors having an opportunity to review a number of informative and interactive display panels. This was followed by welcoming remarks by Adam Lauder, the City’s project manager, and Ward 7 councilor Melissa Durrell, as well as an overview presentation by Melanie Hare, the consultant team lead. The second half of the evening was structured around two community roundtable sessions that invited participants to share their thoughts and visions for specific station areas along the corridor.

Building on the ideas and outcomes from the stakeholder interviews and community roundtables, a full-day Visioning Workshop was held on June 16 at Luther Village. The day brought together approximately 40 invited stakeholders with varied interests, including area landowners, business leaders, University administration, developers, community organizations, and representatives from Grand River Transit, the Region of Waterloo, and various Committees of Council. These invited participants were joined by City of Waterloo staff and facilitators from the consultation team.

The Visioning Workshop began with an overview presentation that summarized the key ideas and opportunities heard to date, and discussed the important questions, challenges and discussion topics to address throughout the day. The remainder of the day was structured around three roundtable discussions. Discussion #1 was intended to clarify the role, key features and potential areas of change for each of the station areas. Discussion #2 was focused on developing more clear directions and identifying “big movies” to guide change within each of the station areas. The discussion was framed around four key themes: land use/built form, public realm, mobility, and economic development, with participants working through a series of discussion topics related to each of these themes. Discussion #3 was designed to

CityCouncil of Waterloo Meeting Station Area Planning Page 85 of 409 Phase 2August Consultation 10, 2015Memo address five specific topics or pilot areas that required more detailed consideration, including broad topics such as “Refreshing Waterloo Park,” “Transforming Suburban Office Parks,” and “Developing a Mobility Strategy for the Corridor.” Participants were welcomed to apply to the knowledge and ideas developed during the first two discussions at a more place-specific scale.

A Public Open House and Pin-Up took place that evening, allowing the panels and discussion materials to be put on display for the public to review. Approximately 40 people attended the open house. The consultant team and City staff were available throughout the evening to address any questions that members of the public brought forward.

The consultation strategy was supported by an active online presence. The project website (http://www. waterloo.ca/lightrailtransit/) has served as the main source of online information. A range of background documentation was made available on this website, in addition to current information and notice of upcoming events. The Station Area Backgrounder, PowerPoint presentations, panels from consultation events, station infographics, and summary consultation notes were uploaded to the website. Additional public feedback was gathered through the Open City Hall platform. The website attracted 130 visitors and 4 written responses. Additional public engagement efforts were made through public advertisements, Twitter notifications, and Facebook event pages. In addition to online consultation outlets, the City employed standard public notice techniques to notify the public of the study of public events.

Summary of Key Themes and Challenges Over the duration of the Phase 1 consultation activities, a range of challenges, opportunities and directions were brought forward. A summary of the key ideas that emerged during these events is available in the attached Appendices. Below is a review of some of the critical themes from the consultation.

Transitioning Low-Density Employment Areas With many employment areas along this portion of the ION corridor, there is an opportunity to diversify the City’s economic base and attract new office, high-tech, and research and development activities. The consultation process has shown that there is a need to create more attractive and flexible workplace environments for start-up companies, medium-sized businesses, and smaller firms that are looking to grow. Transforming employment areas and office parks from primarily single-use, auto-oriented, low- density areas to more vibrant, higher-density, amenity-rich and transit-supportive places can help attract workers and create places to work, learn and play.

Improving Connections Improving connections to and from the ION stations and across the station areas has emerged as an important objective for residents, workers and visitors. With the introduction of ION, it will be important to provide safe and convenient connections and crossing points for pedestrians and cyclists to access nearby destinations, surrounding neighbourhoods and places of work. Enhancements to sidewalks, the cycling and trail network, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, and Laurel Trail connections are key to encouraging active mobility. For example, introducing a bike share system, as well as more seamless connections, was identified by many as supporting desired mobility patterns. Integration of the ION with GRT bus routes is also seen as important to promoting transit use and ION station access.

Beyond improving connections, another common response to a desire for a more pedestrian-oriented built form is the creation of a finer-grained street grid pattern. Such street patterns could be identified through

CityCouncil of Waterloo Meeting Station Area Planning Page 86 of 409 Phase 2August Consultation 10, 2015Memo Station Area Plans and phased in over time as redevelopment occurs. This concept will be explored further.

Placemaking Around the Stations Some of the ION stations will be located in areas with low development densities, parking lots or vacant properties nearby. Comments were received that the Station Area Plans should consider how to transform the immediate station areas into more vibrant nodes where people can access transit services and a broader range of amenities. Members of the project team heard that opportunities for more flexible zoning around the station need to be explored to encourage a range of amenities, create safe and inviting “places,” and encourage mixed use urban development immediately surrounding the stations.

Economic Development The ION runs through a number of important employment and institutional areas in the City. The ION investment should be capitalized upon to help strengthen these employment areas and support connections between businesses, R&D activities, high-tech firms and academic institutions.This significant infrastructure investment has the potential to enhance the investment appeal of the station areas and attract more business activities. The Station Area Plans will also need to explore how best to leverage connections to regional-scale destinations, including Uptown Waterloo, Waterloo Park, the universities, and Conestoga Mall.

Enhancing the Public Realm Opportunities to enhance the public realm – parks, open spaces, campus settings and streets - around the stations are available across the corridor. There should be a focus on protecting and enhancing existing open spaces, including Waterloo Park, while introducing new public spaces and amenities to support more people close to transit stations. Throughout the consultation process, stakeholders spoke to opportunities for new public spaces, including parks, green spaces, plazas, courtyards, and streetscape landscaping and furniture improvements. The Station Area Plans should also explore opportunities to leverage arts and cultural assets to enhance the appeal of the station areas and help create an identity around the stations.

Residential Uses in Employment Areas The desire to introduce a broader range of uses, including residential uses, within employment areas has emerged through the consultation process. More specifically, this desire has been raised along Phillip Street and in Northfield Station area. Those asking the City to consider permitting residential uses on employment lands believe that creating more mixed-use employment areas will bring residents and workers close to places of employment, thereby creating more vibrant hubs of business activity.

To respond to the comments received on the issue, the station area planning process will need to explore the appropriateness of residential uses in employment areas. Developing a set of criteria to strategically evaluate these opportunities will be an important consideration.

Implementation The ideas and concepts proposed in the Station Area Plans need to be grounded in reality. An implementation and phasing strategy will be developed as part of the station area planning process to help bring the plans to fruition. Station Area parking strategies will be created to address transition in mobility patterns while encouraging investment and redevelopment around the stations. The plans will offer policy

CityCouncil of Waterloo Meeting Station Area Planning Page 87 of 409 Phase 2August Consultation 10, 2015Memo recommendations to support implementation, with such policy recommendations potentially including zoning and land use changes, parking rate adjustments, modal split targets, urban design guidelines, or funding strategies.

Conclusions and Next Steps The Phase 1 consultation activities undertaken to date have resulted in numerous conversations with key stakeholders, City staff, and members of the community. Active involvement from key stakeholders and the public indicates the scale and importance of city building around the ION stations, and highlights the desire to impact positive change around the station areas and throughout the City of Waterloo.

A range of opportunities and directions have emerged through these public engagement sessions. These ideas will be further assessed over the coming months and integrated into the Draft Station Area Plans, which will be tabled with Council by the end of 2015 or early 2016.

Additional opportunities for public consultation will be available throughout the remainder of the study process. Ongoing discussions with key stakeholders will continue, and online consultation opportunities will be made available through the project website. Upon completion of the Draft Station Area Plans, they will be tabled with City Council towards the end of 2015. In early 2016, a formal Public Open House session is planned to take place, which will serve as an opportunity for the public to provide additional input into the Draft Station Area Plans.

Throughout 2016, the consultant team will collaborate with City staff to facilitate the preparation of Official Plan Amendments, Zoning By-law Amendments, and other policy and implementation strategies. By the end of 2016, the final Station Area Plans will be delivered in conjunction with Official Plan Amendment(s), District Plan Amendment(s), and Zoning By-Law Amendment(s), as appropriate, and implementation strategies.

Appendix A – Summary of Project Launch Roundtable Discussions (from April 2, 2015)

Appendix B – Summary of Visioning Workshop Discussions (from June 16, 2015)

CityCouncil of Waterloo Meeting Station Area Planning Page 88 of 409 Phase 2August Consultation 10, 2015Memo APPENDIX A – SUMMARY OF PROJECT LAUNCH ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSIONS (from April 7, 2015) On April 7, 2015, the public was asked three questions for each Station Area. The following reflects the comments that were put forward and accepted by the other participants at each table.

Laurier-Waterloo Park #1 what is unique/important about this area: • Waterloo Park – popular, residents of the area use the park often; diversity of uses within the park • Mix of old and new neighbourhoods/features • MacGregor Albert neighbourhood – only HCD in the City • Great mix of important amenities/institutions: Perimeter Institute, Wilfrid Laurier University, rec complex, stadium, curling club • Father David Bauer Dr. / Seagram Dr. provide connections to key destinations • Changing demographics – younger population, less driving

#2 opportunities/challenges

CHALLENGES/ISSUES OPPORTUNITIES Rail corridor divides Waterloo Park (need east- McGregor-Albert neighbourhood should form part west connections) and paths through park do not of the study area to prioritize connections to the reflect actual pedestrian travel patterns park and other station area amenities Large, underutilized UW surface parking lots UW parking lots provide opportunity for development and/or shared parking model Pedestrian connections are lacking between Key amenities and recreational opportunities can future station and Wilfrid Laurier University be supported with more restaurants, pubs/bars, small scale services (e.g. barbers, clinics) to take advantage of the area as a destination Accessibility is an issue – particularly with Luther Younger population is growing – need to provide Village seniors residence (Father David Bauer Dr. more affordable things to do to keep them here fronting the west side of Waterloo Park) Difficult to navigate with inconsistent street Use Seagram Drive as a link between UW and network and lack of wayfinding/signage WLU Pedestrian safety – particularly in park at night (lack of visibility)

#3 vision for this area: • Better connections within Waterloo Park and to the Park (Barrel Yards development, seniors facility, residential neighbourhoods, Wilfrid Laurier University) • Eastern and western sides of the Park well connected • Affordable for small businesses to encourage a broad mix of restaurants/bars/pubs and services that attract young people, provide affordable options and create a more complete community where people want to visit and stay • More Park programming including smaller scale events (folk festivals, movies in the park) that are effectively promoted/marketed to the community • Waterloo Park made safe at all hours – better lighting, visibility, emergency phones • Seamless connectivity between all modes of transportation Council Meeting Page 89 of 409 August 10, 2015 University of Waterloo

#1 what is unique/important about this area: • Lots of workers in the area • Location along a major trail • Intensifying, greater mix of uses and lots of new housing • Brain power of university – “ground zero of innovation in the region/country” and job centre of City • Large, younger population that uses transit, yet surrounded by parking • Multi-modal – GO, IXpress, local buses • Close to Waterloo Park and Uptown

#2 opportunities/challenges

CHALLENGES/ISSUES OPPORTUNITIES University plaza underutilized BlackBerry lands Lots of parking lots Rethink the nature of Ring Road (street grid, biking, pedestrians) Many buildings back onto the future station Campus is interconnected but wayfinding could be improved Winter maintenance and accessibility an issue given Tie disparate parts together large amount of pedestrian activity Campus is growing away from the station Promote more activity at the station and create a destination Ring Road is pedestrian unfriendly Cultural amenities on campus could be promoted more effectively (some students unaware) Lack of east-west connections Create a transit interchange with the university shuttle University Ave. has no pedestrian amenities and is Northdale development not designed for snow University or Columbia not walkable Need to achieve buy-in from university administration Central university storage next to station

#3 vision for this area: • Grid of streets and connections, enjoyable to walk • Complete village with services and amenities at station • Connected to wider city and clear connections • Lots of community programming • Less road/shipping and more of a pedestrian space • High quality architecture and public art • Accelerator hub at RIM lands

Council Meeting Page 90 of 409 August 10, 2015 Research & Technology

#1 what is unique/important about this area: • Young population, used by high tech workers and students • Lots of vacant space, huge blocks: station with more potential to evolve into something completely new • Employment land only • Complete lack of amenities • Uninteresting landscape, plain, sterile, dead after 5pm • Unsafe and uninviting to walk • Proximity to Columbia Lake, Park • East-West disconnected • UW owns lots of land

#2 opportunities/challenges

CHALLENGES/ISSUES OPPORTUNITIES Lack of pedestrian/cycling connections, unsafe Proximity to Park and Columbia Lake, natural, environment to walk, especially during winter. event venue Need trails to lake, to Phillip St Phillip Street has potential to intensify and accommodate facilities Need pedestrian crossings at key intersection and Create/attract more jobs to facilitate e-w connection Employment only – needs mix of uses (daycare, Diversify land uses, bring permissive zoning places to get lunch, restaurants, retail) Lots of vehicular traffic School is underutilized, need for neighbourhood parks Huge blocks – need to break into a finer grain Lots of space for new development UW won’t sell their properties, only lease Create shared facilities for neighbourhood and university Columbia streets is a barrier, no development R&T is deeply connected to UW station facing street Parking

#3 vision for this area: • Mix of uses, with some residential, vertical mix of uses • High tech centre, innovative spaces led by graduates at UW • Highly connected, safe walking environment, inviting roads, integration with GO bus • Dynamic, vibrant, attractive space all day • Green spaces, sustainability, district energy • Amenities for workers and for surrounding neighbourhoods • Streets with continuous built frontages

Council Meeting Page 91 of 409 August 10, 2015 Northfield

#1 what is unique/important about this area: • Good highway access • Major employment/industrial cluster • Large properties • Lots of redevelopment opportunity • Access point to the rest of the City • Potential for future LRT connections • Northfield Racquet and Fitness Centre

#2 opportunities/challenges

CHALLENGES/ISSUES OPPORTUNITIES Lack of identity Attract more jobs and employment Difficult mobility for all modes Transition to more mixed use Lack of amenity or retail for workers LRT enhances the appeal of the area Poor connectivity/area feels disconnected Grid network Need to draw more people in to support demand Support connections to Conestoga Mall station area Stigma of using transit (buses) Public art to create identity/sense of place Expressway creates a barrier/disconnect Expand the active transportation network Need to plan for “modern” employees who don’t Potential park and ride want to be in a traditional office park setting Road congestion and noise issues

#3 vision for this area: • Additional public spaces, with green spaces/courtyards integrated with new development • Improved active transportation network • Space for park and ride facility • Better integration with surrounded uses/sites • More clear station area identity with stronger branding • Greater mix of uses, with additional amenities and retail

Council Meeting Page 92 of 409 August 10, 2015 Conestoga

#1 what is unique/important about this area: • Major highway interchange • Conestoga Mall occupies huge area • Stable residential areas close by • Most auto-oriented out of all station areas • Important job node • GRT terminal • Terminus station • Stable industrial area along Colby Drive

#2 opportunities/challenges

CHALLENGES/ISSUES OPPORTUNITIES Conestoga Mall can be a physical barrier (difficult Conestoga Mall presents greatest opportunity for to get through, not always open) infill/redevelopment Area is not “porous”, difficult to walk/cycle/get around Improved King Street crossings Poor connectivity and poor access to neighbourhoods LRT enhances the appeal of the area Improved connectivity, more bike lanes, trails and sidewalks Pedestrian and cycling safety Redevelop car dealerships, integrate them into high-density buildings Paths and trails don’t always connect or aren’t Policies to support mixed use, higher-densities, clear residential uses Difficult to get to the LRT station without a car Design guidelines for an improved/consistent King Street Industrial/employment areas difficult to access Create a station identity Lexington Road crossing narrow for pedestrians Park and ride facility at the mall Station area could be expanded to include the Manulife offices and area south of Conestogo Parkway

#3 vision for this area: • Intensify Conestoga Mall with mixed-use and higher-density development, 24h of activity • Tree-lined boulevard/green corridor along King Street with multi-use trail • Improved transit, walking, cycling and sidewalk connections to and from the station • Retain some industrial, but improve connectivity • Hydro corridor becomes a dedicated trail/ROW • More transit-supportive uses • Residential areas well-connected to the station

Council Meeting Page 93 of 409 August 10, 2015 APPENDIX B – SUMMARY OF KEY DIRECTIONS FROM VISIONING WORKSHOP ROUNDTABLES (from June 16, 2015) On June 16, 2015, stakeholders and the public discussed a range of topics on each Station Area. The following reflects the comments that were put forward and accepted by the other participants at each table.

Laurier-Waterloo Park 1. Transform Seagram Drive as an important gateway to WLU and the University of Waterloo a. Improved streetscaping with new plantings, benches, design elements, etc. b. Needs to be a complete street. Street has had an auto focus, and could now have a pedestrian focus c. Improve the walk to Laurier with amenities along Seagram Drive – cafes, services, groceries, etc. d. Install sidewalks along Seagram Drive e. Bring the Waterloo Park frontage and amenities to the Seagram Drive street edge 2. Enhance the station with a new amenity hub a. Coffee shops, restaurants, small-scale services, retail, public washrooms b. Plan for a major public art piece or park gateway feature along Seagram Drive 3. Foster a strong relationship between the station and Wilfrid Laurier University a. Consider signage, wayfinding, and university branding b. Enhance pedestrian routes to the University c. Consider bike share opportunities between the station and the University 4. Enhance walkability and active transportation options from the station to major destinations a. Move away from a “car culture” by making walking and cycling more enjoyable b. Enhance the Laurel Trail as a major active transportation connection 5. Improve wayfinding across the station area a. Within Waterloo Park and surrounding communities, use maps and signage to direct visitors to various areas of the park, universities and other destinations b. Particularly important with new students arriving every year who are unfamiliar with the area 6. Provide efficientlocal transit links a. Consider the creation of a frequent bus loop timed with the LRT and connecting to WLU, Conestoga College, the Perimeter Institute, Luther Village, and recreational uses 7. Improve pedestrian safety a. Ensure trails are well lit and clear of underbrush, and maintained throughout the year b. Provide emergency call boxes at key trail intersections and along the Central Promenade c. Improve challenging intersections (King/University, Caroline/Erb) through traffic calming 8. Improve access to the new festival space from the station a. Consider a new trail connection providing a more direct link to the festival space b. Design trails leading toward the festival space for high volumes of pedestrians 9. Promote the station area as a cultural and recreational hub a. Improve relationships between existing cultural and recreational facilities 10. Strengthen the station area’s relationship with Uptown a. Promote Father David Bauer Drive and the Waterloo Park Promenade as important links 11. Manage parking a. Rethink planned surface parking around the periphery of the park b. Parking should be “convenient but not adjacent” c. Consider opportunities for shared parking with the universities during off hours 12. Plan for more affordable housing options a. Large number of students and seniors in the area, but range of affordable housing is very limited 13. Promote higher-density development while maintaining a low to mid-rise built form a. New development should frame the park while protecting views b. Use stepbacks to maintain low to mid-rise built form at street level c. Transform Westmount Place into a more urban commercial destination 14. Create a strong Waterloo Park entrance a. Consider new amenities along Seagram Drive Council Meeting Page 94 of 409 August 10, 2015 University of Waterloo 1. Transform the Phillip Street corridor into a more urban and vibrant boulevard over time a. Develop a network of connected public spaces b. Create an experience by providing more amenities and a greater range of uses 2. Strengthen the network of parks and green spaces a. Develop new green spaces or publicly accessible open spaces along the Phillip Street corridor b. Create green gateways/complete streets through Northdale c. New open spaces at WCI, UW (South Common Initiative) and at Laurier d. Link the network of green spaces and support connections to the Laurel Trail and Waterloo Park 3. Consider the merits of an intermodal transit hub around the station a. Facilitate the integration of busses, LRT users, cyclists and pedestrians around the station b. Consider a transit hub at Seagram Drive as a potential alternative location c. Support access to surrounding destinations such as WLU and Northdale d. Improve transit service to West Campus and along Westmount Road 4. Transform University Avenue into a more inviting, contemporary avenue that serves as a gateway into two university campuses a. Introduce green elements, landscaping and pedestrian treatment b. Create a more welcoming frontage with wider sidewalks c. Consider showcasing a joint academic identity between UW and WLU 5. Enhance campus development and support placemaking and amenities around the station a. Create a node around the station b. Introduce a greater range of amenities (retail, personal services, restaurants, food trucks, fitness facilities, etc.) to support activity around the station c. Provide opportunities for students to socialize, eat, study or recreate d. Support a range and diversity of users, including students, visitors, workers and residents 6. Link surrounding neighbourhoods to the station a. Create connections to the Beechwood and Northdale communities b. Link to surrounding schools, public spaces and other community facilities c. Strengthen students’ connection with the community to support student retention 7. Develop a fine-grained bicycle and pedestrian network around the campus a. Improve north-south bike connections through Northdale b. Enhance Columbia Street as a key connection to R&T Park c. Ensure safe University Avenue crossings d. Transform local roads into more pedestrian/cycling-friendly complete streets 8. Support innovation and business development a. Leverage relationships between UW, WLU, R&T Park, and the Waterloo Innovation Network 9. Support investments in public art and culture a. Introduce experiential public art that leverages the range of arts and cultural amenities in the area b. Support interactions with space and amenities, such as the Laurel Trail, Peter Russel Gardens, the Humanities Theatre, etc. c. Provide new arts and cultural amenities along key desire lines/routes d. Offer discovery walks / district tours 10. Improve wayfinding to provide direction to key public destinations a. Provide maps, signage and discovery plaques b. Support access to Sugarbush Park, the MacGregor-Albert neighbourhood, Waterloo Park, Columbia Lake, Phillip Street, Alumni fields, and other major destinations 11. Make improvements to Westmount Road to create a comfortable pedestrian environment a. Undertake sidewalk improvements and consider new cycling facilities b. Support safe pedestrian crossings at University Avenue and Columbia

Council Meeting Page 95 of 409 August 10, 2015 Research & Technology 1. The station has the potential to become a Global Centre of Innovation, attracting new businesses and innovative start-ups. a. Could become a Sustainable Centre of Excellence, or a world class employment hub renowned for the high quality of its enterprises and for its high-quality architecture. 2. R&T as a vibrant mixed-use community that could include residential uses in strategic locations. It can become a place to live, work and play, and attract young professionals. a. Amenities could include: restaurants, coffee shops, daycares, medical clinics, personal services, etc. b. Residential uses, if contemplated, should be concentrated at the station and/or at strategic locations c. Create frontages to the street d. Phase development over time, anticipating a gradual change rather than an abrupt one e. Development of structured parking is market dependent 3. Phillip Street as a new vibrant mixed-use corridor and gateway a. Create a sense of place with new plazas and office courtyards b. Capitalize on its proximity to two university campuses and the R&T Park innovation hub c. Focus on pedestrian and cycling connections d. Enhance the streetscape to make walking more enjoyable e. Potential to create a boulevard with tree canopy 4. ION stop to become a transit hub connected with buses, pedestrians and cyclists a. Develop an appropriate modal split strategy b. Introduce bicycle and car sharing programs c. Provide electric charging stations as part of new development d. Consider a shuttle bus service to other employment centres 5. Address the lack of infrastructure and need for more appropriate block size. a. Need for a finer grained street/trail network to create a sense of place and a more human-scaled environment b. Potential for new roads (public/private) or connections including: • from Phillip St. to the LRT Station • from Phillip Street to Albert Street • mid-block between Columbia and where Albert meets Phillip Street 6. Reconsider parking rates to support transit-supportive development a. Tenants are currently requesting 4-5 spaces/1,000sqft, but there is a desire to lower this requirement to support transit-oriented development b. Incorporate Transportation Demand Management initiatives, such as shared parking arrangements between properties, contributions to a bike share program, and transit pass incentives, to support a reduction in parking c. Shift away from surface parking closest to the station 7. Develop a new green spine/trail system and an improved wayfinding strategy to link open spaces in the Columbia neighbourhood (eg. Sugarbush Park) to Columbia Lake and the Lakeshore Neighbourhood.

Council Meeting Page 96 of 409 August 10, 2015 Northfield 1. Introduce an interconnected trail network to provide amenity and improve connectivity a. Utilize existing natural and stormwater management areas b. Consider incorporating district-wide stormwater management features 2. Create a comfortable and inviting pedestrian realm at the station a. Focus on the development of a plaza space supported by active uses b. Implement the Northfield Drive widening c. Support transfers to iXpress d. Provide less softscaping immediately around the station, and shift stormwater management away from the station, to support intensification 3. Shift the planned public square on the former NCR lands south where it can support a more mixed- use station area and better relate to Northfield Drive a. Orient the square to improve connectivity into the site b. Help to create an address for new residential uses 4. Establish a finer-grained network of streets and connections to support higher densities and a mix of uses a. Support access to properties and address potential turning restrictions b. Help to establish shared driveways c. Create a north-south connection from Northfield Drive to Randall Drive d. Improve viability of shuttle services 5. Amenitize the area to make it more attractive for area employees taking transit a. Amenities should be integrated with employment uses, not as standalone buildings 6. Create a generous and well-planted public realm along the primary street grid a. Sufficient setbacks for sidewalks, boulevard, and street trees b. Account for road widenings 7. Design areas of surface parking to facilitate pedestrian connectivity a. Shift parking away from the station to shared locations b. Introduce planted boulevards with sidewalks to create a finer walking grid c. Break down large areas of surface parking and set up a future block structure 8. Create a pilot transit circulator to connect area businesses to the station a. Timed to coincide with LRT schedule (every 10-15 minutes) and local business hours b. Smaller buses that can adapt to growing demand 9. Establish a local bike share service connecting the station to key destinations/businesses a. Sponsored by local businesses, but connected to a larger municipal program over time b. Tourist access to St. Jacobs 10. Encourage shared parking and reduced standards a. Allow for parking reductions for mixed-use developments b. Support off-site parking in zoning by-law 11. Support limited residential at the station a. Most appropriate on sites abutting the station b. Designed to create complete integrated environments, not isolated residential uses c. Must include a mix of uses integrated vertically to activate the station area d. Active uses at street level 12. Develop urban design standards to improve the character and image of the station area a. Focus on key streets and ensure the provision of active street frontages b. Introduce restrictions to surface parking locations and shift parking away from the station c. Access and loading guidelines

Council Meeting Page 97 of 409 August 10, 2015 Conestoga 1. Improve connectivity throughout the area to enable more transit-oriented development and other public realm and streetscape improvements a. Finer-grained street grid and smaller blocks b. Enhanced cycling/pedestrian infrastructure c. Safe crossings, including King Street and Northfield Drive 2. Improve access to sites where the LRT runs along the street right-of-way a. Consider strategies to improve access to the “Conestoga Triangle” b. Allow more flexible land uses to optimize future development on challenging sites c. Create new street connections/enhanced grid pattern d. Create a potential new street or connection through the hydro corridor, or utilize the corridor for parking 3. Support the continued intensification of Conestoga Mall to create a higher-density and transit-oriented place a. Create a more people-friendly space around the mall b. Introduce a greater mix of office, entertainment, institutional, and residential uses c. Create a direct connection or weather-protected link between the mall and the station d. Accommodate parking within a structured garage, preferably at the north end of the site e. Improve the site’s permeability to support connections towards the Lincoln community 4. Improve pedestrian and cyclist safety a. Reduce traffic speeds and provide safe crossings b. Connect existing trails/bikeways and provide new infrastructure c. Extend the cycling lane eastward along Northfield d. Create safe and visible access points to and from the station for pedestrians 5. Undertake King Street streetscape improvements a. Extend the recent streetscape improvements along the southern end of King Street northward b. Create an identity or gateway experience through public realm improvements and wayfinding c. Add sidewalks on the west side, and ensure safe crossings 6. Strengthen the Northfield/King retail nodeand create more active street frontages a. Bring retail closer to the street to help define the intersection b. Relocate parking and loading to the rear of buildings 7. Create new local parks and open spaces to address the lack of public green space a. Create places to sit, relax and socialize b. Integrate small public spaces along King Street and Northfield Drive 8. Reconfigure bus routes to better link to the LRT a. Support bus route access by improving connections and enhancing the street grid b. Ensure bus routes provide frequent and direct service to the LRT station c. Introduce a potential GRT circulator linking Northfield Station through the north industrial area, and then to Conestoga Station 9. Strategically manage parking and reduce parking rates for new development a. Consider removing minimum parking rates and introducing maximums b. Ensure that rates are not reduced to a point that causes spillover onto other properties c. Locate parking behind buildings to support more active at-grade uses 10. Introduce new zoning along King Street a. Allow for more pedestrian and transit-oriented commercial uses b. Consider opportunities for new residential 11. Maintain affordable housing and nearby apartments a. Support rental housing b. Provide connections to support access to the station for residents

Council Meeting Page 98 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Engineering Services Title: Advanced Timing of Infrastructure Agreement (ATOI): Westside Employment Collector Report Number: IPPW 2015-076 Author: Thomas Daniel Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: Attachments: Location Maps

Ward No.: Ward 2 - Northwest

Recommendation:

1. That IPPW2015-076 be approved.

A. Executive Summary

West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. has requested to enter into an Advanced Timing of Infrastructure Agreement (ATOI) for the construction of approximately 300 m of the Westside Employment Collector Road that will ultimately connect the Columbia Street Extension with Erb Street West. Funding for this work has been identified in the 2017 Capital Forecast (ref# 676) and the Development Charge (DC) Background Study (DC31).

City staff support this request as it will allow for the early completion of a segment of the Westside Employment Collector Road that is needed for future north-south transportation access between Erb Street West and the Columbia Street Extension. This construction work is also required by West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. To provide access to their development project at 924 & 930 Erb Street West.

Council Meeting Page 99 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

B. Financial Implications ATOI agreements are often requested by developers as a means to advance DC- funded works in situations where City and private-sector schedules for construction timing do not align. The City has entered into ATOI agreements with other developers in the past to advance engineered works such as sewers, water mains and roads. In this situation, West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. wishes to advance road construction before the City’s DC funds are available in 2017. Under an ATOI agreement, the City will reimburse West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. with Development Charge funds and the City of Waterloo Industrial Land Account (ILA) funds for approved expenditures related to the Westside Employment Collector Road and Street ‘A’ road works in accordance with Agreement provisions. Reimbursement will be made when the funds are available on or after 2017 as per the approved Capital Budget.

The City’s share of the proposed works is within the approved capital budget allocation of Development Charge funds and ILA funds, as outlined in table 1.

Table 1: Funding and Estimated Costs:

Description Developer City of City of Total Waterloo (DC) Waterloo (ILA) (incl HST) Funding $334,491.39 $1,101,000.00 $1,113,000.00 $2,548,491.39 Expenditures $334,491.39 $280,225.56 $448,847.07 $1,063,564.02 Balance* $0 $820,774.44 $664,152.93 $1,484,927.37 *Amount remaining for completion of road segment

The Developer will cover any amount in excess of the City budgeted amount.

The tendered amount for the works including overhead, administrative expenses, and contingency is within the current approved capital budget.

In addition to the advanced financing of the Westside Employment Collector Road, West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. will be required to pay the City’s costs for preparation of the ATOI agreement.

C. Technology Implications There are no technological implications with respect to this report.

D. Legal Considerations Legal Counsel has reviewed the Agreement and confirmed that it is acceptable.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

The following linkages to the City’s Strategic Plan have been identified:

Council Meeting Page 100 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Multi-modal Transportation – Design includes sidewalks, multi-use trails, and bicycle lanes in accordance with current standards

Strong Community – improves safety in adjacent developments by redirecting traffic infiltration from local streets and minor Collectors to major Collector and arterial roads

Environmental Leadership – efficient traffic networks reduce travel time, idling and emission levels

Corporate Excellence – fostering partnership with local industry in working toward a common goal

Economic Development – provides required access to City owned employment lands encouraging development and economic growth

F. Previous Reports on this Topic There are no previous reports on this topic.

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Thomas Daniel Director: Ron Ormson Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 101 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Advanced Timing of Infrastructure Agreement (ATOI): Westside Employment Collector IPPW 2015-076

Section 1 – Background

The City’s Advanced Timing of Infrastructure Policy was approved by Council in June 2006 (DS-06-47). This policy allows the City to consider developer proposals to advance the timing for the installation of municipal infrastructure that has been previously identified in the Capital Budget and the Development Charge Background Study. Timing for construction of municipal works is determined largely by the City’s ability to fund those projects. In certain cases where developers propose to assume the costs and financial risks, it may be appropriate to advance the construction schedule for the proposed infrastructure.

West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. has requested to enter into an Advanced Timing of Infrastructure Agreement (ATOI) for the construction of the Westside Employment Collector Road to allow for construction of the Costco store at 924 & 930 Erb Street West.

Section 2 – Westside Employment Collector

The Westside Employment Collector will provide access to the City owned employment lands and will reduce traffic volumes on Columbia Street and local roads within Clair Meadows. The ultimate design of the Westside Employment Collector road consists of approximately 900 m of two-lane roadway, complete with storm sewer, sidewalk, cycling facilities, street lighting, and asphalt.

At this time, it is proposed to construct approximately 300m of the roadway from Erb Street West to the proposed Street ‘A’ intersection in order to facilitate access for a future 8.1 ha (20 acre) commercial retail centre including a proposed Costco store. Council approved the Land Exchange Agreement on March 3, 2014, which set out the conditions and requirements including approvals, construction, and financial obligations of the agreement to transfer/convey the lands.

The construction of the first leg of the Westside Employment Collector road is planned for August 2015 in anticipation of construction and opening of the Costco by August 2016. Servicing and road works have been designed by Stantec Consulting Ltd. on behalf of West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. A publicly advertised competitive tender for the works was issued and closed on July 21st. Stantec has recommended that the work be awarded to the lowest bidder Terracon Underground Ltd.

Council Meeting Page 102 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Section 3 – Financial Implications

In reference line 676 of the approved 2015 capital budget, total funding of $1,101,000.00 from the Development Charges account is allocated in 2016 and 2017 for the Westside Employment Collector. A portion of these funds would be reimbursed to West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. as outlined in the Advanced Timing of Infrastructure agreement.

Section 4 – Conclusions

Staff supports this request as it will allow for the construction of the West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd. development, and facilitate access to the Westside Employment lands and allow for greater traffic distribution once connected to Columbia Street West to reduce traffic impacts in west Waterloo. This report is supportive of the previous land exchange agreement between the City of waterloo and West Waterloo Retail GP Ltd approved by the Council on March 3, 2014.

Council Meeting Page 103 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

DETAIL PLAN

Council Meeting Page 104 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

SITE

KEY PLAN

Council Meeting Page 105 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Engineering Services

Title: Award of RFP15-10: Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report Report Number: IPPW2015-075 Author: Bill Garibaldi and Cassandra Pacey Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: 140028 Attachments: N/A Ward No.: All

Recommendation:

1. That Council approve report IPPW2015-075.

2. That Council approves the award of contract RFP15-10 – Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report to GM BluePlan Engineering Limited at the submitted price of $695,195.00 (plus applicable taxes).

A. Executive Summary

Proposals were solicited via RFP15-10 to undertake an Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report. The report will serve as a comprehensive guiding document for infrastructure asset management in order to maximize benefits, manage risk, and provide satisfactory levels of service to the public in a sustainable manner. RFP15-10 also included the creation of Water Distribution Master Plan to take advantage of efficiencies in data gathering. Upon completion, the Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report will provide the necessary information for Staff to create a Comprehensive Asset Management Plan (the “Plan”) for consideration and approval by Council.

Council Meeting Page 106 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Technical and financial proposals received from three (3) qualified firms were evaluated by the consultant selection team in accordance with the City of Waterloo’s Purchasing By-Law. Based on the evaluation, it is recommended that GM BluePlan Engineering Limited be awarded the above assignment.

B. Financial Implications

On December 9, 2013, Council approved IPPW2013-084 – Corporate Asset Management Plan and the development of a corporate asset management plan using a combination of in-house, and contract staff plus extensive use of a specialized and experienced consultant. Then on May 12, 2014, Council approved IPPW2014-046 – Funding Request-Corporate Asset Management Plan which included capital of $920,000 and the approval to hire the contract project manager. Subsequently, Council approved IPPW2015-022 – Funding Approval and Council Appointment to Steering Committee - Corporate Asset Management Plan Request. As part of that report, $423,000 in capital funding was approved along with the appointment of the Chair of the Finance Committee to the project steering committee.

The award of contract RFP15-10 to GM BluePlan Engineering Limited is within the approved Capital Budget. See table 2 for additional financial details.

C. Technology Implications None

D. Legal Considerations Legal Counsel has reviewed the proposal and did not identify any significant issues.

The development of the Plan will support all areas of the strategic plan through the provision of infrastructure which is sustainable.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic • IPPW2013-084 Corporate Asset Management Plan • IPPW2014-046 Funding Approval – Corporate Asset Management Plan • IPPW2015-022 Funding Approval and Council Appointment to Steering Committee – Corporate Asset Management Plan

Council Meeting Page 107 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Bill Garibaldi Author: Cassandra Pacey Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 108 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Award of RFP15-10: Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report IPPW2015-075

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS

Section 1 - Background In December 2014, Council approved report IPPW2014-127 Interim Asset Management Plan to meet the Provincial requirements established by the Ministry of Infrastructure document: Building Together, Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans. At this time, the Province only requires roads, bridges, water and wastewater systems assets to be included in a plan. The guide does note however, that it is best practice to develop a plan that covers all infrastructure assets for which the municipality is responsible.

In order to achieve this best practice, Council approved the creation of a Corporate Asset Management Plan (the “Plan”) which will include all infrastructure assets for which the City is responsible.

Schedule

The project plan, with updates, is summarized as follows:  Retain contract project manager – completed December 2014  Develop internal asset management project team – February 2015  Complete RFI/RFP – May 2015  Retain consultant – subject of this report • *Create Corporate Asset Management Plan for all assets – October 2016 *Note: A more detailed project plan will be developed in conjunction with the selected consultant and will be communicated in future reporting.

Section 2 - Procurement Process On May 21, 2015 RFP15-10 was advertised on Biddingo, requesting submissions from qualified engineering consultants. Upon closing on June 22, 2015, proposals were received from three (3) firms using a two-envelope system (separate technical and financial components) as required by the Purchasing By-law. The proposal evaluation process was facilitated by Tracie Bell, Manager of Purchasing and the evaluation was undertaken by the consultant selection team, consisting of:

• Councillor Jeff Henry – Corporate Asset Management Plan Steering Committee • Jeff Little – Manager, Engineering Infrastructure

Council Meeting Page 109 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Roslyn Lusk – Director, Transportation Services • Sunda Siva – Director, Facilities and Fleet • Cassandra Pacey – Financial Analyst • Milos Posavljak – Project Manager, Corporate Asset Management Plan • Bill Garibaldi - Project Director, Corporate Asset Management Plan

The financial envelopes were opened only after the technical reviews were completed. Table 1 below lists the proponents, in order of final ranking after considering both technical and financial requirements.

Table 1: Consultant Evaluation Summary

Consultant Name Proposal Price HST Total Including HST GM BluePlan Engineering $695,195.00 $90,375.35 $785,570.35 Limited Associated Engineering (Ont.) $899,829.00 $116,977.77 $1,016,806.77 Ltd. KPMG LLP $882,156.50 $114,680.35 $996,836.85

Section 3 - Financial Implications

On December 9, 2013, Council approved IPPW2013-084 – Corporate Asset Management Plan and the development of a corporate asset management plan using a combination of in-house, and contract staff plus extensive use of a specialized and experienced consultant. Then on May 14, 2014, Council approved IPPW2014-046 – Funding Request-Corporate Asset Management Plan which included capital of $920,000 and the approval to hire the contract project manager. Subsequently, Council approved IPPW2015-022 – Funding Approval and Council Appointment to Steering Committee - Corporate Asset Management Plan Request. As part of that report, $423,000 in capital funding was approved along with the appointment of Chair of the Finance Committee to the project steering committee.

The award of contract RFP15-10 to GM BluePlan Engineering Limited is within the approved Capital Budget. See table 2 for additional financial details.

Council Meeting Page 110 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Table 2: Funding Approvals to Date and Estimated Costs:

Expenditures Funding Projected Description Report Number Approval Date Funding *(including Source Balance HST) FUNDING: Funding - 2014 IPPW2014-046 May 12, 2014 GTR $(700,000) Funding - 2014 IPPW2014-046 May 12, 2014 CRF $(120,000) Funding - 2014 IPPW2014-046 May 12, 2014 DC $(49,800) Funding - 2014 IPPW2014-046 May 12, 2014 WAT $(50,200) Funding - 2015 IPPW2015-022 Feb. 23, 2015 CRF $(423,000) Total Funding $(1,343,000) $(1,343,000) EXPENDITURES INCURRED TO DATE: Overhead $25,380 Contract Staff IPPW2014-046 May 12, 2014 $63,129 Miscellaneous (Includes but not $3,626 limited to Misc, Contingency, etc.) Total Expenditures $92,135 $(1,250,865) Incurred to Date PROJECTED

EXPENDITURES: **Award RFP15-10 (Infrastructure Asset IPPW2015-075 Aug. 10, 2015 $707,430 Management Analysis Report) Overhead $65,453 Contract Staff IPPW2014-046 May 12, 2014 $188,228 Miscellaneous (Includes but not $289,754 limited to Misc, Contingency, etc.) Total Projected $1,250,865 $1,250,865 Expenditures Total $(1,343,000) $1,343,000 $0 *Note: unrecoverable portion of HST included **Note: RFP price refers to the bid price of $695,195 from Table 1 plus unrecoverable HST

Council Meeting Page 111 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Engineering Services

Title: Release of Funds and Approval of Terms of Reference for the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (Waterloo West Side) Report Number: IPPW2015-078 Author: Phil Hewitson Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: Waterloo West Side Attachments: Attachment ‘A’ - Study Terms of Reference (TOR) Ward No.: Ward 1 Southwest & Ward 2 Northwest

Recommendation:

1. That IPPW2015-078 be approved. 2. That Council approve un-budgeted capital funding for the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study in the amount of $100,000 from the West Side Industrial Land Account.

A. Executive Summary Lands on the west side of the City of Waterloo are designated in the Official Plan for development over the next several years. These “west side lands” lie between the Ira Needles Blvd/Erbsville Road corridor, and the north, west and south boundaries of the City. Official Plan designations include residential, employment, retail, commercial, open- space and parkland development, as well as environmentally-sensitive areas to be protected. Development of the west side area, along with continued growth in other areas of the City and neighbouring municipalities will place increasing demands on the City and Region transportation network. On April 7, 2014, Council directed staff to undertake an Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (IMMTS) to analyze and address the transportation needs of Waterloo’s West Side Lands, and to hold a public open house to allow the public to provide comments on existing and future traffic concerns. The public open house was held on March 26, 2015, but the study was delayed until the developer’s appeal to the

Council Meeting Page 112 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) was addressed by the City. Council was advised of the OMB decision on April 27, 2015. Using the attached TOR, City staff will issue a Request for Proposal to retain a consultant to undertake the IMMTS, which is scheduled to begin this fall and be completed by Spring 2016. The study process will provide opportunities for input from property owners within the study area and the public. The study will inform the planning process for development and staging of the City’s West Side Employment Lands, the proposed West Side Collector Road from Erb Street to Columbia Street and other improvements to the transportation network. The study will include analysis, feasibility and costing of a new collector road parallel to Ira Needles Blvd. from Erb Street to the Ira Needles Commercial Centre. As per the April 2014 resolution from Council, the integrated multi modal traffic analysis (including existing and planned development) is to be completed and accepted to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Integrated Planning and Public Works. The findings of the study will be used to inform Planning and Engineering Staff about future design considerations for the West Side Employment Lands that will ultimately return to Council for approval.

B. Financial Implications Funding of $100,000 is requested from the West Side Industrial Land Account to retain a consultant to prepare the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (Waterloo West Side). These funds are un-budgeted. The study will benefit the Westside Employment Lands (WEL). The study will assess traffic impacts on the City and Regional transportation network related to the development of the WEL. The study is anticipated to scope the traffic impact study requirements for the WEL, thereby justifying the use of ILA funding. The deficit balance in the consolidated City Wide ILA is $9.16M, with the amount pertaining to the West Side Lands being a $2.64M of that total deficit. This deficit is intended to be offset by the eventual sale and proceeds of the lands.

C. Technology Implications N/A

D. Legal Considerations N/A

E. Link to Strategic Plan Multi-modal Transportation The Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (IMMTS) will analyze the transportation needs for the west side of the City to the study horizon year of 2031, and recommend transportation network improvements that will accommodate all modes of transportation, in accordance with the Transportation Master Plan.

Council Meeting Page 113 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Strong Community The IMMTS will provide opportunities to consult with land owners, the general public, and review agencies to develop a transportation plan that meets the needs of the community. Environmental Leadership The IMMTS will consider the impacts of transportation improvements on the natural environment and recommend options to mitigate any negative impacts. Economic Development The IMMTS will address the transportation need to support the development of lands designated for residential, employment, and commercial uses.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic DS04-05 West Side Traffic Design Analysis IPPW2014-006 Official Plan Amendment & Zone Change Application Z-13-06 924 & Part of 930 Erb St. West

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Phil Hewitson

Director: Ron Ormson

Commissioner: Cameron Rapp

Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 114 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Appendix A Terms of Reference Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (IMMTS) Waterloo West Side

Council Meeting Page 115 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Integrated Planning & Public Works Engineering Services

TERMS OF REFERENCE

INTEGRATED MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION STUDY (WATERLOO WEST SIDE)

July 2015

INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (IMMTS) is to evaluate the implications of increased development in west Waterloo on the transportation system, and provide recommendations on: (1) transportation network and operational improvements to respond to growth; and (2) how to expand, connect, and integrate active transportation and transit in the study area. This Terms of Reference sets out the framework for the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study, to be undertaken as a comprehensive transportation planning analysis by a professional consultant.

STUDY AREA The Study Area is west Waterloo, more specifically the lands west of and including Erbsville Road and Ira Needles Boulevard in the City of Waterloo. The Study Area may extend into the City of Kitchener and Township of Wilmot with respect to travel connectivity and transportation impacts. The Study Area is comprised of a range of residential, commercial, employment, municipal, and open space lands, and includes:

• The Boardwalk (commercial centre) • West Side Marketplace (commercial centre) • Waterloo Commons (commercial centre) • Region of Waterloo Waste Management Site (landfill) • Columbia Forest, Columbia Forest II, and Clair Hills neighbourhoods • and future planned development including:

- West Waterloo Commercial Centre (commercial centre, anchored by Costco)

- West Side Employment Lands (~48 hectares)

- planned employment and commercial lands west of Ira Needles Boulevard, south of Erb Street West

Council Meeting Page 116 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

- Vista Hills (~1500 residential homes, under construction)

The Study Area is illustrated in Figure 1 (attached).

TRANSPORTATION CONTEXT Strategic transportation planning documents have been prepared by the Region of Waterloo and the City of Waterloo that include the Study Area, including: 1. The Region of Waterloo Transportation Master Plan (RTMP), which defines how the regional transportation system will expand and change over the coming decades, focusing on more travel choices, affordability, sustainability, connectivity, active transportation, rapid transit, and the movement of goods.

2. The City of Waterloo Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which provides strategic planning for local transportation planning and decision-making, focusing on accessibility, travel choice, health and sustainability, fiscal efficiencies, and “complete streets”.

Both the RTMP and the City’s TMP recognize the significance of the automobile in both the existing and future transportation network, but seek to enhance multi-modal systems of walking, cycling, and transit where feasible to provide transportation balance. In addition to the RTMP and the City’s TMP, the Regional Official Plan and the City’s Official Plan contain transportation planning policies aimed at creating a safer and more sustainable transportation system, limiting automobile reliance, and minimizing vehicular traffic impacts. Transportation Impact Studies (TIS) have been prepared for most of the substantive developments in west Waterloo, although most focus on site specific impacts rather than comprehensive (network) and cumulative impacts.

OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study for west Waterloo are: a) to consolidate and align recent transportation studies and data for west Waterloo; b) to determine targets for network operations; c) to evaluate the transportation network and related intersection operations (capacities, constraints, impacts, opportunities, and targets) in west Waterloo to full build-out of the community; d) to evaluate transit, active transportation, and transportation demand management (TDM) options for west Waterloo, and provide recommendations on how to foster same;

Council Meeting Page 117 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works e) to evaluate land use and phasing options for designated employment lands; f) to evaluate opportunities to expand the transportation network to enhance connectivity; g) to evaluate transportation network options for the West Hill District; h) to identify transportation improvements to enhance the operations of the transportation system; i) to coordinate municipal capital works, and align said works with the planned development; j) to develop a comprehensive update for transportation master planning specific to the study area; k) to educate and engage the public and interested stakeholders in transportation planning for west Waterloo.

ISSUES Issues related to the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study include: 1. the ability to expand the transportation network, in particular south of Erb Street; 2. establishing land use and phasing options for the designated West Side Employment Lands; 3. consolidating information and data from existing transportation studies where assumptions and methodologies differ; 4. land and infrastructure constraints, including: (a) the location and operations of the Waterloo Waste Management Site (landfill); (b) hydro and utility infrastructure; (c) grading and drainage; (d) building setbacks; and (e) the natural environment. 5. coordinating municipal capital budgets given budget constraints and priorities; 6. implementing recommended improvements where jurisdiction rests with authorities other than the City of Waterloo; 7. determining best practices for transportation network design relative to community expectations; 8. funding recommended improvements to the transportation network.

PROCESS The Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study will follow the steps below: Step 1 Draft Terms of Reference presented to the community for input by City staff.

Council Meeting Page 118 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 8 Integrated Planning & Public Works Step 2 Council receiving the proposed Terms of Reference for the IMMTS. Step 3 Council approval of the IMMTS Terms of Reference. Step 4 Formation of a Technical Advisory Team comprised of City staff, Regional staff, Wilmot Township staff, and key agencies. The team will be consulted at key milestones as determined through the development of a Technical Work Plan. City staff to include: • Transportation Services • Active Transportation & LRT • Engineering Services • Planning Approvals • Fire Rescue Services • Economic Development

Step 5 Request for proposals to retain a consultant to undertake the IMMTS. Step 6 Selection of a consultant to undertake the IMMTS by a Consultant Selection Committee. Step 7 Consultant to develop a Technical Work Plan for the IMMTS, for approval by the City in consultation with the Region. Step 8 Consultant to review: (1) existing transportation information, data, methodologies, and policies; and (2) existing development in the Study Area. Step 9 Consultant to host an open house to receive input from (and share information with) interested persons. Step 10 Consultant to conduct agency and stakeholder consultation, in particular the Region of Waterloo, City of Kitchener, Township of Wilmot, and Committees of Council such as WACAT. Step 11 Consultant to commence the IMMTS based on the objectives of the study and with consideration of input from interested persons, agencies, and stakeholders. Without restricting the scope of the study, the IMMTS shall: • inventory pending development within the Study Area, and determine development densities for designated employment lands; • describe planned road improvements within the Study Area, including:

- construction of a new collector road between Columbia Street and Erb Street at Gate 2 of the Regional Waste Management Site (landfill)

- widening of Ira Needles Boulevard with by-pass lanes at Erb Street West

- improvements to Erb Street West (Erb Street Environmental Assessment including possible modifications to the Wilmot Line intersection)

- improvements to Columbia Street West;

Council Meeting Page 119 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 9 Integrated Planning & Public Works • evaluate existing traffic relative to the current transportation network; • evaluate active transportation and transit within the Study Area; • forecast future traffic based on the Region of Waterloo’s transportation model to full build-out of the community, including the following projects, incorporating traffic forecasts from available studies:

- The Boardwalk

- 101 Ira Needles Boulevard

- Cressman Lands

- Former West Hill Golf Course Lands (Home Hardware)

- Waterloo Commons

- Westside Marketplace

- Vista Hills Community

- Emery Homes Lands

- Sifton Lands

- West Side Employment Lands (City of Waterloo)

- West Waterloo Commercial Centre (Rice Commercial Group); • identify and complete a preliminary evaluation of: (1) options to enhance the transportation network and its operations, including transportation network improvements, jurisdictions, and capital costs; (2) options to enhance active transportation and transit within the Study Area. Step 11 Shall include a Discussion Paper with: (1) open house to inform the public and solicit feedback from interested persons; and (2) presentation to Waterloo City Council. Step 12 Consultant to revise and update the IMMTS (as required, with necessary analysis) based on input received from the Discussion Paper open house and presentation to Council as required by Step 11. Step 13 Consultant to prepare a Final Report containing a recommended Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Plan (IMMTP) for the Study Area. If necessary, prepare alternative options for transportation network and operations improvements. Step 13 shall include: (1) consultation with the Region of Waterloo to obtain acceptance of the IMMTP; and (2) presentation to Waterloo City Council. Step 14 City Council’s consideration of the Final Report. Step 15 Update of transportation master plans to incorporate the approved IMMTP.

Council Meeting Page 120 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 10 Integrated Planning & Public Works STAKEHOLDERS AND CONSULTATION GROUPS The following Stakeholders shall be consulted, and may comprise part of the Technical Advisory Team: 1. City of Waterloo, including: a. Integrated Planning & Public Works b. Economic Development c. Waterloo Advisory Committee on Active Transportation (WACAT) d. Fire Rescue Services

2. Regional Municipality of Waterloo, including: a. Transportation and Environmental Services, including Transportation Planning, Transit, Waste Management b. Planning, Development and Legislative Services

3. Township of Wilmot

4. Utility Providers, including: a. Waterloo North Hydro b. Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro c. Hydro One d. Union Gas

The following Consultation Groups are to be consulted: 1. Owners of vacant lands within the Study Area; 2. Owners of lands under development within the Study Area; 3. Laurel Creek Headwaters Environmentally Sensitive Landscape Public Liaison Committee (Region of Waterloo); 4. Neighbourhood Associations within the Study Area; 5. Agencies, including the Grand River Conservation Authority, Waterloo Regional Police, and Emergency Medical Services.

In addition to the Stakeholder and Consultation Groups identified above, the open houses and public meetings will provide an opportunity for interested persons to provide feedback on the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study. Written submission may also be advanced to the consultant and Technical Advisory Team at any time throughout the process.

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS The background documents to be reviewed by the consultant include: • City of Waterloo Official Plan

Council Meeting Page 121 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 11 Integrated Planning & Public Works • City of Waterloo Transportation Master Plan • City of Waterloo Zoning By-law • Region of Waterloo Official Plan • Region of Waterloo Transportation Master Plan • Transportation impact studies undertaken within the study area since 2000 • Class Environmental Assessments for road improvements within the study area since 2000

STUDY MANAGEMENT AND DELIVERIES The consultant shall prepare a Technical Work Plan to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Integrated Planning & Public Works, outlining the phases, study methodology, approach, and timelines necessary to complete the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (IMMTS). The IMMTS should be completed over the course of approximately 9 months. The Technical Work Plan should reflect an understanding of the transportation network and operational issues within the Study Area, and outline the tasks to be completed in each phase of the IMMTS, by whom, and including: 1. Consultation with the Technical Advisory Team. 2. Anticipated project timeline, divided by key tasks, milestones, and phases. 3. Public consultation process. 4. Stakeholder and agency consultation process. 5. Methodologies and assumptions to be used in the IMMTS. 6. Development of concept plans (options) to modify the transportation network and enhance connectivity. 7. Preparation of reports, presentations, and consultation materials. 8. Scheduling & facilitating the public meetings (open houses, Council meetings). 9. Presenting the IMMTS to Waterloo City Council and Regional Council.

CONSULTATION Consultation will occur at various stages of the IMMTS, as per City practices and as encouraged by the City’s Public Involvement Guidelines. Opportunities for public involvement may include: • Open houses. • Public meetings. • Meetings with individuals as requested. • Email notifications and updates. • Letters to property owners and stakeholders.

Council Meeting Page 122 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 12 Integrated Planning & Public Works • Newspaper advertisements. • Online consultation. • Webpage consultation and notifications. • Social media.

The goal of the consultation is to obtain input from the community and stakeholders to inform the consultant and Council.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Council Waterloo City Council will be responsible for decisions on the IMMTS, taking into consideration input from the community, stakeholders, the consultant, and the Technical Advisory Team.

Consultant The role of the consultant is to prepare the IMMTS including undertaking research and analysis, providing a forum for discussion, developing options and recommendations, and defending the study recommendations to the City and the Region. The consultant will be responsible for: 1. The cost of booking and holding all public consultation sessions. 2. The cost of preparing all documents for all public consultation sessions. 3. The cost of preparing and delivering all communication materials (including public notices) for all public consultation sessions. 4. Keeping minutes of all meetings through the study. 5. Soliciting and documenting input from the community, stakeholders, and agencies during the study. 6. Preparing responses to requests, enquiries, and questions during the study, including formal responses in reports. 7. Inventories and data analysis for the study. 8. Undertaking transportation modeling and analysis as required. 9. Preparing study documents, maps, diagrams, and reports. 10. Developing professional recommendations and defending them at Council.

Note, all consultation materials, documents, public meetings, and notices must be compliant with AODA requirements. To facilitate comprehensive review and feedback from staff and public agencies, the consultant will be responsible for scheduling on-going meetings with the Technical Advisory Team.

Council Meeting Page 123 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 13 Integrated Planning & Public Works

City Staff The role of staff is to facilitate the IMMTS. City staff will be responsible for project managing and coordinating with the consultant throughout the process. The City will provide the consultant with access to background studies and reports in the possession of the City.

Stakeholders The role of stakeholders is to be engaged in the IMMTS and provide the consultant and Council with information, comments, and opinions.

DELIVERABLES To successfully achieve completion of the IMMTS, the consultant will be expected to deliver: 1. Technical Work Plan Prepare a Technical Work Plan.

2. Public Consultation Process and Communication Plan Prepare a public consultation process that is described in a Communication Plan and includes: • an open house to introduce the IMMTS in order to obtain initial input from property owners and interest persons • at least one (1) open house to present the Discussion Paper and receive input on options • presentation of the Discussion Paper to Waterloo City Council • consultation with the Region of Waterloo to obtain acceptance of the recommended Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Plan (IMMTP) • presentation of the Final Report to Waterloo City Council

3. Technical Advisory Team Consultation Consultant shall prepare a consultation process to update and seek input from the Technical Advisory Team at key milestones, ensuring adequate time for the Technical Advisory Team to review documents.

4. Transportation Assessment Complete a transportation assessment for the IMMTS to:

Council Meeting Page 124 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 14 Integrated Planning & Public Works • assess current and projected transportation demands for lands and roads within the Study Area; • assess options to expand, connect, and integrate the transportation network within the Study Area to improve traffic operations and safety; • assess road and intersection capacities and deficiencies; • assess the internal road network of the West Hill District Plan, west of Ira Needles Boulevard, • assess benefits and feasibility of additional north south collector roads to connect Ira Needles Commercial Centre, and Columbia Street West to Erb Street West; • assess active transportation and transit within the Study Area to foster non- automobile travel, and assess strategies and designs to increase modal splits for increased active transportation and public transit use; • identify and assess strategies for developing complete streets; • identify appropriate transportation demand management measures and identify mitigation measures or transportation improvements to accommodate travel within the Study Area; • determine if, and where, traffic calming is warranted and the nature thereof.

5. Discussion Paper A Discussion Paper is to be prepared to: • set out the background and purpose of the IMMTS; • review the existing transportation network and operations, and constraints to each; • review existing and contemplated land uses, and determine related transportation demands; • establish a range of transportation network and operational improvement options to be considered, and discuss the opportunities, challenges, and implications of each option; • determine a preferred transportation network and operational improvement option; • summarize community and stakeholder input received; • outline the next steps in the process.

Technical data and analysis conducted by the consultant shall be delivered to and become the property of the City of Waterloo.

6. Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Plan An Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Plan (IMMTP) is to be prepared to include such matters as: • preferred transportation network • preferred transportation operations

Council Meeting Page 125 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 15 Integrated Planning & Public Works • new policies to be integrated into the City’s Transportation Master Plan • design standards and/or policies for transportation infrastructure within the Study Area; • connectivity and access options for various active transportation modes and transit; • information and technical appendices.

7. Final Report A Final Report is to be prepared to: • respond to the issues identified through the Discussion Paper and public consultation process; • describe with defensible rationale the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Plan (IMMTP) for the Study Area; • provide discussion on fiscal impacts to the City and the Region.

8. Documentation The consultant shall supply: • Discussion Paper: - 15 double-sided bound copies of the Discussion Paper - 1 single-sided unbound copy of the Discussion Paper - 1 editable electronic copy of the Discussion Paper - 1 AODA PDF electronic copy of the Discussion Paper • Supporting Reports: - 15 double-sided bound copies of all supporting reports prepared for the IMMTS - 1 single-sided unbound copy of all supporting reports prepared for the IMMTS - 1 editable electronic copy of all supporting reports prepared for the IMMTS - 1 AODA PDF electronic copy of all supporting reports prepared for the IMMTS • Maps, Diagrams, Pictures: - 15 double-sided bound colour copies of all maps, diagrams, and pictures for the IMMTS - 1 single-sided unbound colour copy of all maps, diagrams, and pictures for the IMMTS - 1 editable electronic colour copy of all maps, diagrams, and pictures for the IMMTS - 1 AODA PDF electronic colour copy of all maps, diagrams, and pictures for the IMMTS

• Final Report: - 25 double-sided bound colour copies of the Final Report - 1 single-sided unbound colour copy of the Final Report - 1 editable electronic colour copy of the Final Report

Council Meeting Page 126 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 16 Integrated Planning & Public Works

- 1 AODA PDF electronic colour copy of the Final Report

9. Presentation to Waterloo City Council The consultant shall be responsible for presenting the Discussion Paper and Final Report to Waterloo City Council, as well as the Regional Council if directed by the City’s Commissioner of Integrated Planning & Public Works. If Waterloo City Council modifies the recommended Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Plan (IMMTP), the consultant shall be responsible for revising the IMMTP to reflect the modifications made by Council, and for presenting the revised IMMTP to Waterloo City Council if required by the Commissioner of Integrated Planning & Public Works.

GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE STUDY AND PLANS All documents including maps, plans, and reports developed during the IMMTS process shall become the property of the City of Waterloo. This includes PowerPoint presentations used at the consultation sessions and at Council. All documents and presentation materials must be compliant with AODA requirements and are the responsibility of the consultant or consulting group.

1. Consulting Services Costs Consulting services for the IMMTS are to be a maximum of $85,000, all inclusive. 2. Collaborative Submissions Collaborative submissions from two or more consulting firms will be permitted, however only one proposal shall be submitted per collaboration.

BIAS In order to avoid any bias or perception of bias in relation to the Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation Study (IMMTS), any corporation, partnership or individual who: a) owns or leases property in the Study Area; b) is currently undertaking consulting work relating to lands within the Study Area for a private landowner or lessee of property or has done so in the last six months, or has a contract to undertake future work in the Study Area,

shall not be allowed to make submissions to, or be considered by, the consultant selection committee.

Council Meeting Page 127 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 17 Integrated Planning & Public Works CONTACT The City’s Project Manager for the IMMTS is: Phil Hewitson, P.Eng. Manager, Active Transportation and LRT Integrated Planning & Public Works Department, Engineering Services City of Waterloo, 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, ON N2J 4A8 T 519.747.8660 F 519,747.8523 E [email protected]

Council Meeting Page 128 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A 18 Integrated Planning & Public Works Figure 1 STUDY AREA

Lands west of and including Erbsville Rd / Ira Needles Blvd Corridor

Council Meeting Page 129 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Financial Planning & Purchasing

Title: Cycling Infrastructure Grant Expression of Interest Report Number: CORP2015-070 Author: Kim Reger Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: [Attachments] Ward No.: Click here to enter text.

Recommendation:

1. That Council approve CORP2015-070 and

2. That Council endorses and approves the submission of the Waterloo Park Promenade project as the City of Waterloo’s application to the Ontario Municipal Cycling Infrastructure Program.

A. Executive Summary

As part of #CycleON Action Plan 1.0, the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has established the $10 million Ontario Municipal Cycling Infrastructure Program (OMCIP), to help municipalities build new and improve existing cycling infrastructure.

Under this new program, municipalities are eligible to apply for funding for up to 50% of the total eligible costs of a cycling infrastructure project to a maximum amount of $325,000.

The program includes a two-stage application process that involves the submission of an expression of interest (EOI) and, for municipalities shortlisted on the basis of their EOI, an application form. Only one application may be submitted per Applicant.

Council Meeting Page 130 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

Advancement from the EOI stage to the application stage and the award of funding will be determined through a competitive process.

Staff recommends that an application for the Waterloo Park Promenade (Trans Canada Trail through Waterloo Park) be submitted for this grant opportunity.

• Project meets application criteria – it is a linear off-road project which would improve an existing piece of cycling infrastructure. • Project includes an upgrade to a busy trail that connects Uptown Waterloo to two university campuses. Counts indicate 384,000 combined pedestrian and cyclists have used the trail over the last ten months at a ratio 2:1. The highest counts of combined users are from the months of September, May, and June at 53,000- 55,000 each month. • The project will support the volume of trail users by providing a comfortable and safe experience when using the trail to commute or for leisure.

B. Financial Implications

The maximum amount of funds that can be requested by the Applicant is $325,000; the maximum that can be requested is 50% of total Eligible Project Costs and the Applicant must contribute at least 20% of Eligible Project Costs. OMCIP funds are intended to supplement, not replace, regular municipal funding for cycling.

In 2015 Approved Capital Budget Ref #817 for the Trans Canada Trail through Waterloo Park is budgeted as follows:

o In 2016 $78,000 from the Gas Tax Rebate Fund and $78,000 from the Parkland Dedication Reserve Fund o In 2017 $509,000 from the Gas Tax Rebate Fund and $509,000 from the Parkland Dedication Reserve Fund . Staff verified with MTO that the Gas Tax Rebate dollars are not considered partner funding because the City was not awarded that funding specifically for cycling projects.

The funds set aside for Project #817 did not include the enhancements for cycling upgrades such as a dedicated bike lane; therefore, the $325,000 funding for the project would be to supplement the planned expenditure to upgrade the cycling infrastructure on the Promenade.

Council Meeting Page 131 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

Project Costing:

Source of Project Requested Applicant Intended Total Eligible Funds OMCIP Funds Contribution Contributions Project Costs Amount $325,000 $528,700 $0 $853,700 Percent % of Total 38% 62% Eligible Project Costs Program Max Request Must Contribute Requirements 50% 20%

The City would request the full $325,000 with the City contributing 62% of eligible costs and requesting 38% of total eligible costs which fit program parameters.

Engineering staff became aware of the grant opportunity on July 6th and proceeded to work with finance to identify projects that would be suitable candidates for this grant opportunity. The July 13th Council meeting was too soon to fully vet all opportunities and create a report. The next Council meeting is August 10th which is past the grant submission deadline; therefore, the EOI was submitted on August 6th. Submitting a grant application before Council approval in exceptional circumstances is consistent with the City’s Grant Policy.

Grant policy states that:

“That under exceptional circumstances where the timeline does not allow for preapproval, grant applications will be submitted and brought to appropriate approval body at the next possible meeting. (E.g. stimulus Grant Applications, applications during summer months)”.

C. Technology Implications

Not applicable.

D. Legal Considerations

Staff did not seek legal advice.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Multi-modal Transportation and Environmental Leadership

Council Meeting Page 132 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

Not applicable.

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Kim Reger Director: Filipa Reynolds Commissioner: Keshwer Patel Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 133 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

Cycling Infrastructure Grant Expression of Interest CORP2015-070

Background:

Under this new program, municipalities are eligible to apply for funding for up to 50% of the total eligible costs of a cycling infrastructure project to a maximum amount of $325,000. Funding will be provided between April 1, 2016 and March 31, 2018.

Key Dates

Activity Date

Invitation to submit EOI July 3rd, 2015

EOI Deadline August 6th, 2015

Invitation to submit Applications September 2015

Application Deadline October 2015

Anticipated announcement of Recipients December 2015

A signature is not required on the electronic copy of the EOI form. The deadline for submitting electronic copies of the EOI is Thursday, August 6th, 2015 at 5:00pm EST. The original signed hard copy of the completed form is to be mailed off separately.

Council Meeting Page 134 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Corporate Services

Eligibility Requirements:

All Ontario municipalities are eligible for OMCIP funds. Projects must focus on infrastructure for cycling. Projects that primarily support walking or other modes of transportation will not be considered.

The trails have to be a one continuous segment. If the land isn’t owned by the City it is required to submit a legal binding agreement that demonstrates that the applicant can use the land. Partnerships are encouraged but not mandatory. Projects cannot provide parking. Synergies with other larger projects are valued.

Eligible costs include: design/engineering costs, project management costs, materials, construction and automatic bicycle counters.

Projects that already have full funding commitment are not eligible for OMCIP. OMCIP funds are intended to supplement, not replace, regular municipal funding for cycling.

Reporting Requirements:

Reporting requirements will be specified in the Agreement. Generally, there are two components:

• a financial report of the expenditures, to be submitted following the completion of the OMCIP Project (the “Final Report”); and • collection of performance data illustrating the OMCIP Project’s impact, which is to be forwarded to the Ministry two years after the OMCIP Project’s completion.

More detail on reporting requirements can be found:

http://www.forms.ssb.gov.on.ca/mbs/ssb/forms/ssbforms.nsf/GetFileAttach/023- 5073E~2/$File/5073E_Guide.pdf

Council Meeting Page 135 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Corporate Services

Disbursements:

Any amount of OMCIP Funds provided to a Recipient will be subjected to adjustment as set out in an Agreement. Funding will be disbursed at specific project milestones. Although this may be modified at the discretion of the Ministry, the Ministry’s intent is for OMCIP Funding to be provided as follows:

Milestone Percentage of Total Eligible Project Costs

Award of contract design 25%

Award of construction contract 25%

Submission of Certificate of Substantial Completion 35%

Submission of Final Report 15%

Project Selection Process:

Advancement from the EOI stage to the application stage and the award of funding will be determined through a competitive process. The Ministry will consider the criteria described in the Evaluation Considerations when evaluating EOIs and Applications. Scores will be assigned according to each of the criteria and projects will be prioritized for OMCIP Funds based on their total score. Projects with stronger evidence of benefit will be ranked higher than those with evidence that is less clear. It is understood in some cases that only qualitative information on project impacts can be provided.

Factors to be considered during evaluation are as follows:

Connectivity, safety and security, municipal priority, cost effectiveness, feasibility, innovation, tourism and economic development, project readiness and ridership.

Recommended Project:

Waterloo Park Promenade (Trans Canada Trail through Waterloo Park)

• In 2015 Approved Capital Budget Ref #817: o In 2016 $78,000 from the Gas Tax Rebate Fund & $78,000 from the Parkland Dedication Reserve Fund o In 2017 $509,000 from the Gas Tax Rebate Fund and $509,000 from the Parkland Dedication Reserve Fund

Council Meeting Page 136 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Corporate Services

• The funds set aside for Project #817 did not include the enhancements for cycling upgrades such as a dedicated bike lane; therefore, the $325,000 funding for the project would be to supplement the planned expenditure to upgrade cycling infrastructure on the Promenade.

The Project meets application criteria as it is a linear off-road project which would improve an existing piece of cycling infrastructure. The project includes an upgrade to a busy trail that connects Uptown Waterloo to two university campuses. Counts indicate 384,000 combined pedestrian and cyclists have used the trail over the last ten months at a ratio 2:1. The highest counts of combined users are from the months of September, May, and June at 53,000- 55,000 each month. The project will support the volume of trail users by providing a comfortable and safe experience when using the trail to commute or for leisure.

Projects Considered but not Recommended:

King Street Streetscape (King St. – Erb St. to Central St.)

• In 2015 Approved Capital Budget Ref# 783, $3,561 in 2015 & $241K in 2016 • An agreement with the Region is required for the project occurring on regional land; timing to complete this requirement doesn’t coincide with the grant deadline.

Trans Canada Trail Project

• No budget earmarked for this project. • The trail does not meet the continuous criterion.

R&T Park Multi-Use Trail Upgrade

• In 2015 Approved Capital Budget Ref# 229, $233K in 2016, $238K in 2017 and $121K in 2018 • The trail does not meet the continuous criterion.

Council Meeting Page 137 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Corporate Services

Title: Proposed Staffing – 2015 Operating Budget - Update Report Number: CORP 2015-074 Author: Ralph Kaminski Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: [Attachments] Ward No.: ALL

Recommendation: 1. That Council Report CORP2015-074 be approved.

2. That Council authorize the hiring of the 6.1 FTE (full time equivalent) budgeted positions as outlined in this report.

A. Executive Summary With the approval of the 2015 Budget, 6.1 FTE positions were funded but the hiring of staff deferred. Council deferred these hires so that we could evaluate these positions with consideration to the new strategic plan. Staff were asked to have the strategic plan completed and then report back to council in August. Based on consideration of the new strategic plan and individual divisional pressures, staff recommend implementing the deferred 2015 positions as outlined in this report, and believe these positions continue to be appropriate and necessary to meet community and Council expectations for service delivery.

One exception is that staff now recommend using the proposed Engineering Technologist position funding to support the extension of the Heritage Planner contract position through 2016 and then in 2017 for a permanent Asset Management position to manage implementation of the new asset management plan. As for the Heritage Planner position, we will be requesting permanent funding for said position in 2017 through the 2016-18 budget process.

Additional divisions may have staff requests to further the vision of the strategic plan. These position requests would appear in the 3 year budget and the purpose and benefits being reported in the appropriate business plan.

Council Meeting Page 138 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

B. Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with this report as they were approved in Council Report CORP2015-012

C. Technology Implications

None

D. Legal Considerations

None

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Corporate Excellence – maximize public service excellence

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

CORP2015-012

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: R. Kaminski Aug.-5-15

Director: R. Kaminski Aug.-5-15

Commissioner: K.Patel Aug.-5-15

Finance: K.Patel Aug.-5-15

CAO

Council Meeting Page 139 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

Proposed Staffing – 2015 Operating Budget - Update CORP 2015-074 Background With the approval of the 2015 budget, 6.1 FTE positions were funded but the hiring of staff deferred. Council deferred these hires so that these positions could be evaluated with consideration of the new strategic plan. Staff were asked to have the strategic plan completed and report back to council in August on the deferred positions.

While each division affected by council’s decision on staffing has successfully balanced their workload and managed its impact, we cannot continue to advance the goals and objectives of council and our strategic plan unless we have harmony with our budget, business plans and staff complement. This report will confirm the need for an additional 6.1 FTE hires and requests that council allow for the hiring of these funded positions as outlined herein.

Updates The position names, purpose, and impact if deferred, are summarized below as per the original Council Report - Corp2015-012 for the deferred positions. Following this is the Director’s update.

Compliance & Standards Officer PT (1.4 FTE) The addition of two part-time compliance and standards officers would be on a cost- recovery basis. One part-time officer costs approximately $60,000, but generally has an offsetting revenue that exceeds the costs at a ratio of 2:1. The positions will allow municipal enforcement to continue to provide 24/7 364 service and allow us to cost effectively deal with sick time, overtime, vacations, court and major events. Part-time staff is only guaranteed 21 hours over a two week period allowing us to cost effectively schedule staff to meet demands. Should this request be denied or deferred, there is likelihood that some enforcement and budget goals will not be met in municipal enforcement. Additionally, staff coverage may be reduced at various times of the year or additional overtime costs incurred.

Update: Municipal enforcement services (MES) still requires these positions. MES has adjusted to the deferral of these positions by utilizing existing staff to fill staffing gaps, in many cases incurring overtime. Service levels have also been impacted due to the delay in complaint response and case resolution times.

Licensing & Standards Officer (1.0 FTE) In 2014, council approved the business licensing by-law and program which included business and enforcement targets. Along with the program, council approved in principle the hiring of staff to ensure targets were met. Without a compliance and

Council Meeting Page 140 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

standards officer, licensing and standards officer and by-law enforcement assistant there is no staffing associated with the approved program. These staff are key to ensuring that the program meets targets and achieves the approved goals. The program is designed to provide the community with enhanced health and safety, consumer protection and nuisance control which can only be done effectively with the addition of staff as requested. Should this request be denied, the business licensing program would not meet its goals and targets. Without staffing to ensure compliance there would be risk to the community.

Update: MES requires this position to support the business licensing program and to achieve business licensing revenue targets. MES has adjusted to the deferral of these positions by utilizing existing staff to fill staffing gaps, in many cases incurring overtime.

Part-time Community Outreach Coordinator (0.6 FTE) This 0.6 FTE is being funded within the existing budget and will better position the city to implement the council approved culture plan. The plan recommends that a community outreach coordinator (part time at 21 hours) be responsible for interacting with and supporting community groups/organizations providing programs for the community. There is a strong community development direction to have a staff presence for a spectrum of community groups, including immigration groups, multi-cultured organizations, aboriginal groups, inclusion groups and specialized groups that typify the changing needs of the community. The position would be responsible to interact, and support organizations that are currently providing programs for the community.

Not approving will be a factor in that the outreach into the community will jeopardize the ability to build a strong community as expectations and needs continue to rise. The position would strengthen our ability to assist the diverse residents and engage their sense of belonging.

This position is currently in budget and has no budget implications.

Update: The outreach worker is required to fill the ‘strong community’ pillar, in overall community engagement.

Customer Service Rep – Fleet This is an existing part time permanent position established 11 years ago when there was 60% of the equipment we currently have. As a result of significant increased work load and administration work associated with each piece of equipment (i.e. work orders for repairs, insurance & registration documents, external bill payments) we are requesting that this position go to permanent full time. There has been a significant down load in the administrative procedures that has disproportionately impacted this position’s workload (ex. 70% of parts are purchased directly through the suppliers) increasing processing time. Additional volume of work is experienced due to

Council Meeting Page 141 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

Environmental regulations, Commercial Vehicle Operator’s Registration (CVOR) compliance and changes in business practices. Repairs will likely get delayed due to paper work delay. Emergency work will require overtime to meet the demand or temporary arrangements will take up monies that are earmarked for other purposes and/or projects.

Update: Fleet has through the budget process foregone a student position to create this full time role and better achieve the administrative requirements of the fleet operation and reduce delays in equipment maintenance and ensure compliance with our CVOR requirements.

Financial Analyst (1.0 FTE) This position will allow for a redistribution of work amongst the financial planning team in order to initiate and complete projects that have significant organizational impacts in a more expedient manner. In addition to providing financial support on a daily basis to other departments, the financial planning team also coordinates the city wide budget process and the city-wide grants process, has significant year-end reporting duties as well as other corporate duties including debt, DC bylaw, reserve & reserve fund monitoring & reporting, among others. Important and worthwhile initiatives including; continuing to build reports and messaging to simplify and provide value add financial information for users and the public, developing a parking model, reviewing fleet shop rates, developing a building standards permit fee model review, undertaking a comprehensive review of the municipal price index, assessing and developing cost recovery models for recreation are some of the initiatives on the team's work plan that are above and beyond the current capacity. If this request is denied or deferred, it will result in projects and initiatives that impact Council, CMT and other departments to be delayed, reduced in scope or require that an external consultant be hired to complete the work at an additional cost to the city. Unbudgeted overtime is also likely.

Update: Increasing the complement on the financial planning team would bring staffing levels back up to pre-2013 levels. A dual challenge has occurred simultaneously - while the team complement has shrunk, work being performed by Financial Analysts and Budget Analysts is simultaneously growing in both volume and complexity.

Effective financial oversight is critical to the organization; proper controls, robust analysis and accurate information sharing with key decision makers is crucial to support the 2015-2018 strategic plans’ Corporate Excellence Goal of fiscal responsibility.

As the complexity of the business environment increases, more in-depth analysis of the financial impacts of various initiatives is needed to support council decision making eg. activating any of the tools within the uptown community improvement plan. As these initiatives continue to be contemplated, the day to day activities performed by the team become more diluted in order to make time to deal with other projects/initiatives. If the position is denied or deferred on August 10th, it will again be requested to be funded in the 2016-2018 budget as this position is essential to keep moving the city

Council Meeting Page 142 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Corporate Services

forward and to provide council with adequate financial information for decision making on city wide initiatives and programs and to support the guiding pillar of Fiscal Responsibility with the 2015- 2018 Strategic Plan.

Engineering Technologist This request is for an engineering technologist that is required to manage the significant increase in site plan projects. The position would reside in the development engineering section of the engineering services division, IPPW and be financed through the increased site plan engineering revenues collected.

If this request is denied or deferred, it would limit development engineering’s ability to respond to applications and could lead to increased overtime cost, as well as result in poor service delivery.

Update: Adjustments to the duties of staff in the development engineering section have resulted in efficiencies to address the anticipated volume of new site plan applications. These adjustments preclude the need to hire an additional engineering technologist.

The following two positions are related to the funding no longer required for the engineering technologist position.

Heritage Planner (Contract) The new strategic plan has identified the importance of heritage conservation in supporting a strong community and Economic Development. Recognizing the contract funding for the heritage planner expires in late 2015, IPPW proposes that the operating funds temporarily available from not filling the engineering technologist position be used to extend the heritage planner contract. IPPW will be proposing through the 2016-18 budget process that this position be made permanent in 2017.

Asset Management Position (Full time permanent) Development of the asset management plan is being managed by a contract position funded through the asset management plan capital project. It is proposed that this position be made permanent in 2017 using the engineering technologist funding available at that time. This position would be key to supporting the guiding principle of Infrastructure Renewal in the new strategic plan.

Storm Water Labourer The purpose of this position is to provide resources to address preventative maintenance requirements such as catch basin, manhole, storm grate, creek inspections and maintenance activities such as debris removal. This ensures that the infrastructure is in good working order and can perform as intended during a storm

Council Meeting Page 143 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Corporate Services

event. The existing stormwater section staffing level does not allow for such activities to be carried out.

The current practice for maintaining storm water infrastructure can be considered a reactive model, where the majority of defects in infrastructure are detected at the point of failure. If the shift to a more proactive model does not proceed, there is increased risk of liability and legal action associated with damage claims as a result of flooding. In addition, failure to comply to the city’s environmental compliance approvals for storm water infrastructure could result in charges under the Ontario Water Resources Act. The additional resource would provide the stormwater section the capacity to identify potentially significant failures in our stormwater management infrastructure.

Additionally, the position costs have been accounted for in the 2015 stormwater utility rates.

Update: Water Services still requires the storm water labourer position. We are currently deferring some aspects of preventative maintenance/inspection of the storm water system due to the lack of resources. We believe this position is still relevant as the job activities listed are directly tied to two guiding principles of the 2015 -2018 strategic plan; Infrastructure renewal and environmental leadership. This position will also assist overall support for IPPW emergencies.

Council Meeting Page 144 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Corporate Services

Title: Award of Construction Contract – Waterloo Service Centre Expansion & Restoration Report Number: CORP2015-059 Author: Alan McGregor Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: N/A Attachments: None Ward No.: 4

Recommendation: 1. That Council approve CORP2015-059 2. That Council approve the award of the construction contract for the Waterloo Service Centre Expansion & Restoration to Melloul-Blamey Construction Inc. in the amount of $10,490,000 (excl. HST).

A. Executive Summary In May of 2015, a Request for Prequalification was issued by the City for the purpose of selecting approximately 6 qualified construction firms who would be eligible to respond to a formal tender for the construction of this project. Following a detailed review of the 32 submissions from general contractors, six firms were selected to respond to the formal tender request (RFT #15-10). As stipulated in the tender documents, immediately prior to the bid opening, the City announced to the bidders that the “Construction Budget Value” of this project is $11,100,000. The following Table 1 identifies those bidders and the value of their submitted bids

TABLE 1: TENDER SUBMISSION SUMMARY Name of Bidder Tender Comments Amount Ball Construction Ltd. Did not submit Bird Construction Group Did not submit Bondfield Construction Company Limited $11,613,000 Buttcon Limited Did not submit Graham Construction and Engineering LP Did not submit Melloul-Blamey Construction Inc. $10,490,000 Low bid and within announced construction budget

Council Meeting Page 145 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

B. Financial Implications The 2015 Capital Budget includes $9,792,000 (ref. # 405) for the Construction and rehabilitation of the various buildings at the Waterloo Service Centre and $1,592,000 (ref. # 402) for relocating the Data Centre that is currently located at Waterloo City Centre. The funding will be applied towards the construction and rehabilitation of the following:

i. Existing Administration Building Rehabilitation – Lower Level Locker Rooms and Washrooms ii. Workshop and Meter Shop Addition – Existing Administration Building iii. Demolition of existing Salt/Sand Structure iv. New Salt/Sand Structure with underground conveyor unloading system v. Enclosure of Existing Vehicle Storage Building vi. New Main Entrance Canopy at Existing Administration Building vii. New Cold Storage Building viii. New Roadway Access System and Infrastructure upgrades ix. New Storage Compounds (enclosed) x. Parking Lot Expansion (Upper Level) xi. Completion of Rainwater Harvesting Project work xii. Corporate Space Planning Project (addresses some components)

The award of RFT15-10 to Melloul Blamey Construction Inc. for $10,490,000 (plus applicable taxes) is within the approved capital budget. A summary of funding sources and estimated costs is provided in Table 2.

Council Meeting Page 146 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

Table 2 – Funding Approvals to Date and Expected Costs Expenditures Report Approval Funding Description Funding *(including Balance Number Date Source HST) Funding:

Funding CS-AM2012-049 13-Aug-12 DC ($34,000)

Funding CS-AM2012-049 13-Aug-12 XDC ($658,000)

Funding PWS2012-031 14-May-12 CIRRF ($492,500)

Funding PWS2012-031 14-May-12 Grant ($409,991)

Funding CORP2014-039 12-May-14 CIRRF ($150,000)

Funding Grant ($81,362)

Funding Ref 405 CORP2015-043 11-May-15 CIRRF ($3,306,000)

Funding Ref 405 CORP2015-043 11-May-15 DC ($4,342,000)

Funding Ref 405 CORP2015-043 11-May-15 GTR ($1,624,000)

Funding Ref 405 CORP2015-043 11-May-15 SEW ($260,000)

Funding Ref 405 CORP2015-043 11-May-15 WAT ($260,000)

Funding Ref 402 CORP2015-043 11-May-15 CRF ($796,000)

Funding Ref 402 CORP2015-043 11-May-15 EMPDEV ($796,000) Total Funding ($13,209,853) ($13,209,853)

Expenditures Incurred to Date:

Total Expenditures $1,351,245 ($11,858,608) Incurred to Date

Projected Expenditures:

RFT $10,699,800

Contingencies and other $680,808 expenses

Fees & Permits $70,000

Furnishing & Equipment $408,000

Total Projected $11,858,608 $0 Expenditures

Total ($13,209,853) $13,209,853 $0 * Note: Unrecoverable portion of HST included

Council Meeting Page 147 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

C. Technology Implications The New Administration Building will be constructed to meet LEED silver certification standards as mandated by Council for the construction of new City facilities.

The new Salt/Sand Storage Building will be a modern facility implementing the latest technology for the delivery, unloading/loading of sand and salt in to City vehicles. Included in the design is an underground conveyor system that will deliver salt from an area outside of the main structure in to the building. This system will facilitate the delivery of salt and make both the delivery and loading operations much faster and significantly more efficient for staff.

Environmentally, the design of the new Salt/Sand Storage structure will eliminate soil contamination, as all salt will now be stored and loaded indoors. Noise will be reduced significantly during loading/unloading operations as these activities will now be completed indoors while the building doors are closed, and with the conveyor unloading system, there will no longer be the continuous backing up of loading equipment, thus eliminating the back-up warning signals on vehicles and equipment. Other renovation work will include the provision of energy-efficient materials, equipment and systems that will reduce operating costs and provide extended life-expectancy with the resultant savings in operating and replacement costs.

With its new location in the New Administration Building, the Data Centre will be located in a facility not located within the flood plain. While the existing data equipment is being relocated to the new location, the New Data Centre will be served by modern and improved mechanical and electrical services such as temperature control and uninterrupted power that will address potential operational issues. The design of the new Data Equipment Room, with its raised access floor, will provide flexibility for the constantly changing IT equipment and equipment layouts.

D. Legal Considerations The tender process has undergone an external legal review and has been reviewed by the Audit Committee on August 6, 2015.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Healthy and Safe Community: Continue to address the City’s infrastructure deficit.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic CORP2015-043 – Waterloo Service Centre Expansion – Release of funds for Construction Contract

Council Meeting Page 148 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Alan McGregor Director: Sunda Siva Commissioner: Keshwer Patel Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 149 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Transportation Services

Title: Traffic and Parking By-law Amendments Report Number: IPPW2015-072 Author: Christine Koehler Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: Traffic – By-law Amendments Attachments: Maps (2 pages) Ward No.: Wards 3, 4, 5 and 6

Recommendation:

1. That IPPW2015-072 be approved.

2. That Traffic and Parking By-law #08-077 be updated with the amendments contained herein.

A. Executive Summary The status of various streets within the City of Waterloo require updating in the Traffic and Parking By-law to provide traffic control within new subdivisions, and to accommodate for changes due to ownership of streets, changes to speed limits, and the inclusion of reserved lanes. Therefore, an update is required to the schedules within Traffic and Parking By-law #08-077 (By-law) and these are included in this report.

B. Financial Implications The costs for the installation of the proposed signage will be funded as follows: - Signage on Lake Louise Boulevard and signage for New Hampshire Street will be funded through the traffic calming capital budget - Remaining signage will be paid for from the 2015 Transportation Operating budget for sign placement at an approximate cost of $1,000.

C. Technology Implications There are no technology implications with this report.

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

Council Meeting Page 150 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Based on the recommendations within this report, changes to the Traffic and Parking By-law #08-077 are required. In turn, these recommendations are enforceable under the Highway Traffic Act.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Strong Community: • Promote the creation of complete and integrated communities and neighbourhoods by developing safe roads for commuting and recreational purposes.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic Reports for By-law Amendments are generated on an as needed basis throughout each year.

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Christine Koehler Director: Roslyn Lusk Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 151 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Traffic and Parking By-law Amendments IPPW2015-072

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS

Section 1 – Background

Traffic and Parking By-law Amendments

1. Amendments for Reserved Lane on Lake Louise Boulevard (Ward 3)

As part of the traffic calming design for Lake Louise Boulevard, staff installed bike lanes in May of 2015. The installation of the bike lanes requires the addition to the Traffic and Parking By-law reserved lanes schedule. The reserved lane schedule requires staff to install bike lane signs and by default restricts vehicles from parking within the bike lane.

Bike lanes are now in place on Lake Louise Boulevard from Conservation Drive to Westmount Road.

Map 1 indicates the intersection where the lanes were implemented.

2. Amendments for No Parking Area on New Hampshire Street (Ward 4)

Due to the installation of the sidewalk from the walkway on New Hampshire Street to Angler Way, the pavement width for the street has been reduced. Staff are recommending that parking be restricted on both sides of the road as on-street parking can no longer be accommodated.

Emergency vehicles and winter control operations could be compromised if on-street parking was to remain.

Letters have been distributed to the abutting property owners to inform them of the impending installation of no parking anytime signs. Due to the proximity of the area to Millen Woods Public School, staff will ask for assistance from By-law Enforcement staff to enforce the no parking area when school commences in September.

Map 2 indicates the section of New Hampshire Street that will restrict on-street parking.

Council Meeting Page 152 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

3. Amendments for No Stopping Area on Sandowne Drive (Ward 5)

Sandowne Public School requested that changes be made opposite the school to extend the existing no stopping hours (8:30 am to 9:30 am, 3 pm to 4 pm, Monday to Friday, September 1 to June 30). The changes are to ensure that parents use the existing “student drop off area” on the school side of Sandowne Drive.

Currently the no stopping area exists from Boxbury Drive to 274/276 Sandowne Drive. It is recommended that the no stopping area be extended up to and including 284 Sandowne Drive (an additional five houses). Letters have been delivered to the affected homes indicating the changes that will be made.

The signs will be in place for the start of the 2015/2016 school year, and have been discussed with staff from Sandowne Public School.

Map 3 shows the extended area for the no stopping zone.

4. Amendments for No Parking Anytime Area on The Lion’s Gate (Ward 6)

Staff received a request to review the existing on-street parking on the Lion’s Gate from Lion’s Court to the end of the street. Concerns were expressed with respect to vehicles parking on both sides of the street, limiting the pavement width for emergency vehicles.

Residents were provided with a number of options to choose from and provided comments back to staff regarding the on-street parking.

Yes No Leave on-street parking as is 6 12 Winter parking restrictions (December 1 to March 31 5 12 -No Parking anytime) North/West side of the street. No Parking 8:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday to Friday for both 8 9 sides of The Lions Gate.

Based on the comments received and concerns for emergency services, staff are recommending to implement no parking anytime along the frontage and side yard of 239 The Lion’s Gate (the outside curve of the street) to ensure space for both emergency vehicles and winter control operations. Letters have been sent to the area residents informing them of this proposed change.

Map 4 indicates the changes to schedule 1 – no parking anytime.

Section 2 – By-law Amendments

The following changes are required to the Traffic and Parking By-law #08-077.

Council Meeting Page 153 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

ADD

Schedule “1”, Part V, Section 4, No Parking

Highway Side From To Times/Days New Hampshire Both Schooner Angler Way Anytime Street Crescent (north leg) The Lion’s Gate South/East Adjacent to 239 Anytime The Lion’s Gate

DELETE

Schedule “4”, Part V, Section 8, No Stopping

Highway Side From To Times/Days Sandowne Drive East Boxbury Drive 73 m south of 8:30 am – 9:30 am Boxbury Drive 3:00 pm – 4:00 pm Monday-Friday September 1 – June 30

ADD

Schedule “4”, Part V, Section 8, No Stopping

Highway Side From To Times/Days Sandowne Drive East Boxbury Drive 165 m south of 8:30 am – 9:30 am Boxbury Drive 3:00 pm – 4:00 pm Monday-Friday September 1 – June 30

ADD

Schedule “22”, Part XIX, Reserved Lanes

Highway From To Lake Louise Conservation Drive Westmount Road Boulevard

Council Meeting Page 154 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 155 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 156 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Chief Administrative Officer

STAFF REPORT Economic Development

Title: City of Waterloo Public Art Policy Report Number: CAO2015-015 Author: Astero Kalogeropoulos Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: Appendix A – Public Art Policy Ward No.: City-wide

Recommendation:

1. That report CAO2015-015 City of Waterloo Public Art Policy dated August 10, 2015 be received;

2. That Corporate Policy A-018 - Public Art Policy Attached as Appendix A be approved;

A. Executive Summary The proposed Public Art Policy replaces the Percent for Art Policy (R&L96-17) and provides additional direction and clarification to staff and will ensure the appropriate development, management and maintenance of all Public Art for the City of Waterloo. The Policy is a first step in the development of a comprehensive, multi-faced program approach to Public Art.

The Public Art Policy provides a foundation for the effective development, management, and stewardship of Public Art throughout the City of Waterloo by: • articulating a clear definition of Public Art and a collection mandate for the City of Waterloo; • clarifying funding strategies; • outlining a management framework that identifies consistent processes, roles and responsibilities;

Council Meeting Page 157 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Chief Administrative Officer

• ensuring sound stewardship of all Public Art assets held in trust for the citizens of Waterloo.

B. Financial Implications There are no direct financial implications associated with this report. The current Percent for Art Policy (1996) allocates one percent of qualifying capital project budgets to Public Art. The Public Art Policy will not change this funding mechanism, but the creation of a Public Art Reserve Fund will allow greater flexibility in how the contributions to Public Art can be used. Public Art contributions are currently tied to specific capital projects. The creation of a Public Art Reserve Fund will allow this money to be used as part of the contributing project budget or pooled with other funds to either enhance a more prominent capital project or to support non-contributing projects identified through a Public Art Master Plan.

As a result of IPPW2015-056 - 144 Park Street Public Art Letter of Credit (June 15, 2015), $130,505 is being held in Letter of Credit Account #889871. These funds will be transferred to the Public Art Reserve Fund upon approval by Council.

C. Technology Implications None.

D. Legal Considerations None.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development) The policy supports the direction and goals within other corporate and community plans, such as the Official Plan, the Culture Plan, and the Economic Development Strategy. It emphasizes the important role culture plays in both Economic Development and in building a Strong Community.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic Percent for Art Policy (R&L96-17) - September 1996 IPPW2015-056 - 144 Park Street Public Art Letter of Credit (June 15, 2015)

Council Meeting Page 158 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Chief Administrative Officer

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Astero Kalogeropoulos Director: Justin McFadden Commissioner: Finance:

CAO

Council Meeting Page 159 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Chief Administrative Officer

City of Waterloo Public Art Policy CAO2015-015

BACKGROUND The Percent for Art Policy (R&L96-17) was approved by Council in May1996, to pursue the integration of Public Art as an important element of Waterloo’s growth and development.

Public Art has become recognized as an integral component of a vibrant, sustainable, welcoming, and prosperous Waterloo and is identified in many City initiatives including the Official Plan, Urban Design Manual, City Land Disposition, Culture Plan, Waterloo Park Master Plan, King Street Streetscape Plan, and the Station Area Planning process.

Although the Percent for Art Policy (1996) has resulted in a significant increase in art in public spaces over the past 19 years, staff have identified that it requires updating and refinement in order to ensure its on-going effectiveness. In addition, the Waterloo Culture Plan (2013) recommends that the policy be revised and integrated into a larger strategy to grow the Public Art Collection with a more strategic approach.

The proposed Public Art Policy replaces the Percent for Art Policy (R&L96-17) and provides additional direction and clarification to staff. This will ensure the appropriate development, management, and maintenance of all Public Art for the City of Waterloo. The Policy is a first step in the development of a comprehensive, multi-faced program approach to Public Art.

The Public Art Policy provides a foundation for the effective development, management, and stewardship of Public Art throughout Waterloo by: • articulating a clear definition of Public Art and a collection mandate for the City of Waterloo; • clarifying funding strategies; • outlining a management framework that identifies consistent processes, roles and responsibilities; • ensuring sound stewardship of all Public Art assets held in trust for the citizens of Waterloo.

DISCUSSION

Council Meeting Page 160 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Chief Administrative Officer

Definition of Public Art Public Art is defined in the proposed Policy as artistic works that are created by artists and acquired by the City with the specific intention of being sited on or staged in municipally owned public space.

This clear definition of Public Art will: • provide parameters for when and how city staff is involved in the acquisition of artistic works; • clarify municipal responsibilities in terms stewardship of Public Art assets held in trust for the citizens of Waterloo; and, • help to ensure consistent implementation of the Policy across the corporation.

Private Art Although outside the definition of Public Art, staff recognizes that the private sector plays a significant role in the provision of art on private lands throughout the city. Private artistic works may be incorporated into architecture, landscape designs of private infrastructure, or the layout of private open spaces, including private connections to adjacent public features such as parks and open spaces.

For sites on major corridors, the Site Plan Review Committee encourages developers to provide artistic work, located on private property. Staff is not recommending changes to this practice. Economic Development and Integrated Planning and Public Works staff will continue to work with institutional and private developers with projects at prominent sites through the city, as outlined in the Official Plan, to encourage the use of private artistic works to foster a sense of place and character and to compliment the City’s Public Art Collection.

Collection Mandate Waterloo’s Public Art Collection has grown in ways that are quite organic and unpredictable. Public Art initiatives have been viewed by the City as a series of discreet and largely unconnected projects. However, in order to grow the Public Art Collection in a more strategic direction, and to ensure the most effective use of the resources available, it is important to develop a collection mandate.

A clear mandate will: • guide decision-making during the acquisition process; • help to ensure that every art project achieves the highest level of artistic excellence and has significant public impact; and, • ensure the Collection reflects Waterloo’s diverse cultural character and heritage.

The mandate of the Collection as set out in the Public Art Policy is to: • acquire artistic works to increase livability and attractiveness of Waterloo; • introduce neighbourhood landmarks and/or place makers into the public urban environment; • stimulate the growth of arts and art-related businesses within the City;

Council Meeting Page 161 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Chief Administrative Officer

• articulate Waterloo’s evolving identity or celebrate the city’s heritage and past traditions; • increase the accessibility of artistic works by all citizens; and, • encourage excellence, quality, and innovation.

Funding Strategies Staff is not recommending significant changes to the percent for art funding model for civic construction projects.

The percent for Public Art will represent one percent of the City’s contribution to the total budgeted non-land costs of applicable capital projects over one million dollars, to a maximum of $300,000. Project funding obtained through grants is not considered part of the City’s contribution although the City portion of funding is applicable. Capital projects from capital budget themes such as Facility Expansion, Facility Upgrades, Facility Management, Park Expansion, and Park Rehabilitation/Upgrade will be eligible and include new building construction, major additions and/or renovations to existing buildings, and park development projects. Road work, water services, storm or sanitary sewer work or other service work or infrastructure projects are not applicable.

This approach is consistent with the funding model in place since 1996. Public Art in public space has been funded through a percent for art contribution from eligible civic projects including RIM Park, John M. Harper Branch Library, Fire Station #4, Waterloo Public Square, and Waterloo Service Centre (in progress).

Funding for Public Art through a percent of capital funding model is also consistent with the approach taken by numerous municipalities regionally, provincially, nationally and internationally. Ontario municipalities using a percent for art funding model include Cambridge, Kitchener, London, Markham, Ottawa, Richmond Hill, Region of Waterloo, and Toronto.

Public Art Reserve Fund The Percent for Art Policy has resulted in significant growth of the City’s Public Art Collection and has impacted in the number of artistic works in publically accessible space. Under the Percent for Art Policy (1996), the artistic works commissioned by the City have been associated with the contributing project. This practice has resulted in distinct clusters of artistic work in the uptown and at RIM Park. This current approach of connecting commissions to contributing projects does not provide a mechanism to ensure even distribution of art in public spaces throughout Waterloo.

To address this issue, staff is recommending that a Public Art Reserve Fund be established. The Reserve Fund will allow Public Art contributions from civic projects to be pooled with other funds to either enhance prominent capital projects or to support non-contributing projects identified through a Public Art Master Plan. The Reserve Fund will increase flexibility, allow the inclusion of artistic work in public spaces to be done more strategically, and make the most of opportunities and resources.

Council Meeting Page 162 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Chief Administrative Officer

Developer contributions to a Public Art Reserve Fund may also be considered through applications under Section 37 of the Planning Act. As outlined in the Official Plan, through Section 37 of the Planning Act, the City may authorize increases in height and/or density in return for the installation of publically accessible art, representing one percent of the value of construction for the development. Contributions through Section 37 may be used for on-site enhancement (private artistic work rather than Public Art) or could be directed to a Public Art Reserve Fund for municipally-led Public Art projects. The ability to encourage developer contributions to a Public Art Reserve Fund rather than on-site enhancement will provide the City with greater control over how these funds are used for community benefit.

The process for using money in the Public Art Reserve Fund will be outlined in a separate policy that will be approved by Council as part of the Finance Department’s annual Reserves and Reserve Funds Update report in September, 2015.

Maintenance To support the ongoing maintenance and conservation of the artistic works in the City’s Public Art Collection, the Public Art Maintenance operating budget line will be maintained.

Management Framework To ensure a consistent, fair, and transparent process, the Public Art Policy clearly outlines the roles and responsibilities of staff, City Council, and a Public Art Committee.

The proposed Public Art Policy recommends that the Public Art Program implementation, including acquisition, documentation, and maintenance, be coordinated by Economic Development staff and provides a process for the inclusion of a range on internal stakeholders from other municipal departments (Community Services, Integrated Planning and Public Works, Municipal Enforcement, and Facilities & Fleet Departments).

To provide expert community input on Public Art, the Policy also outlines the role of a Public Art Committee (PAC). Staff recommends that the PAC be established as a standing subcommittee of Council’s Advisory Committee on Culture.

NEXT STEPS

Public Art Master Plan It will be important for Public Art Program staff to work in a focused and strategic way in the coming years. Following the approval of the Public Art Policy, staff will begin development of a Public Art Master Plan to inform the acquisition and location of artistic works moving forward. Culture Plan (2013) identifies the need for a long-term review of potential locations in the city where Public Art should be installed. The primary intent of the Public Art Plan is to identify and prioritize potential sites and opportunities for new Public Art projects. The Plan will be guided by the Public Art Policy and is intended as a

Council Meeting Page 163 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Chief Administrative Officer

living document that will evolve in accordance with changes in urban development and policy.

This Public Art Master Plan will: • identify the location of Public Art initiatives connected to the Capital Budget; • establish an inventory of existing spaces that could accommodate the addition of artworks; • prioritize non-contributing projects or locations for the inclusion of artistic work in public spaces; • identify areas of low concentration of Public Art assets to increase the accessibility of artistic works by all citizens; and, • provide a framework for qualifying public spaces for Public Art.

Art Resource Guide for Developers To support the incorporation of art in privately-owned spaces, staff will develop an art resource guide for developers. The guide will outline the benefits of including art in development projects, tools for implementing a commissioning process, and staff resources available.

CONCLUSION Public Art contributes to our community’s cultural aspirations, supports social wellbeing and enhances economic vitality. During the Culture Plan consultation process, residents indicated that they are interested in exploring new approaches to Public Art in Waterloo. The proposed Public Art Policy will be the foundation for a robust Public Art Program that will enliven streets, neighbourhoods, public and green spaces. As the Culture Plan notes, “art and design are central to quality of life and productivity. The current momentum needs to be sustained and enhance to make public spaces even more lively, engaging and memorable.”

Council Meeting Page 164 of 409 August 10, 2015

CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: Public Art Policy Policy Category: Administration Policy Policy No.: A-018 Department: Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Approval Date: October 7, 1996 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Astero Kalogeropoulos Attachments: Related Documents/Legislation:

Key Word(s): Art

POLICY STATEMENT: The City of Waterloo recognizes that Public Art is a valuable asset that enhances the quality of life for its citizens, strengthens community pride, improves the aesthetics of the public environment, and contributes to the City’s cultural aspirations, social wellbeing and economic vitality. Public Art is a mechanism to celebrate culture and heritage, reflect community diversity, express shared values and define the unique local identity. Public Art advances the City’s strategic goal to build a well-designed and appealing City that supports the four pillars of sustainability (economic, environmental, social, and cultural) and engages the community.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this Public Art Policy for the City is to: a) establish a standardized and transparent process for the selection, acquisition, maintenance and de-accession of Public Art; b) ensure management of the collections is in line with other policies of the City of Waterloo; and c) provide a sustainable funding model for the management of Public Art.

DEFINITIONS: Acquisition: The process of accepting an artistic work into the City’s collection of Public Art.

Artist: The designer/creator of an artistic work. This term can include, but is not limited to, a professional artist, graphic designer, collaborative team, architect, or landscape designer.

Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date: July 10, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date: July 15, 2015 Council Meeting Page 165 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 2

Borrowed: An artistic work that is borrowed by the City, through a loan agreement, for a defined period of time from a lender who owns and retains ownership of the artistic work.

Collection: The artistic works acquired for permanent display in Public Space through the Public Art process, directly owned by the City of Waterloo for the purpose of presentation to the public.

Community Art: An artistic work created collaboratively between an artist and an identified community. Community members actively participate in the creation of the artistic work. The artistic process is of equal importance to the artistic product.

De-accession: The process of removing an artistic work from the City’s collection of Public Art.

Inter-departmental Public Art Team: A team led by staff responsible for the implementation of the Public Art Program and including representatives from a range of other municipal departments that provides guidance on the acquisition of Public Art and borrowed artistic work.

Owned: An artistic work that is owned by the City for the benefit of current and future generations.

Public Art: Artistic works that are created by Artists and acquired by the City with the specific intention of being sited on or staged in municipally owned public space. Such artistic works may be owned or borrowed, and may be characterized as aesthetic, functional, interactive, or any combination thereof. These works may be created using any material or any combination of media, including but not limited to: sculptures; water features; paintings; drawings; textiles; furnishings; installations; and kinetic works.

Public Art Committee: A standing subcommittee of the City’s Advisory Committee on Culture (ACC), a committee of community representatives appointed by City Council.

Public Art Master Plan: A plan developed by staff and managed by the staff responsible for the implementation of the Public Art Program, which is informed by this policy and recommends a practical implementation strategy for Public Art. In addition to identifying and prioritizing locations throughout the City where Public Art may be situated, the plan will make recommendations regarding themes and materials based on an assessment of the current inventory of Public Art. It will also serve as the first stage in the development of a more detailed and longer-term Public Art master plan.

Public Art Reserve Fund: Funding to support the Public Art Policy will be provided through the establishment of a Public Art Reserve Fund. Funds from the Reserve Fund will be used for designing, fabricating, installing and documenting public works or community art projects chosen through an objective juried selection process.

Council Meeting Page 166 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 3

Public Space: Space available for use by the public, that can include, but is not limited to, parks, boulevards, trail systems, open spaces, waterways, roads, bridges, gateways, street spaces, civic squares as well as exterior and interior public areas associated with buildings or structures owned, operated, occupied or used by or for the City.

SCOPE: This policy applies to all members of the corporation of the City of Waterloo including: a) Council; b) full, part-time and contract staff; c) Advisory Committees or Boards and any sub-committees of these committees or boards; and d) volunteers involved in the management of the City of Waterloo’s Public Art Collection.

Murals and other artistic works that do not leave a lasting record of their creation are considered temporary art and are not subject to this policy.

Furnishings, such as benches, light standards, and signage are not subject to this policy unless a design component is commissioned.

Plaques, memorials, and interpretive signs are not subject to this policy unless a design component is commissioned.

The City’s Heritage Collection and Arts Collection fall under other City policies, and are therefore not subject to this policy.

POLICY COMMUNICATION: The policy will be posted to the City of Waterloo’s website.

POLICY:

1.0 Collection Mandate

The mandate of the Collection is to: a) acquire artistic works to increase livability and attractiveness of Waterloo; b) introduce neighbourhood landmarks and/or place makers into the public urban environment; c) stimulate the growth of arts and art-related businesses within the City; d) articulate Waterloo’s evolving identity or celebrate the city’s heritage and past traditions; e) increase the accessibility of artistic works by all citizens; and f) encourage excellence, quality and innovation.

Council Meeting Page 167 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 4

2.0 Risk Management

The City of Waterloo must comply with Canadian and Provincial laws and by international conventions and treaties signed by Canada including, but not limited to: a) the Municipal Act; b) the Ontario Planning Act c) the Copyright Act; d) the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act; e) the Occupational Health and Safety Act; f) Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (WAPPRIITA); g) the Ontario Heritage Act; h) the Cultural Property Export and Import Act; i) the UNESCO “Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property 1970”; and j) any subsequent revisions or replacements of these Acts or Conventions.

3.0 Funding

3.1 Municipal Contribution The primary funding mechanism for Public Art Reserve Fund is a percent for public art strategy. The percent for Public Art will represent one percent of the City’s contribution to the total budgeted non-land costs of applicable capital projects over one million dollars, to a maximum of $300,000. Project funding obtained through grants is not considered part of the City’s contribution although the City portion of funding is applicable. Applicable projects include capital projects with the themes that include Facility Expansion, Facility Upgrades, Facility Management, Park Expansion and Park Rehabilitation/Upgrade. These themes include new building construction, major additions and/or renovations to existing buildings, and park development projects. Road work, water services, storm or sanitary sewer work or other service work or infrastructure projects are not applicable.

The Percent of Art can be used on the specific project from which it is sourced or it can be pooled with other funds to either enhance a more prominent capital project or to support non-contributing projects identified through the Public Art Master Plan.

3.2 Private Sector Contributions Developer contributions to the Public Art Reserve Fund may be considered through applications under Section 37 of the Planning Act. Private sector and community donations will also be encouraged.

Council Meeting Page 168 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 5

3.3 Maintenance Budget The Public Art Maintenance operating budget line will be maintained to support ongoing maintenance and conservation of artistic works in the City’s Public Art Collection.

4.0 Selection 4.1 Roles The management of Public Art is a consultative process involving multiple participants, including community representatives, City staff and City Council.

4.1.1 Role of Public Art Committee The Public Art Committee will: a) advise Council on the implementation of this policy through the Advisory Committee on Culture; b) review scope and terms of reference for each new proposed Public Art project; c) ensure application of established procedures and guidelines for each selection process; d) coordinate the selection of project juries; e) advise and promote communication and outreach of this policy to the community; and f) advise Council on proposed gifts, donations and bequests to the City in accordance with established guidelines.

4.1.2 Role of City Staff City staff will: a) facilitate regular Public Art Committee meetings, circulating information, providing guidance and arranging for the recording of minutes; b) recommend a budget through the City’s annual budget process; c) administer project budgets; d) establish and maintain a Public Art Inventory; e) develop scope and terms of reference for each new proposed Public Art project; f) coordinate the acquisition or de-accession of artistic works in accordance with this Policy; g) coordinate conservation of the City’s Public Art as required; and h) investigate Federal, Provincial, or other sources of funding to promote and support the development of Public Art in the City.

The implementation of this Policy will be coordinated by staff responsible for implementation of the Public Art Program in collaboration with the Inter- departmental Public Art Team.

Council Meeting Page 169 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 6

4.1.3 Role of City Council Council will: a) act as an advocate for art in Public Spaces in the City; b) approve the Public Art Policy; c) approve any changes to the Public Art Policy, as needed; d) authorize expenditures from the Public Art Reserve Fund; e) approve the annual Public Art maintenance budget through the budget process; and f) approve the selection, acquisition or de-accession of Public Art.

4.2 Owned Public Art The process for soliciting proposals for providing Public Art should: a) attract Artists from a variety of artistic disciplines; b) be meaningful, fair and equitable; c) encourage opportunities for learning, participation, and experimentation in arts and culture; and d) integrate Public Art into the planning, design, and execution of selected civic development projects.

Proposals for providing Public Art may be solicited through: a) open competition; b) invited competition; or c) direct award, where permitted by the City’s Purchasing By-law.

Public Art will be selected on merit through a process informed by expertise and community input through the Public Art Committee. The selection will employ a jurying process coordinated by the Public Art Committee, with guidance from the Inter-departmental Public Art Team. Final decisions regarding the selection, acquisition of artistic works will be made by City Council. Sites for Owned Public Art will be identified through the Public Art Master Plan. Each artistic work that is being considered for selection as Owned Public Art will be evaluated according to the following criteria: a) quality of work; b) condition of work; c) monetary and/or appraised value; d) artistic reputation of the artist; e) suitability of the artistic work for display in a Public Space; f) no duplication of other Owned Public Art or aspects thereof; g) relevance to the City’s natural and built environment, cultural heritage, and/or history; h) authenticity of the artistic work; i) long-term durability and maintenance requirements of the artistic work; and j) ethical and legal considerations regarding ownership.

Council Meeting Page 170 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 7

All offers of gifts, donations and bequests of artistic works will be reviewed by the Public Art Committee with guidance from the Inter-departmental Public Art Team prior to any acquisition, designation or installation as Public Art to assess: a) artistic merit; b) site suitability and context; c) durability and maintenance requirements; d) financial implications; and e) public safety.

4.2 Borrowed Public Art All artistic works to be considered for selection as Borrowed Public Art will be evaluated against the following criteria: a) quality of the artistic work; b) artistic reputation of the Artist; c) suitability of the artistic work for display in a Public Space (e.g. size, subject matter); d) condition of the artistic work; e) the City’s ability to safely display and conserve the artistic work; and f) exposure provided for Waterloo artists.

Proposals for Borrowed Public Art will be reviewed by an Inter-departmental Public Art Team led by Economic Development staff. Sites for Public Art will be identified through the Public Art Master Plan.

5.0 Acquisition

5.1 Owned Public Art The City may acquire Owned Public Art through: a) purchase; b) commission; or c) donation.

Each acquisition will be accompanied by a maintenance plan that is supplied by the Artist or donor.

All donations must be unencumbered and the locations for donated artistic works will be subject to the Public Art Master Plan and approved by the Inter- departmental Public Art Team. The donor of the artistic work must have legal title to the artistic work and will be responsible for meeting the Canada Revenue Agency criteria if the donor wishes to receive an Official Receipt for Income Tax purposes for the donation. This process, which includes an appraisal of the artistic work at the donor’s expense, to determine its fair market value, requires pre-approval of the City’s Finance Department.

Council Meeting Page 171 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 8

The City may decline to consider or accept any gift, bequest or donation of art in its sole discretion.

5.2 Borrowed Public Art The City may secure Borrowed Public Art for display on a temporary basis. Temporary installations may last from one day to one year, typically remaining on view for three to six months.

Following the approval of a proposal, an appropriate agreement between the Artist and/or sponsoring organization and the City will be executed.

The Artist and/or sponsoring organization will be responsible for funding, installation, maintenance and timely removal of the artistic work, and restoration of the site.

5.3 Acquisitions and Signing Authority Acquisitions will follow City of Waterloo’s Procurement By-law, which establishes policies for the procurement of goods and services by the City, and any subsequent revisions or replacement of this by-law.

5.4 Installation The City is responsible for coordinating the installation of all Owned or Borrowed Public Art. The installation process will be identified, in advance, through the purchase, commission, donation, or exhibition agreement and may involve participation of the Artist and/or a contracted professional installer. The condition of all acquired artistic works will be reported upon receipt, and any problems found will be referred to the Artist/lender for resolution, prior to installation.

5.5 Insurance All artistic works owned by the City through purchase, commission and/or donation, are the property of the City and are insured under the City’s insurance policies.

For all Borrowed Public Art, the Artist will submit proof, satisfactory to the City, of insurance coverage for the artistic work, and a waiver freeing the City from liability in case of accidental loss, theft, damage or vandalism. In addition, the Artist will submit a complete list of the displayed artistic work(s) which will include the: a) title(s); b) dimensions; c) medium/media; and d) appraised value(s).

Council Meeting Page 172 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 9

6.0 Maintenance

The Artist is responsible for developing a maintenance plan for each Public Art artistic work. The maintenance plan must be submitted for review and consideration along with the proposal to select the artistic work for acquisition. The complexity of the maintenance plan may vary based on the size, nature and material of the artistic work. Maintenance plans will include, but are not limited to: a) maintenance specifications; b) budget implications; c) manufacturer lists; and d) key contacts, including the Artist

The City is responsible for the care and maintenance of the artistic work, in accordance with the approved maintenance plan. Staff responsible for the implementation of the Public Art Program will monitor the maintenance plan. The appropriate City staff will undertake an inspection of the artistic work according to a pre-determined schedule. Staff may, if deemed necessary, retain a qualified art restorer to undertake the inspection.

7.0 Storage

When storage of Public Art, whether short-term or long-term, is required, the City will ensure that such storage meets appropriate museum standards. Whenever possible, existing City and community resources will be used for the storage and management of the City’s Owned Public Art.

8.0 De-accession of Public Art

The City may de-accession Public Art when necessary. All reasonable efforts will first be made to resolve problems or re-site the Public Art, in consultation with the Artist and/or donor, where appropriate. Reasons for de-accession include, but are not limited to: a) endangerment of public safety; b) excessive repair or maintenance; c) irreparable damage; d) inaccessibility; and e) site redevelopment

In the event of theft, vandalism or accidental loss, the City may determine whether replacement or de-accession of the artistic work is appropriate.

No artistic work will be de-accessioned and disposed of without consultation with the Public Art Committee. Recommendations of the Public Art Committee regarding the need for and method of de-accession will be made to staff responsible for the implementation of the Public Art Program. The de-accessioned artistic work may be

Council Meeting Page 173 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: A-018 Page 10

moved, sold, returned to the Artist or destroyed, with any monies received through a sale allocated to the Public Art Reserve Fund.

9.0 Private Art

Staff responsible for economic development and municipal planning will work with new and established businesses, agencies and other levels of government, architects, builders, contractors, and developers to identify opportunities for incorporating private artistic works into architecture, building and/or landscape designs of private infrastructure, or the layout of private open spaces, including private connections to adjacent public features (e.g. streets, bridges, road infrastructures, interchanges, gateways, parks and open spaces).

The inclusion of private artistic works will be encouraged formally through the development review process and informally as opportunities arise.

Private sector developers will be encouraged to integrate private artistic works into the design of private sites, buildings and/or landscaping, especially in publicly accessible and visible areas of private sites, including, but not limited to: a) building facades; b) floors; c) ceilings; d) courtyards; or e) entrances.

This could include functional and decorative elements including, but not limited to: a) benches; b) water features; and c) light standards.

The City will not assume any responsibility for maintenance of private artistic works installed on private lands.

COMPLIANCE: In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 174 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Financial Planning & Purchasing

Title: 2016-2018 Budget Strategy Report Number: CORP2015-047 Author: Cassandra Pacey & Filipa Reynolds Meeting Type: Finance & Strategic Planning Committee Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: NA Attachments: Appendix A – Proposed 2016 Budget Schedule Appendix B – 2015 Capital Projects Recommended for Automatic Funding Appendix C – 2015 Capital Projects Recommended to Return to Council Ward No.: City Wide

Recommendation:

1. That Council receives CORP2015-047 “2016-2018 Budget Strategy” and approves the Budget process contained within. 2. That Council approves the Capital Budget Review and Approval process Option 1 contained within CORP2015-047. 3. That Council approves the Public and Council Engagement process contained within CORP2015-047. 4. That Council receives the proposed 2016 budget schedule for information as attached in Appendix A. 5. That Council directs staff to explore various options to balance the 2016-2018 Operating Budget as described in the section “Potential Solutions for 2016-2018 Operating Budget Balancing”

A. Executive Summary In February, the City wide 2016-2018 Budget Process was initiated by Finance with the assistance of the Corporate Management Team (CMT) and the Operational Leadership Team (OLT). Initial discussions have included but are not limited to the budget process, roles, documents, policies budget milestones and public/council engagement

During the 2015 budget process, Finance staff received comments from CMT and OLT in regards to continuing the process of a one year / three year budget approval. The recommendation from CMT and OLT was to prepare a one year budget for 2015, the first year of Council’s term, and to prepare a three year budget for 2016-2018.

Council Meeting Page 175 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with general information on the 2016- 2018 Budget Process, including touching on the Business Plan process, and summarizing the changes to Budget policies. In addition, key budget milestones are included and Appendix A provides a more detailed view of the budget schedule for Council’s consideration and approval.

The report also specifically touches on the Capital Budget by giving Council a flavour of total draft over-target project sheets submitted, how they and the three year budget process relate to the Asset Management Plan and how the next Development Charge By-law and Background Study impact the multi-year budget. Staff have also included a new Capital budget review and approval process for Council’s consideration and approval.

Lastly, the report also looks at the Operating Budget and provides a high-level summary of the status of Fees & Charges, reminds Council of the three Operating Budget Buckets, and provides historical, current and forward looking information to describe financial challenges for the upcoming budget. To balance the upcoming three year budget, Staff are requesting direction from Council to further explore the potential solutions laid out in the report.

B. Financial Implications NA

C. Technology Implications NA

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

E. Link to Strategic Plan/Economic Vitality (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development) This report links to the Corporate Excellence pillar and the Guiding Principle: Fiscal Responsibility within the strategic plan.

Council Meeting Page 176 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Cassandra Pacey Author/Director: Filipa Reynolds Commissioner: Keshwer Patel Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 177 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

2016-2018 Budget Strategy CORP2015-047

REPORT

The report is divided into 3 main sections with sub-sections beneath each one as follows:

1. General Information 1.1 Budget Process 1.2 Budget Schedule 1.3 Business Plans 1.4 Public and Council Engagement 1.5 Budget Policies

2. Capital Budget Update 2.1 Capital Budget Review & Approval Process – New for Council’s consideration 2.2 Over-target projects 2.3 Asset Management Plan 2.4 Development Charge By-Law & Background Study

3. Operating Budget Update 3.1 Fees & Charges 3.2 Operating Budget Buckets 3.3 Financial Challenges: 2016-2018 Operating Budget 3.3.1 Core Consumer Price Index (CPIX) 3.3.2 Labour Agreements 3.3.3 2016 – 2018 Preliminary Forecast 3.3.4 Historical Context 3.3.5 Labour & Benefits 3.3.6 Historical Balanced Budgets 3.3.7 Other Revenue Shortfalls 3.3.8 Surplus Deficit 3.3.9 Potential Solutions for 2016-2018 Operating Budget Balancing

Council Meeting Page 178 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

1. General Information

1.1 Budget Process The Operational Leadership Team (OLT) continues to be tasked with presenting a balanced operating and capital budget to CMT for their review and approval before it is presented to Council for approval. As part of the budget roles and process, a subcommittee of OLT has been established to represent the OLT larger group in the budget process. The subcommittee is co-chaired by Ralph Kaminski, Director of Building Standards & Chair of OLT and Filipa Reynolds, Director of Financial Planning & Purchasing.

Ongoing discussions have been occurring with the OLT budget subcommittee as well as CMT in order to lay the framework for the 2016-2018 budget process. Discussions have included but have not been limited to; budget policies, budget directives, public/council engagement, capital budget envelopes and business plans. In addition, the Audit Committee was consulted on August 6 with respect to budget process and policies.

Roles and Budget Flow: A summary of budget roles have been as established as the following;

• Corporate Management Team (CMT ) • Approve Budget Directives • Review OLT’s balanced budget and recommend changes

• Operational Leadership Team (OLT) • OLT to present balanced budget to CMT

• OLT Budget Sub-Committee • 9 Directors form the 2016-2018 OLT subcommittee: • Co-chairs: • Filipa Reynolds, Director Financial Planning & Purchasing • Ralph Kaminski, Chair of OLT & Director Building Standards • Representatives from the departments: • Ron Ormson, Director Engineering Services • Scott Nevin, Director Growth Management • Jim Bowman, Director Community Programming & Outreach • Richard Hepditch, Fire Chief • Sunda Siva, Director Facilities & Fleet • Megan Harris, Director Communications • Liana Jupan, Library Manager Finance & Facilities

Council Meeting Page 179 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Corporate Services

• Recommend budget directives • Balance operating and capital budget based on corporate priorities & recommend to OLT larger group and then CMT

• Finance • Coordinate the Corporate-Wide Budget Process • Assist with development of Corporate financial policies and direction • Provide city wide overview of the operating and capital budgets to Council on Budget Day

• Directors • Analyze prior years actual to budget variances with assistance from Finance and incorporate sustainable revenue and expenditure changes into the budget • Identify and evaluate risks to respective divisions and departments • Prepare budget documents • Present business plans and budget highlights to Council

• Audit Committee • Provide strategic advice on budget policy • Review budgeting process • Monitor actual performance against budget throughout the year through review of regular variance reporting

The above roles assist in setting the budget and how budget information will flow through the organization for approval. Figure 1 outlines the budget process flow chart for the 2016-2018 budget.

Council Meeting Page 180 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Corporate Services

1.2 Budget Schedule The intent is to release the budget publicly to Council in December 2015 with the final budget approval in February 2016. There are several communication points within the budget schedule to reach out to Council with information. The political review and approval milestone dates have been included in Table 1.

Council Meeting Page 181 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Corporate Services

Table 1: Political Budget Review Timeline Steps Who Political Review September Reserve & Reserve Fund Policy Approval Council October Audit Committee Budget Process Review Council Third Quarter Significant Operating Budget Variance November 16 Update Council Fees & Charges - Enterprise / Rate Approval December 14 Early Capital Budget Approval Council Public Budget Release December 18 Public Business Plan Release Council January 11, 2016 January 18, 2016 January 25, 2016 Business Plan Presentations Council February 1, 2016 February 2, 2016 Capital Budget Review Council February 8, 2016 Operating and Capital Budget Approval Council

Prior to reaching the political review and Council deliberation the proposed budget, several checkpoints exist to prepare options for Council to review. The steps include preparatory work to identify impacts to future budget years and administrative review by both the OLT Budget Sub-Committee and CMT. Background on the preparatory and administrative steps in the budget has been included in Appendix A with key milestones identified below.

Key milestones for the 2016 Budget and Business Plans include:

• Budget and Business Plan Preparation (May – August) • Administrative review by the OLT Budget Sub-Committee and CMT (August/September) • Budget and Business Plan distribution to Council and the public (December) • Business Plan Presentations (January 2016) • Budget Approval (February 2016)

1.3 Business Plans Business Plans are developed to provide an operational view of what services/initiatives are undertaken and how funding supports those services and initiatives. The 2016-2018 Business Plan process will be facilitated by the Communications division and together with the OLT Budget Sub-Committee has reviewed the template utilized for the 2015 budget process. Updates have been incorporated to include Council’s 2015-2018 strategic plan and as well as 3 years of budget data to align with the multi-year budget process. The 2016-2018 business plans will be presented by Directors to Council in January 2016.

Council Meeting Page 182 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Corporate Services

1.4 Public Engagement A Budget Public Engagement Working Group (BPE), chaired by Sheldon Pereira with Filipa Reynolds and Megan Harris as team members, has been formed. The BPE is meeting regularly to develop strategies for engaging members of the public, into the City of Waterloo budget process. Building on the momentum and engagement created via the recently approved City of Waterloo Strategic Plan process, in the coming months the City will also work to engage the public in various aspects of the budget process. As a starting the point, the City will:

• Publish and make available Budget Requests online via the City website and social media channels, on December 18th; • Encourage citizen participation in the budget process via discussion threads on Open City Hall related to issue papers and budget process; and, • Engage our community in ongoing dialogue through awareness campaigns via social media and traditional channels, to highlight opportunities for feedback and engagement with the budget process.

These tactics and strategies represent a starting point in the public engagement strategy for the upcoming budget process, and will continue to evolve and grow in the coming months.

Council Engagement The BPE has also developed strategies for engaging members of council in the City of Waterloo budget process. Similar to the public engagement process, the BPE will build on the momentum and engagement created via Strategic Plan process. Methods of reaching out to council include the following:

• Publish and make available Budget Requests and Business Plans online via the City website and social media channels, on December 18th; • Present the business plans to Council on January 11, 18 & 25 • Capital Budget Review days on February 1 & 2 • Budget Approval on February 8

Council Meeting Page 183 of 409 August 10, 2015 10 Corporate Services

1.5 Budget Related Policies Finance, OLT Budget Sub-Committee and CMT have reviewed the various Budget Related Policies. Report CORP2014-058 Budget Policy Updates which is included in the Council meeting agenda on August 10, 2015, outlines recommended amendments for Council’s approval. The recommended amendments are primarily minor in nature.

The Audit Committee was provided with the following 5 key budget policies for their August 6, 2015 meeting:

1. FC-002 Financial Requests Outside of Budget 2. FC-013 Use of Budgeted Assessment Growth Revenue 3. FC-014 New Revenue 4. FC-006 Employee Development and Capacity Building Reserve Policy 5. FC-012 Capital Policy

2. Capital Budget Update

2.1 Capital Budget Review and Approval Process The OLT Budget Subcommittee reviewed and discussed the current budget approval process. As a result of that review, two options for the approval of capital were developed.

Option 1 (Recommended) • A more in-depth review and discussion of capital projects with Council as part of the Budget process and to apply criteria to significantly reduce funding release reports. Option 2 • Maintain the existing funding release and approval process for capital projects (i.e. status quo).

The recommended process change (option 1) entails setting aside specific dates for Council to review and approve the 2016-2018 capital funding, 2019-2025 capital forecast. The objective is to streamline the Capital approval process by providing Council with more project information for decision making as part of the budget approval. This would enhance efficiency by allowing all routine projects to be approved and automatically funded by Council on budget day. Only unique projects will be required to return to Council with a detailed report prior to tender award/start date.

Unique projects will be identified through a staff review using the criteria outlined below. Staff will identify projects that are outside the normal scope of the capital budget, (e.g. Service Centre Rehabilitation or Columbia Street Reconstruction), and recommend that they return to Council in advance of any expenditures. In addition, Council can request that staff bring additional information for projects and that the information will be supplied prior to or by budget day.

Council Meeting Page 184 of 409 August 10, 2015 11 Corporate Services

The following criteria was established to assist in the decision making of identifying which projects would be automatically funded through the Budget Approval process and which projects would need to return to Council with a report before funding is released:

1. Financial Materiality • Projects receiving funding greater than $5M over the 3 year period 2. Non-routine in nature • e.g. construction of a City facility, development of a CIP 3. High Public/Council Interest • e.g. Mary Allen Park, Paving at FDBD at Waterloo Park 4. Request by Council

Based on existing policy, in 2015, 64 reports are to be authored, reviewed by various levels within the organization and ultimately reviewed by Council. The purpose of these reports is to provide Council with more information on the projects and ultimately, if Council approves the report, the funding would be released. Generally, the next time Council would see a report on the same project would be at award of tender based on the terms of the purchasing by-law.

If we had applied the criteria developed above to the 2015 Capital Budget to the 64 projects: • 42 would be recommended for funding automatically once Budget is approved o Appendix B identifies the 42 projects and respective funding • 22 would be recommended to return to Council before funding is released o Appendix C identifies the 22 projects and respective funding While developing the proposed expanded capital approval process, staff reviewed the potential advantages to Council and Staff. Advantages identified by staff include:

1. Efficiency Improvement • The number of funding release reports would be reduced to unique projects and would build capacity within the organization • Less congested Council agendas and more time available for other Council business 2. Industry practice • The process would be similar to the capital approval process utilized by other municipalities. • Municipalities that follow a similar process include the Town of Oakville, City of Kitchener, City of Toronto, City of Oshawa and City of Brantford 3. Financial Allocation Decisions • Approval on budget day would alleviate pushing financial allocation decisions into the future

Council Meeting Page 185 of 409 August 10, 2015 12 Corporate Services

4. Eliminates Redundancy • Would eliminate a redundant step in the process that would ease pressure on Council agendas while still allowing Council to make "no go" decisions before tenders are awarded

To facilitate the proposed methodology, the following process changes are recommended; 1. Remove $200K automatic funding release approval 2. Full day capital budget review with Council on tentatively on February 1 & 2 3. Unique Projects • Staff will flag any unique projects that are recommended to return to Council before any money is spent (non-routine projects – e.g. Columbia St, SC Rehabilitation) • Council may request follow up information for any project as a result of the January meeting which staff would need to bring back prior to or by budget day 4. Budget day • Council may identify projects from the approval process and request a more detailed report before being approved for funding release • Any other projects approved on Budget Day will not return to Council for funding release. The next time Council will see the project will be for tender award or any other unique circumstances determined by Council or Staff

Council Meeting Page 186 of 409 August 10, 2015 13 Corporate Services

2.2 Over-Target Projects Preliminary data gathering and analysis of capital budget items has revealed $195M in over-target projects. While this is not a comprehensive list of infrastructure needs that exceed funding available, through the budget process Council will be provided with the over-target project sheets which can be used for information or decision making. Table 2 identifies the dollars by department, division and year.

Table 2: Preliminary Over-Target Capital Dollars DEPT DIVISION 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total

CAO Strategic Initiatives 266 109 133 27 83 114 144 59 90 30 1,055 CAO Ec Dev 2,380 331 2,711 CAO Subtotal 2,646 440 133 27 83 114 144 59 90 30 3,765

COMM Rec. & Fac. Services 104 104 COMM Fire Rescue 205 2,416 689 719 807 4,835 COMM Environment & Parks 79 658 101 296 104 1,074 891 296 90 309 3,898 COMM Municipal Enforcement 48 48 Community Services Subtotal 183 910 2,517 985 104 1,793 1,698 296 90 309 8,885

CORP Communications 206 890 995 30 31 2,152 CORP Fac&Flt-Facilities 796 1,220 1,286 1,439 1,468 4,169 3,402 3,176 3,516 8,937 29,410 CORP Finance 578 281 423 522 105 1,909 CORP Legislative Services 734 734 Corporate Services Subtotal 1,580 2,391 2,705 2,694 1,573 4,169 3,402 3,176 3,546 8,968 34,206

IPPW Eng. Serv.-Dev-Sanitary 306 1,413 1,720 IPPW Eng. Serv.-Dev-Parks 136 136 IPPW Growth Management 1,156 1,554 1,405 1,068 1,877 287 7,348 IPPW Transportation Services 6,520 1,284 1,309 1,335 1,362 1,389 223 18,734 91,432 10,935 134,525 IPPW Water Serv.-Sanitary 289 295 301 307 313 1,505 IPPW Subtotal 7,965 3,133 3,015 2,711 3,688 1,677 223 19,040 92,846 10,935 145,233

LIB Library 1,070 1,046 847 46 247 36 3,291 Library Subtotal 1,070 1,046 847 46 247 3,291 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 13,444 7,919 9,216 6,418 5,495 8,000 5,467 22,571 96,572 20,243 195,381

2.3 Asset Management Plan The Award of RFP15-10: Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report is on Council’s agenda for August 10th. The Infrastructure Asset Management Analysis Report will provide the necessary information for Staff to create a Comprehensive Asset Management Plan (AMP) for consideration and approval by Council. It is anticipated that the AMP will be completed by October 2016. As AMP project progresses, staff will assess how to integrate the AMP and associated financial plan with the three year budget process and will communicate to Council on this front.

2.4 Development Charge By-Law Background Study The City’s current Development Charge By-Law and Background Study expires in December 2017. As a result, there will be an amended Capital Budget brought forward within the 3 year budget period (2018 budget) for Council’s consideration and approval.

Council Meeting Page 187 of 409 August 10, 2015 14 Corporate Services

3. Operating Budget Update

3.1 Fees & Charges Updates Part of the budgeting process is to review and update divisional and department Fees & Charges. Departments have been tasked with the responsibility to review their revenues to determine market responsiveness, customer affordability and cost recovery for all fees.

Updates to the division and department Tax Base Fees were tabled before Council on July 13, 2015. Staff identified whether revenues are increasing in line with inflation on average and the estimated financial impact. This analysis is presented to facilitate council decision making on user fees, taking into account the impact on the upcoming budget balancing exercise within the funding cap.

Council’s approval of fees & charges has been split into 2 dates, one for tax base fees and one for enterprise fees. The different dates were established to facilitate work on the operating budget, enable fee updates occurring before budget approval and allow for Enterprises to incorporate factors outside of the City’s control (e.g. Regional water rate increase which becomes known later in the year).

Type of Fee Council Approval Tax Base Fees July 13, 2015 Enterprise Fees December 14, 2015

Three Corporate Services fee approvals were deferred by Council and are listed on the August 10, 2015 agenda for consideration.

Council Meeting Page 188 of 409 August 10, 2015 15 Corporate Services

3.2 Operating Budget Buckets

As part of the MPI study and review undertaken and approved by Council in 2014, the concept of determining the bucket that an operating item fits into was introduced. Figure 2 provides information and examples of each of the 3 buckets.

Figure 2: Operating Budget Buckets

Staff will continue to present the operating budget in these categories to assist Council with decision making as well as to allow for effective public engagement.

3.3 Financial Challenges: 2016-2018 Operating Budget

3.3.1 Core Consumer Price Index (CPIX) – Bank of Canada On February 9, 2015, Council provided direction to revisit the use of MPI versus CPIX and report back to Council. MPI has been calculated since 2007 as a tax increase funding cap to represent the inflation rate the City of Waterloo can expect to incur given the specific basket of goods that it consumes.

CORP2015-049 was presented and approved by Council on June 15, 2015. This approval effectively replaced MPI with CPIX. CPIX will be calculated using a 12 month rolling average from the Bank of Canada. The most current 12 month rolling average based on May 2014 to June 2015 CPIX is 2.1%. The most up to date 12 month rolling average will be calculated and reported to Council in September for approval on an annual basis. As part of the three year budget process, Council will be asked to approve a 3 year tax increase and as CPIX is correlated to the increase, it will be based on a forecast. However, each year, CPIX will be recalculated and the information will be

Council Meeting Page 189 of 409 August 10, 2015 16 Corporate Services

brought to Council in September of each year. Council can at that point direct staff to adjust the tax increase and the budget accordingly if CPIX has changed.

3.3.2 Labour Agreements

As a service provider, labour and benefits is the single largest expense in the City’s Operating budget and in 2015 has an associated budget of $63M.

The City has labour contracts with several different groups – Management, Staff Association, CUPE and Fire. The current agreement with the Staff Association and CUPE Local 1542 expires on December 31, 2015. The Waterloo Professional Firefighters contract expired on December 31, 2014. Recommended agreements will be brought forward for Council’s consideration and approval at the conclusion of the negotiations.

To facilitate decision making for budget purposes, staff have broken down labour and benefits into the tax funded budget and the enterprise budget. Salaries, wages and benefits account for 65% to 80% of the gross budget on the tax funded portion of the budget. On the enterprise side, the labour component of the gross budget ranges from a low of 17% (due to a large component of the budget being the water and sanitary payments to the Region) to a high of 78%. As a result, the blended city-wide rate for labour and benefits represents approximately 52% of the tax based gross budget, less transfers to capital/reserves and other fixed flow through costs.

Where labour constitutes a significant portion of the budget, cost reduction initiatives will have an impact on existing labour budgets.

3.3.3 2016-2018 Preliminary Forecast A forecast has been developed for the upcoming three year Operating Budget. This forecast will continue to be updated and refined over the next couple of months as the administration continues to move through the budget process.

As illustrated in Table 3, preliminary information indicates that if taxes increase by CPIX (currently 2.1%) it will be insufficient to cover the cost of existing labour and base budget pressures. Existing labour and base budget incremental costs are forecasted at $8.5M over three years as compared to $4.1M of additional tax revenue over that same period. There is $0.4M of funding currently tied up to pay the Core Area Development Charge exemption that will be available to assist in funding the pressures, however significant additional funding would still be required.

Council Meeting Page 190 of 409 August 10, 2015 17 Corporate Services

Incremental Operating Impacts of Capital & Growth are projected at $1.6M over the three year period to be covered off with projected Assessment growth of $1.8M over the same period. It should be noted that although total Assessment Growth is projected at $3M over the three year period, Council approved policy applies 60% of the Assessment Growth (or in this case $1.8M) to Operating, and 40% (or in this case $1.2M) is divided evenly between the Capital Reserve Fund and Capital Infrastructure Reinvestment Reserve Fund.

Service Level Changes of $2.5M over the three year period do not have any funding allocated.

If the entire forecasted shortfall of $6.4M were to be funded, it would result in a tax increase of approximately 6% a year for each of the next three years.

Table 3: Operating Budget Forecast 2016-2018

Preliminary Estimates - 2016-2018 Budget Forecast 2016 2017 2018 Total Available Funding (000's) Tax increase (CPIX estimate 2.1%) 1,310 1,360 1,410 4,080 Assessment Growth - based on 60% of projection 600 600 600 1,800 Core Area Assessment Repayment - final repayment 10 400 - 410 Total Funding Available 1,920 2,360 2,010 6,290

Other Costs Base Budget Changes (Including Labour & Benefits) 3,730 2,560 2,270 8,560 Operating Impacts of Capital 660 380 540 1,580 Service Level Changes 1,050 360 1,140 2,550 Total Other Identified Costs 5,440 3,300 3,950 12,690

Funding Deficit 3,520 940 1,940 6,400

It should be clearly noted that the figures associated with each of the categories in “Other Costs” and the years that the figures are associated with still need to be vetted in detail and will be further refined over the coming months.

The non-labour pressures consist of various types. Some are uncontrollable due to legislation or requirements to pay third parties, or they are historical funding shortfalls that need to be addressed. Others are operating impacts of a capital project previously approved by Council or to be approved by Council, and some are related to population growth. Others are more discretionary in nature and are to move the Strategic Plan forward by enhancing and investing in services.

Examples of specific pressures in each of the three buckets are as follows:

Council Meeting Page 191 of 409 August 10, 2015 18 Corporate Services

Base Budget Changes • Electricity • Health and Safety Coordinator • External Legal expenses • Garbage collection in City parks/open spaces • Museum & Archival Services & program development

Operating Impacts of Capital & Growth • Ongoing park & sportsfield maintenance for new assets (e.g. Westmount Sportsfields, Alexandra Park, Mary Allen Park)

• Maintenance of new facilities (such as the Northwest Campus) and additional roads or road widenings (such as Columbia St. Fischer Hallman to Erbsville, Columbia Street extension to Wilmot line). Ongoing maintenance of these additional assets includes; snow clearing, grass cutting, street sweeping etc.

Service Level Changes • WREDC sustainable funding • Cultural Planning Specialist • Part-time Community Outreach Coordinator • Integrated Risk Management Analyst • East Side Library Branch ongoing operating funding

3.3.4 Historical Context

For several years, taxes have been raised at the rate of inflation and 60% of Budgeted Assessment Growth has been budgeted in the Operating budget. These main revenue streams for funding additional costs have been covering existing labour & benefits and little more. In fact, since 2012, on average, there has been approximately $300,000 annually left to deal with other pressures other than labour.

Table 4: 2012-2015 Operating Budget: Main Revenue Streams to fund tax supported expenses

2012 2013 2014 2015 Labour Costs 1,638,223 1,314,857 1,165,795 1,129,158 Taxes (@ MPI) (1,207,901) (894,615) (737,629) (931,324) Assessment Growth (60%) (712,684) (510,836) (699,833) (820,489) Funding Available for Other Needs (282,362) (90,594) (271,668) (622,655)

Labour and benefits, as well as other revenue shortfalls create an inherent pressure that over the short term and historically could be dealt with without significant consequences; however, the issue becomes more substantial with the accumulated impact over time.

Council Meeting Page 192 of 409 August 10, 2015 19 Corporate Services

3.3.5 Labour & Benefits

Since the City is a service provider, labour and benefits is the City’s largest expense. While the City’s negotiated settlements are competitive in relation to our comparators, generally they are higher than inflation (i.e. tax increases) for all labour groups and particularly this is true of Emergency Services. Emergency worker compensation is rising faster than other municipal services, and inflation. These increases stretch the City’s budget and draw funds away from other programs and services.

This particular issue is one that many municipalities are struggling with as binding arbitration leaves them with few negotiation options. Emergency services workers are valued municipal employees who ensure community health and safety in all Ontario municipalities. Because these essential workers are not allowed to strike, the collective bargaining process relies on arbitration to resolve differences if a settlement can’t be reached. The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) continues to advocate for improvements to the arbitration process so that “ability to pay” includes economic and fiscal impacts of an arbitrators’ decision.

The total average annual shortfall experienced between the taxes increased by MPI from 2012-2015 (specifically the public sector wage agreement increase) versus actual ratified agreements is approximately $400K per year or $1.6M cumulative over the four year period for all labour groups in total.

3.3.6 Other Revenue Shortfalls

The City’s $172M gross Operating Budget is funded in 3 main ways: 1) through taxes and assessment growth, 2) user rates, and 3) “other” revenues including; user fees, grants, investments, heads & beds, etc.

User rates are fully recovering their budgeted operating costs through user fees. If taxes are capped to increase at inflation, and if “other” revenues do not keep increasing at the pace of inflation, and the difference is not picked up by the general tax base, there is an inherent pressure that is being absorbed.

Other revenues that do not lend themselves to increases by inflation include; grants, heads and beds (where the rate per student has remained static at $75 per student since 1987), investments, supplementary taxes and various user fees that need to be competitive and affordable (e.g. swimming fees). Of the $41M of Other Revenues in the 2015 budget, approximately 80% are not able to be increased regularly by inflation. Figure 3 illustrates this concept.

Council Meeting Page 193 of 409 August 10, 2015 20 Corporate Services

Figure 3: Conceptual example of Revenue Shortfall

Incremental Funding

Other Non- inflationary Revenue Assessment Growth (FUNDING GAP) Tax Increase @ MPI

User Rate Other Revenue Incremental Change Inflationary

Even if some of the non-inflationary revenues increase as actuals over time, for a variety of reasons (but not due specifically to inflation), they cannot necessarily be increased in the budget on a steady, ongoing basis as is intended by inflation. To illustrate how non-inflationary revenue may increase over time, an example is investments which may yield a higher rate of return based on portfolio mix/investment tools/cash availability/economic factors etc. While it’s not logical to simply increase expected investment returns by inflation each year, if a trend-line over time indicates that investment decisions are yielding a higher rate of return and forecasting supports a continued pattern for the medium to long term then an increase in budgeted investment revenue would be recommended. In the meantime, the gap in revenue is absorbed from within.

Council Meeting Page 194 of 409 August 10, 2015 21 Corporate Services

3.3.7 Historical Balanced Budgets

The City has undertaken several approaches over the years in order to balance the budget. One way this was accomplished was by reducing expenses and implementing revenue true ups to the tune of $5M from 2012-2015.

The City has also recalibrated its labour force several times over the last few years to create efficiencies and to adapt to an ever changing environment by reducing labour in certain areas in order to increase it in others without an additional financial pressure as well as adjusting service levels and developing joint services initiatives with area municipalities to generate economies and service continuity.

Examples of this recalibration/service level adjustments and joint service initiatives include:

2008-2010 Budget • 10 positions were eliminated (e.g. Food Services supervisors, Customer service associate, Box office coordinator) • In 2008 a, service level reduction was made to the leaf collection program, reducing the number of passes on each city street from 3 to 2. In 2009, this was further reduced to 1 pass on all city streets with an additional isolated pickup following the one pass.

2013Forward • 9 positions eliminated (e.g. Director Strategic Planning & Performance, HR Recruitment Coordinator) • Recalibrated positions (e.g. 7 General Managers reduced to 3 Commissioners, Systems Analyst recalibrated to Security Analyst)

Insourcing/Outsourcing • Food Services was brought in house & Food Services Supervisors were reinstated • AMP – Hired a fixed term contract employee to develop the AMP • Capital Project Inspections – combination of in house and outsourcing to most efficiently manage peaks

Council Meeting Page 195 of 409 August 10, 2015 22 Corporate Services

Joint Services A formal Joint Service formalized approach began in 2004 between City of Waterloo and City of Kitchener, however, informal and ad hoc cooperative partnering have occurred between the two cities for many years prior to 2004. Ad hoc partnering also occurs with the Region of Waterloo and the City of Cambridge. • Regional Road maintenance agreement was established between Waterloo, Kitchener, Cambridge and the Region of Waterloo in 2008. • Other examples of joint initiatives include; After hours dispatch, Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study, Two-way radio technology sharing agreement, Border street construction, Waterloo Region Small Business Centre, Water/Wastewater Rate Study.

2015 Budget • Recalibrated positions (e.g. Environmental Steward from Strategic Initiatives Division replaced another related position in Environment & Parks) • Shared Roles (e.g. Project Management Officer position responsibilities were transferred to Engineering Services while simultaneously including a Project Manager Role) • Freeze on several new staff hires proposed through the 2015 Budget (6 FTEs were deferred) to allow for the completion of Council’s 2015-2018 Strategic Plan and therefore provide time for a sober second thought to what is needed to move the City forward.

In order to keep taxes at the rate of inflation, many budget lines were simply not receiving the increase they should have been receiving and as a result, and over time, operational decisions are deferred to remain within the funding cap. For example: Corporate services which are internal services takes longer to complete a project or initiative, or takes on more risk by not being as detailed with review of reports/business processes/reconciliations. For front line services, decisions such as leaving a greater portion of a park’s turf to naturalize instead of cutting it right out to the edge are incremental reductions to minimize impacts to citizens but to remain within the funding cap.

Council Meeting Page 196 of 409 August 10, 2015 23 Corporate Services

3.3.8 Surplus/Deficit

As has been reported to Council on a regular basis each year, operational tax based areas of the City have been in a deficit for some time. However, the City has been fortunate to have exceeded expectations related to supplementary taxes, investment income, dividends and development revenue. Figure 4 shows the surplus history from 2003 to 2014 and 2015 is currently projected at $0.

Figure 4: 2003 to 2014 Actual Surplus, 2015 Projected

Report CORP2015-063 tabled at Council on July 13, 2015 indicates a preliminary estimate for actuals coming in right on budget for 2015. Staff will be monitoring budget to actual variance throughout the year and will provide an update to Council in November based on Q3 results.

Due to the magnitude of the budgeted revenue true ups made in the 2015 budget (specifically to dividends, investments, penalties & interest and supplementary taxes which have traditionally been the source of the City’s surplus), staff do not recommend further true ups to these budgeted revenue streams without first determining the effects of the changes over the course of several years. While the 2015 true ups were considered conservative and sustainable for the medium term, any additional budgeted revenue true ups could be risky to undertake.

Council Meeting Page 197 of 409 August 10, 2015 24 Corporate Services

3.3.9 Potential Solutions for 2016-2018 Operating Budget Balancing The proposed 2016-2018 Operating budget will come forward with various options that include service delivery impacts, tax increase above inflation, policy changes, or some combination thereof. This is intended to address the financial challenges described in Table 3, as a result of the inherent pressures that have been mounting over the course of several years that could not be addressed by the inflationary funding cap.

Management will be reviewing options and will be presenting them to Council for consideration as part of Budget deliberations. Examples of options being reviewed include:

• Service Delivery Impacts: - Additional outsourcing/insourcing - Eliminating services - Service Level reductions - Further enhancing joint services - Selling Assets - Technology investment for future efficiencies • Tax increase above inflation • Policy changes (e.g. Step gapping, Vacancy Management)

Council Meeting Page 198 of 409 August 10, 2015 25 Corporate Services

Appendix A – Proposed 2016 Budget Schedule

Timeline Steps Who Preparatory Work OLT Budget Sub-Committee CMT February - May Budget Strategy Sessions Finance Administrative Review Supervisors Budget Launch Managers - Presentation OLT - Targets CMT May - Direction Finance Identified Staff June Budget Software Training for Departments Finance June MPI vs CPIX Report Council July Fees & Charges Approval - Tax Base Council Budget Preparation Managers - Business Plans OLT - Operating Budget CMT May - August - Capital Budget Finance OLT Budget Sub-Committee Finance June - August Reserve & Reserve Fund Policy Review & Update Audit Committee August Audit Committee Process Discussion Audit Committee Budget Strategy Approval August Budget Policy Approval Council September 21 - FSP CPIX Approval Council OLT OLT Budget Sub-Committee Administrative Review / Budget Deliberations CMT August - September Administrative Approval Finance October - November Public Budget Document Preparation Finance December - January Public Engagement OLT Budget Sub-Committee Political Review September Reserve & Reserve Fund Policy Approval Council October Audit Committee Budget Process Review Council Third Quarter Significant Operating Budget Variance November 16 Update Council Fees & Charges - Enterprise / Rate Approval December 14 Early Capital Budget Approval Council Public Budget Release December 18 Public Business Plan Release Council January 11, 2016 January 18, 2016 January 25, 2016 Business Plan Presentations Council February 1, 2016 February 2, 2016 Capital Budget Review Council February 8, 2016 Operating and Capital Budget Approval Council

Council Meeting Page 199 of 409 August 10, 2015 26 Corporate Services

Appendix B – 2015 Capital Projects Recommended for Automatic Funding (Illustrative Scenario)

Department Projects Total COMM Parkland Amenity Improvements - Small Parks - City Wide 310,000 Parkview Cemetery Expansion 765,000 COMM Total 1,075,000 CORP City Hall - Data Centre Re-Location 1,591,000 Corporate Space Planning 544,000 End User Computing Requirements 344,000 Enterprise Wide Security 254,000 Fibre Network Infrastructure - Large Scale 216,000 Maximo - Expand Functionality & Upgrades 232,000 Peoplesoft Financials & HRMS Upgrades and Enhancements 286,000 Site, Building, Architectural and Accessibility System Improvements 740,000 CORP Total 4,207,000 IPPW Allen St E-Willow St (tracks) to Erb St 2,532,000 Blackpipes Rehabilitation - Proactive 743,000 Cedar Trunk 1 - Erb Street to approx. 720 m. south of Erb Street 289,000 City Wide - City Road Share of Regional Projects 698,000 City Wide - Development Driven Sanitary Sewer Upgrades 596,000 City Wide - Streetlighting Retrofit, Pole Replacement, & Hydro Conduits 337,000 Columbia St - Fischer-Hallman to Erbsville Rd 5,765,000 Columbia Street Extension to Wilmot Line 772,000 Columbia-Lexington - Weber to Davenport - Multi Use Trail and Partial Road Di 625,000 Conservation Dr- from Beaver Crk Rd to W Limit Snowcrest Pl. 2,491,000 Conservation Drive - Beaver Crk Rd to W limit Snowcrest Place 431,000 Conservation Drive and Beaver Creek Road Lands Surrounding SPS# 2 and SPS # 537,000 Development Driven Water Upgrades 476,000 Erbsville Road - Laurelwood Area 7 to City Limit 424,000 Floodplain Mapping and Policy Update 258,000 Glenridge Dr (entire length) & Glenridge Place 242,000 King Street - Erb St to Central St 3,561,000 King Street - Weber to Conestoga Mall & Weber St Forwell Creek Rd to Blythw 982,000 Northfield Drive - Davenport Rd to University Ave 282,000 Office Renovations - Building Standards 275,000 Ontario Building Public Portal (OBPP) Project 286,000 Parking North of Erb 1,225,000 Spruce Street - Columbia to Hickory 382,000 SPS #2 on Conservation Dr @ Beaver Crk Road 1,604,000 Uptown Parkade - Capital Repairs 212,000 Valve Replacement Program 308,000 Various Resurfacing 862,000 Walter Bean Trail - Woolwich Street Reconstruction 373,000 Water Meter Replacements 675,000 Waterloo Spurline Storm Sewer Upgrades 546,000 Woolwich St - Kiwanis Park Dr. to University Ave. 276,000 Woolwich St - Sunbridge to Kiwanis Park Dr. 206,000 IPPW Total 29,271,000 Grand Total 34,553,000

Council Meeting Page 200 of 409 August 10, 2015 27 Corporate Services

Appendix C – 2015 Capital Projects Recommended to Return to Council (Illustrative Scenario)

Department Projects Total CAO Data Mine - The Re-Purposing of the Carnegie Library 1,837,000 East Side Employment Lands 510,000 Public Square Addition of Features and Rehabilitation Work 1,100,000 West Side Employment Lands Servicing 204,000 CAO Total 3,651,000 COMM Alexandra Park Expansion-Land Acquisition 1,085,000 Waterloo Park - Bauer Parking Lot Upgrade 204,000 Waterloo Park - Implementation of Master Plan 310,000 COMM Total 1,599,000 CORP Fleet Expansion and Replacement 203,000 Fleet Replacement - Equipment Replacement / Expansion Program 1,561,000 Service Centre Rehabillitation 9,792,000 CORP Total 11,556,000 IPPW Beaver Crk Rd.(from approx 625 m north of Laurelwood to Conservation Dr) 2,294,000 Core Area Development Driven Upgrades 1,996,000 Corporate Asset Management Plan - All Assets 423,000 Forsyth Drive Road Re-profiling 420,000 Hydro Corridor Trail - South of Columbia St. 399,000 In Camera Item 1,913,000 Northdale Community Improvement Plan Implementation 837,000 Northdale Priority Project 500,000 Rapid Transit Station Area Planning 233,000 Uptown Community Improvement Plan 1,581,000 Uptown Streetscape Enhancements & Underground in conjunction with LRT 2,649,000 Water Distribution System Master Plan Study 234,000 IPPW Total 13,479,000 Grand Total 30,285,000

Council Meeting Page 201 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Financial Planning & Purchasing

Title: Budget Policy Updates Report Number: CORP2015-058 Author: Cassandra Pacey Meeting Type: Finance & Strategic Planning Committee Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: NA Attachments: Appendix A – FC-010 Definition of Capital Appendix B – FC-011 Multiple Year Budget Approval Appendix C – FC-014 New Revenue Appendix D – FC-018 Capital Overhead Appendix E – FC-002 Financial Requests Outside of Budget Appendix F – FC-012 Capital Budget

Ward No.: City Wide

Recommendation:

1. The Council approve CORP2015-058 “Budget Policy Updates”; 2. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-010 Definition of Capital attached as Appendix A. 3. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-011 Multiple Year Budget Approval attached as Appendix B. 4. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-014 New Revenue Policy attached as Appendix C. 5. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-018 Capital Overhead attached as Appendix D. 6. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-002 Financial Requests Outside of Budget attached as Appendix E. 7. That Council approve the revised Corporate Policy FC-012 Capital Budget attached as Appendix F.

Council Meeting Page 202 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

A. Executive Summary A review of the existing policies associated with providing parameters related to budget has resulted in proposed amendments. The proposed amendments are intended to provide consolidation and clarity to the budget process.

CORP2015-058 provides a high-level summary of the proposed changes to the existing policies within the body of the report. There are two categories of amendments for Council’s approval, administrative updates and substantial updates. The administrative category contains minor wording updates, updates to reflect the corporate policy template and administrative improvements. The substantial category updates contain similar changes as the administrative category however also includes proposed adjustments to approval process.

The Operating and Capital budget processes are inclusive and comprehensive. They are management tools that provide fiscal parameters for the City to deliver on a myriad of services to the members of the community. While every effort is made to work within the boundaries of the budget, there are times when new information surfaces or priorities re-align between budget cycles. In an effort to provide guidance to the organization in addressing these scenarios in a dynamic environment, budget policies were developed and have been in existence for a number of years.

Finance has collaborated with the Operational Leadership Team (OLT) Budget Sub- Committee and Corporate Management Team (CMT) to review existing budget policies. In reviewing the existing policies, staff are proposing amendments to allow for consolidation, clarity and refinement. In addition, the Audit Committee received 5 key policies for consideration at the August 6, 2015 Audit Committee meeting.

B. Financial Implications NA

C. Technology Implications NA

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

Council Meeting Page 203 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Cassandra Pacey Director: Filipa Reynolds Commissioner: Keshwer Patel Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 204 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

Budget Policy Updates CORP2015-058

A review of the existing policies/documents associated with providing parameters related to budget has resulted in proposed amendments. The proposed amendments are intended to provide consolidation and clarity to the process.

CORP2015-058 provides a high-level summary of the proposed changes to the existing policies within the body of the report. There are two categories of amendments for Council’s approval, administrative updates and substantial updates. The administrative category contains minor wording updates, updates to reflect the corporate policy template and administrative improvements. The substantial updates contain similar changes as the administrative category however also includes proposed updates to approval process.

In addition, the Audit Committee reviewed 5 key policies at the August 6, 2015 Audit Committee meeting.

Council Meeting Page 205 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

The 5 key policies reviewed by Audit Committee are:

1. FC-002 Financial Requests Outside of Budget 2. FC-013 Use of Budgeted Assessment Growth Revenue • (no changes recommended) 3. FC-014 New Revenue • (no changes recommended) 4. FC-006 Employee Development and Capacity Building Reserve • (no changes recommended) 5. FC-012 Capital Budget

The amended policies have been included in the attached appendixes however a summary of the proposed amendments are identified below.

Administrative Policy Updates

1. FC-010 Definition of Capital (Appendix A) • Added wording to reflect that the minimum dollar included within the capital budget is $10,000 annually. This update will provide clarity with respect to the minimum requirement per year versus over the 10 year timeframe. 2. FC-011 Multiple Year Budget Approval (Appendix B) • The policy has been updated to replace reference to Municipal Price Index (MPI), to Core Consumer Price Index (CPIX) published by the Bank of Canada. The CPIX policy (FC-019) was approved by Council on June 15, 2015 and this update is recommended to be consistent. • The policy was also updated to reflect the ability of Commissioners to adjust fees as allowed under 3.1.8 of the Fees & Charges By-Law. 3. FC-014 New Revenue Policy (Appendix C) • The policy has been updated to replace reference to MPI, to CPIX. The CPIX policy (FC-019) was approved by Council on June 15, 2015 and this update is recommended to be consistent. 4. FC-018 Capital Overhead (Appendix D) • The policy has been updated to reference Corporate Services and Library projects being exempt unless utilizing a Project Implementation Division. The policy was silent on these two departments and this update is to provide additional clarity on when Corporate Services and the Library are to pay capital overhead.

Council Meeting Page 206 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Corporate Services

Substantial Policy Updates

1. FC-002 Financial Requests Outside of Budget (Appendix E) • The inclusion of a threshold related to the purchase or sale of land. The anticipated expenditures include however are not limited to surveys and environmental assessment. • Proposed ≤ $100,000 CMT • Proposed ≥ $100,000 Council 2. FC-012 Capital Budget (Appendix F) • The policy has been updated to refer to the Definition of Capital policy rather than duplicating wording from another policy. • The policy has been updated to reflect the new capital approval process proposed in CORP2015-047.

Council Meeting Page 207 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix A – Definition of Capital

CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: Definition of Capital Policy Category: Financial Control Policy No.: FC-010 Department: Corporate Services Approval Date: February 17, 2007 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Cassandra Pacey Attachments: Related Documents/Legislation:

Key Word(s): Budget, Capital

POLICY STATEMENT: The Council for the City of Waterloo is committed to demonstrating financial leadership and sustainability. This policy assists in formalizing a defined and transparent process for defining capital projects.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to define capital projects and minimum threshold to be included in the capital budget.

DEFINITIONS: Capital Asset: A capital asset is an item with physical substance (the exception being software) with a useful economic life extending beyond one fiscal year.

Ongoing Maintenance: Ongoing maintenance includes but is not limited to painting, mechanical maintenance, and replacement of existing parts.

Betterment: Betterment is a cost incurred to enhance the service potential of a tangible capital asset by either increasing productivity or service capacity and results the extension of the asset life.

Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date: July 10, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date July 15, 2015 Council Meeting Page 208 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-010 Page 2

SCOPE: This policy applies to all members of the City’s organization including members of Council, full, part-time and contract staff.

POLICY COMMUNICATION: Council will receive this policy for approval. If approved, the policy will be posted on the city’s intranet. Staff will be advised of the policy via distribution to the Operational Leadership Team and Corporate Management Team.

POLICY: Minimum Capital Budget Threshold: The minimum annual dollar amount to be included within the Capital Budget is $10,000.

Examples of acceptable capital budget items: There are many projects that may be considered eligible for the capital budget beyond those that fit the definition of an asset.

Examples of acceptable items to be included in the capital budget are as follows: • Maintenance projects requiring significant funding or will be completed in stages over multiple years. • Soft projects such as studies and consultant work that are usually the precursor to changes in operations or the implementation of capital projects. • Projects that are a result of an agreement for services or funding between Municipalities, the Region or other Government body. • An obligation to make capital expenditures or major maintenance expenditures as part of an agreement to sell or lease a property. • A project that improves operational effectiveness.

COMPLIANCE: In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 209 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix B – Multiple Year Budget Approval B CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: Multiple Year Budget Approval Policy Category: Financial Control Policy No.: FC-011 Department: Corporate Services Approval Date: December 17, 2007 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Cassandra Pacey Attachments: Related Documents/Legislation: Ontario Municipal Act Regulation 291.(1)

Key Word(s): Budget

POLICY STATEMENT: The Council for the City of Waterloo is committed to demonstrating financial leadership and sustainability. This policy assists in formalizing a defined, transparent and flexible process for budgeting.

PURPOSE: Changes made to the Ontario Municipal Act in 2006 provide Council with greater flexibility. The additional flexibility is created due to the ability to approve a one year budget for the first year of a Council term and the remaining three years in one, three year approval if Council wishes. The purpose of this policy is to define the procedures for multiple year budget approvals.

DEFINITIONS:

Municipal Act The Municipal Act is the statute governing the powers, duties, internal organization, and structure of Ontario municipalities.

CMT Corporate Management Team

Net Zero Adjustments categorized as "housekeeping" items whereby budget funds can be reallocated within departments to realign the existing budget.

Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date: July 10, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date July 15, 2015 Council Meeting Page 210 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-011 Page 2

SCOPE: This policy applies to all members of the City’s organization including members of Council, full, part-time and contract staff.

POLICY:

Budget and Business Plans 1. Departments will prepare three year budgets & business plans that will establish three years of service levels and three years of revenue requirements. 2. Departments are expected to operate within their approved budget in each of the three years. 3. Annually, if a surplus exists, it will be allocated to reserve funds based on existing surplus allocation policies.

User Fees 1. City of Waterloo User Fees will be reviewed as part of the budget process. User Fees will be adjusted to reflect market influences and operation needs. 2. The Fee & Charges By-Law will be approved by Council as a single year in the first year of a Council Term. 3. Subsequent to the first year, a three year approval of the Fee & Charges By-Law will be sought. 4. That the powers of a Commissioner to increase, decrease or waive a fee outlined in section 3.1.8 in the Fees & Charges By-Law 5. Significant changes may be brought to CMT and subsequently to Council for review and approval. 6. User Fees that are legislated to be set for a specific date or time period will be adhered to and brought to Council for approval.

Council Meeting Page 211 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-011 Page 3

Adjustment Process 1. The three year budget approval will allow for an annual adjustment process so that Council has some flexibility to adjust plans and budgets as economic and political circumstances change.

Adjustments may include, but are not limited to;

a) Material changes to the projected Core Consumer Price Index (CPIX) b) Material changes to Labour Agreements c) Material changes to Economic assumptions d) Changes to Assessment Growth Projections*

Material changes are defined an individual items that will have an impact of 1% property tax budget (or approximately $600,000). *Assessment Growth Budget will be adjusted annually for changes to Assessment Growth Revenue within the three year budget cycle. The changes will be reflected in the annual budget confirmation that goes to Council for approval. This is to ensure the tax levy is adjusted appropriately.

Scenario Recommended Action Actual Assessment Growth is greater than Allocate excess funds to Budget budget up to a maximum of 1% property Contingency to minimize the impact of tax budget (or approximately $600,000) unforeseen expenses or shortfalls in assessment growth in future years. Actual Assessment Growth is less than Fund the shortfall through the Tax Rate budget up to a maximum of 1% property Stabilization Reserve as a one-time tax budget (or approximately $600,000) infusion of funds. Sustainable funding to be referred to the following year’s budget process. Differential between Actual Assessment Open the budget per materiality threshold. Growth and Budgeted Assessment Growth greater than 1% property tax (or approximately $600,000)

Council Meeting Page 212 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-011 Page 4

Operating Net Zero Procedure: 1. There is an opportunity for Managers/Directors/CMT to make "Net Zero Adjustments" between budget cycles.

2. It is not an opportunity to create new programs or receive additional funding as by definition the changes must net to zero.

3. Any changes must be a reallocation of one expense to another expense, or from one revenue source to another revenue source, thereby having no overall financial impact but rather to more accurately align the budget.

For instance, if actual expenses for a certain budget line are historically below budget provision, funding may be reallocated to another desired expense account, as shown below:

Amount Account Account Description Org Org Name Program Project Increase Budget to: + sign in front $5,000 200511 Mtc Contracts 13511 Building Stds 00000 00000 Decrease Budget from: - sign in front -$5,000 200106 Legal Prosecution 13511 Building Stds 00000 00000 Net Zero check 0

Capital Net Zero Procedure: 1. Projects of equal or lesser value may be traded off within the three year period adhering to the following thresholds;

Threshold^ Approval Level^ < $10,000 Directors > $10,000 and < $50,000 Commissioner > $50,000 and < $200,000 CMT ≥ $200,000 Council Note: ^The projects have been approved during the capital budget process. The alignment of the projects may be adjusted based on the identified thresholds to be efficient and cost effective.

COMPLIANCE: In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 213 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix C – New Revenue Policy

CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: New Revenue Policy Policy Category: Financial Control Policy No.: FC-014 Department: Corporate Services Approval Date: April 14, 2008 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Cassandra Pacey Attachments: Related Documents/Legislation:

Key Word(s): Revenue

PURPOSE: During any year, opportunities may arise for “new revenue.” The purpose of this policy is to define “new revenue” and recommend an allocation methodology. This policy was created in 2008 in response to the following Notice of Motion.

1. Develop a policy to define “new revenue.” 2. Recommend a process for allocation of any such revenue, providing for discussion by Council prior to any discussion occurring at the staff level.

Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date July 10, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date July 15, 2015 Council Meeting Page 214 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-014 Page 2

DEFINITIONS:

Revenue Based on the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA) Handbook (HB), revenue is defined as the following:

The inflow of cash, receivables, or other consideration arising in the course of the ordinary activities of an enterprise, normally from the sale of goods, the rendering of services, and the use by others of enterprise resources yielding interest, royalties, and dividends. Revenue is net of items such as trade or volume discounts, returns and allowances, claims for damaged goods, and certain excise and sales taxes. Excise and sales taxes to be netted against revenue would normally include those imposed at the time of sale and would normally exclude those imposed prior to the time of sale on either the goods or their constituents.

In the municipal setting, our typical sources of revenue are Property taxes, User Fees, and Other Revenues such as Government Grants and Investment Income.

Revenue Recognition Based on the CICA HB, revenue recognition is defined as the following:

Revenue from sales and service transactions should be recognized when the requirements as to performance….are satisfied, provided that at the time of performance ultimate collection is reasonably assured.

New Revenue Based on the definitions above, “New Revenue” can be considered those revenues which are over and above the base revenue currently budgeted to be received, which can be reasonably assured of being received.

New Revenue would include new “types” of revenue, such as: 1. Additional revenue from Government Grants or Grant Programs 2. Additional revenue from new sources of revenue such as new user fees

In the City of Waterloo, new revenue under this policy would exclude: 1. Property tax increases 2. Additional revenue from Assessment Growth 3. Additional revenue from existing User Fees 4. Additional revenue from Investment Income

SCOPE: This policy applies to all members of the City’s organization including members of Council, full, part-time and contract staff.

Council Meeting Page 215 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-014 Page 3

POLICY:

Allocation of New Revenue Currently, there are some Council-approved policies and procedures which allocate new revenue, those being:

1. Excess Assessment Growth a. In general, any amount received in excess of budgeted Assessment Growth will be put in the Budget Contingency to be used for unforeseen expenditures or shortfalls in assessment growth in future years. b. See actual policy for details 2. Assessment Growth a. 20% of assessment growth revenue will be dedicated to the Capital Reserve Fund. b. See actual policy for details. 3. Core Consumer Price Index (CPIX) a. In general, new property tax revenue generated from CPIX is to be used for municipal inflationary increases in the base budget, or other priorities as deemed necessary by Council and/or staff.

The above policies and procedures should be followed first, before the following are considered as outlined below:

4. Government Grants or other funding from other levels of government a. Funding linked to a specific program or service, whether operating or capital, then the funding will be used for that program or service. For example: i. New funding from the Province on Ontario in the amount of $1.3 million that is directed to roads and bridges. ii. An infrastructure project originally funded by the City of Waterloo and subsequently receives a grant (i.e. MIII), the original funding (i.e. CRF) would be directed to the Capital Infrastructure Reinvestment Reserve Fund (CIRRF) b. Funding that does not have a specific link to a program or service (all or in part), will be discussed at Council with direction provided to staff. For example, although the $1.3 million is directed to roads and bridges, Council may wish to direct staff as to which roads or bridge projects receive this funding.

Council Meeting Page 216 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-014 Page 4

5. Other revenue a. Any significant increases in other sources of new revenue ($100,000 or more), direction to staff will be sought from Council. b. For any linked sources of new revenue, such as sponsorship or fundraising revenue, funding will be used as per the linkage to the program.

COMPLIANCE: In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 217 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix D – Capital Overhead

CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: Capital Overhead Policy Category: Financial Control Policy No.: FC-018 Department: Corporate Services Approval Date: February 17, 2007 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Cassandra Pacey Attachments: Related Documents/Legislation:

Key Word(s): Budget, Capital

PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to define overhead, the corresponding overhead rate charged to capital projects and where the overhead will be recovered in the operating budget.

DEFINITIONS: Overhead: Recovery of expenses budgeted and paid through the operating budget. Costs include and not limited to: staff related expenses to manage projects, process & release of payments, design.

Project Budget Division: Division that identifies the need and subsequently budgets a capital project.

Project Implementation Division: Division that implements capital projects on behalf of other divisions.

Grant:

Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date: July 10, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date: July 15, 2015 Council Meeting Page 218 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-018 Page 2

A gift in monetary or in kind terms by another government, agency or organization for specified purposes which are usually defined by specified qualification of terms. SCOPE: This policy applies to all members of the City’s organization including members of Council, full, part-time and contract staff.

POLICY: Projects Equal to or less than $1,500,000 That capital projects with a Project Budget Division from Integrated Planning and Public Works (IPPW) and Facilities & Fleet (F&F) will have a 6% overhead fee charged to them.

That capital projects that identify the Project Implementation Division as a division within IPPW or F&F, will have a 6% overhead fee charged to them. The divisions within Community Services, Corporate Services, CAO department and Library will pay overhead only on the projects that require Project Implementation Division services.

Projects Greater than $1,500,000 That capital projects with a Project Budget Division from Integrated Planning and Public Works (IPPW) and Facilities & Fleet (F&F) will have a 3% overhead fee charged to them.

That capital projects that identify the Project Implementation Division as a division within IPPW or F&F, will have a 3% overhead fee charged to them. The divisions within Community Services, Corporate Services, CAO department and Library will pay overhead only on the projects that require Project Implementation Division services.

Grant Funding Overhead will not be charged on grant funding where overhead is considered an ineligible expense. Examples include however are not limited to Federal Gas Tax Fund, Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund.

Overhead Fees Overhead fees will be charged when the project is approved. The corresponding revenue in the operating budget will be assigned to the implementation division.

Council Meeting Page 219 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-018 Page 3

COMPLIANCE: In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 220 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix E – Financial Requests Outside of the Budget Process

CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: Financial Requests Outside of the Budget Process Policy Category: Financial Control Policy No.: FC-002 Department: Corporate Services Approval Date: February 17, 2007 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Cassandra Pacey Attachments: Related Documents/Legislation:

Key Word(s): Budget

PURPOSE: During any given year, requests are made for operating or capital funding outside of the budget process as a result of new information or re-alignment of priorities. It is imperative that the long term impact, the impact beyond the current year, of these requests be understood and addressed prior to funds being expended when possible.

Should acquisitions/spending be contemplated that exceed the approved budget proposed at any time during the year, approval must be requested and obtained (as identified in Table 1) in advance and in order for additional funds to be expended when possible, over and above those originally approved within the budgets. This does not include emergency acquisitions (please see the Purchasing By-Law for Emergency acquisitions).

DEFINITIONS: Over Budget: An item that has been budgeted for, but which is anticipated to exceed the approved budget.

Outside of Budget: Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date: July 10, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date July 15, 2015 Council Meeting Page 221 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-002 Page 2

An item that has not been budgeted for.

Capital Item: A “capital item” is a project. In the case where a number of projects are grouped together (i.e. Roads Rehabilitation Program), a “capital item” is considered to be the individual projects within the larger project / program.

Operating Item: The definition of an “operating item” requires judgment and discretion on the part of the Commissioner/Director and could be considered to be a line item, or a program within a division or department level.

Staff: An individual who is hired to provide services for the City of Waterloo on a regular basis (part-time or full-time capacity) in exchange for compensation and who does not provide these services as part of an independent business.

SCOPE: This policy applies to all members of the City’s organization including members of Council, full, part-time and contract staff.

POLICY: Identification of Capital Budget Funding Requirements: Directors / Commissioners are encouraged to work with . their staff to monitor capital project in progress in order to identify projects that have unanticipated costs that will cause the project to exceed the approved budget. . their staff to identify capital projects that are outside the budget process as a result of new information or re-alignment of priorities.

Identification of Operating Budget Funding Requirements: Directors / Commissioners are responsible for managing their operating budget and working within their division / department’s budget allocation. Salaries, wages, benefits and the related FTE count is approved by Council during the budget process. As a result, these items are included in the divisional / department budgets that Directors / Commissioners are responsible for managing.

If it not possible to remain within budget, Directors / Commissioners are responsible for adhering to the process identified below:

Council Meeting Page 222 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-002 Page 3

Funding Sources for Capital and Operating Overages*: Directors / Commissioners are encouraged to work with . Their respective Financial Analyst and/or Accounting Technician to identify possible funding sources based on the process identified below. Where possible, alternate funding identification and approval is to be obtained prior to financial commitments being made that exceed budget.

Funding Process: The Department will inform the Director of Financial Planning & Purchasing and the appropriate Financial Analyst/Accounting Technician if a strategy is undertaken that will alter the budget.

1. The Divisional budgets are to be reviewed by the Director of the respective Division or the Commissioner of the respective department to identify sources of funding or expenditures that the overage could be substituted for. For Capital, this would include reviewing related capital projects that have a credit balance. See Credit Balance Policy for detailed information regarding eligibility of project to project transfers.

2. If no acceptable alternative is found at the Divisional level, then the Commissioner shall review the Departmental budget for alternative strategies.

3. If no alternative strategy is found, the Commissioner will contact the Chief Financial Officer or Director of Financial Planning & Purchasing so that Finance may assist in recommending a funding strategy.

*Note: Any item funded by Reserve or Reserve Funds must receive Council Approval regardless of dollar amount.

Council Meeting Page 223 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-002 Page 4

Table 1 Overage Scenarios 1. Capital Budget a. Over Budget – The Item has been budgeted, but is exceeding the approved budget i. Approval Thresholds 1. ≤ $10,000 Directors 2. > $10,000 and ≤ $50,000 Commissioners 3. > $50,000 and < $100,000 CMT 4. ≥ $100,000 Council 5. Items that accumulate to ≥ $100,000 Council b. Outside of Budget – The item has not been budgeted for i. Approval Thresholds 1. ≤ $10,000 Directors 2. > $10,000 and ≤ $25,000 Commissioners 3. > $25,000 and < $50,000 CMT 4. ≥ $50,000 Council 5. Items that accumulate to ≥ $50,000 Council 6. Item related to the purchase or sale of land (e.g. survey, environmental assessment) ≤ $100,000 CMT 7. Items related to the purchase or sale of land (e.g. survey, environmental assessment) ≥ $100,000 Council 2. Operating Budget a. Staffing i. New staffing requests are to be approved by Council b. Overages i. Directors are responsible for monitoring their R&E’s on a monthly basis and managing their operating budgets accordingly. Areas of concern should be flagged to the GM & Finance. ii. A purchase order (PO) made where budget is exceeded at the divisional level, will require budget confirmation by Finance before the PO can be dispatched. iii. The annual Surplus/(Deficit) process will identify budget overages in excess of $100,000 by division and report them to Council iv. Approval Thresholds 1. ≤ $10,000 Directors 2. > $10,000 and ≤ $50,000 Commissioners 3. > $50,000 and < $100,000 CMT 4. ≥ $100,000 Council 5. Items that accumulate to ≥ $100,000 Council

Council Meeting Page 224 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-002 Page 5

COMPLIANCE: In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 225 of 409 August 10, 2015 Appendix F – Capital Budget

CORPORATE POLICY

Policy Title: Capital Budget Policy Category: Financial Control Policy No.: FC-012 Department: Corporate Services Approval Date: February 17, 2007 Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Author: Cassandra Pacey Attachments: Related Documents/Legislation:

Key Word(s): Budget, Capital

PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to govern the items that will assist in creating the capital budget.

DEFINITIONS: Capital Project: A capital project is an item identified and funded through the Council Approved Capital Budget or an item funded through the Financial Requests Outside the Budget Process.

Overhead: A fee applied via a percentage to reimburse the operating for internal resource support.

Internal Resource Support: Internal Resource Support can include but is not limited to: design services, project management, contract administration, review of reports.

Mandatory Policy, Municipal Act: No Policy Administration Team, Review Date: July 10, 2015 Corporate Management Team, Review Date July 15, 2015 Council Meeting Page 226 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-012 Page 2

SCOPE: This policy applies to all members of the City’s organization including members of Council, full, part-time and contract staff.

POLICY: 1. That projects appearing in the Capital Budget adhere to the minimum balance threshold identified in the Council approved policy, Definition of Capital (FC-010). 2. Projects will be reviewed and use the criteria below to determine to assist in the decision making of identifying which reports would be automatically funded post Budget Approval and which reports would need to return to Council with a report before funding is released: a. Financial Materiality i. Projects receiving funding greater than $5M over the 3 year period b. Non-routine in nature i. e.g. construction of a City facility, development of a Community Improvement Plan (CIP) c. High Public/Council Interest i. e.g. Mary Allen Park, King Street Streetscape d. Request by Council 3. That all reserve funds financing capital expenditures must, at a minimum, have a positive balance. 4. That all fleet replacement & expansion expenditures, excluding Community Services-Fire Rescue Services, Community Services-Municipal Enforcement small vehicles and Integrated Planning and Public Works-Building Standards, be submitted to Council for approval prior to proceeding. 5. That transfers from the Operating Budget include the following; a. That an annual amount of $62,000 be set aside in the Operating Budget for the purpose of purchasing Environmentally Sensitive Lands. b. That an annual contribution of $20,000 from the Operating Budget be set aside in the Environmental Cleanup Reserve for the purpose of environmental cleanup. c. Each year as part of the approved budget strategy, 20% of Assessment Growth will be allocated to each of the Capital Reserve Fund (CRF) and the Capital Infrastructure Reinvestment Reserve Fund (CIRRF). d. That the contribution to the Commercial Property Reserve Fund from the City Centre Operating Budget is $191,436 and the Contribution to the Operating Budget from the Commercial Property Reserve Fund is $171,000. e. The Protective Services Equipment Reserve Fund (“PRO”) will receive annual funding of $249,000 from the Operating Budget.

Council Meeting Page 227 of 409 August 10, 2015 POLICY NUMBER: FC-012 Page 3

6. All proposed capital expenditures accessing Industrial Land Account (ILA) funding are subject to a staff report request to Council and Council approval, prior to commencement of the project. 7. For Capital Project Overhead charges related to projects, refer to the Capital Overhead policy. 8. That Water and Sanitary Sewer revenue will be used to reimburse to the IPPW- Transportation Division for 10% of both water and sanitary sewer costs on applicable roads rehabilitation projects. 9. That an annual amount of $750,000 from 2013-2016 and $525,000 in 2017 is directed to the Library Expansion Reserve Fund starting in 2013 from the Capital Reserve Fund to assist in funding the East Side Library project.

COMPLIANCE: In cases of policy violation, the City may investigate and determine appropriate corrective action.

Council Meeting Page 228 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Planning Approvals

Title: Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-11 to remove a Holding Symbol for 128 King St N (128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St) Report Number: IPPW2015-077 Author: Trevor Hawkins Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: Z-15-11 Attachments: Appendix A – Site Plan Appendix B – Draft By-law Ward No.: Ward 7 – Uptown Ward

Recommendation:

1. That Waterloo City Council approve Integrated Planning & Public Works Report IPPW2015-077; and 2. That Waterloo City Council approve Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15- 11, for the lands identified on Map 1 attached hereto (128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St), in accordance with Section 6 of IPPW2015-077.

A. Executive Summary

The applicant has requested an amendment to the Zoning By-law to remove the Holding Symbol applied to 128 King St N (128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St) to permit the development of an apartment building with ancillary commercial uses.

Based on staffs’ review of the application, we support the approval of Z-15-11 because the Owner has satisfied the requirements for removal of the Holding Symbol, including: • The Owner has entered into a Section 37 Development Agreement with the City of Waterloo that outlines the matters to be provided to the City in exchange for an increase in density to permit 17 additional bedrooms. • The Owner has submitted a Record of Site Condition (RSC) to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE). The City and Region of Waterloo have documentation indicating the RSC has been acknowledged by the MOE.

Council Meeting Page 229 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

B. Financial Implications

Staff is not aware of any municipal financial implications with respect to the requested application. Should the application be appealed, potential costs related to an Ontario Municipal Board hearing may be incurred.

C. Technology Implications

Staff is not aware of any technology implications.

D. Legal Considerations

Staff did not seek legal advice.

E. Link to Strategic Plan/Economic Vitality (Strategic Pillars: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development) a) Zone Change Application Z-15-11 supports the City’s Strategic Plan by providing bicycle repair and bicycle storage facilities (Multi-Modal Transportation) for the public’s use.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

Council approved IPPW2013-081.1, which rezoned the lands to (Holding) Multiple Residence – 25 on June 16, 2014.

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Trevor Hawkins Director: Joel Cotter Commissioner: Cameron Rapp

CAO

Council Meeting Page 230 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-11 to remove a Holding Symbol for 128 King St N (128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St) IPPW 2015-077

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS

SECTION 1 – SUBJECT LANDS

Location: 128 King St N (128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St)

Ward: Uptown Ward

Size: 0.17 ha

Owner: 2208254 Ontario Inc.

Applicant: GSP Group

Existing Land Use: Vacant, Residential Commercial

Public Input: Notice of the intent to pass a by-law to remove the ‘H’ was advertised in the Waterloo Chronicle on July 29, 2015.

SECTION 2 – BACKGROUND

On June 16, 2014, Council approved Zoning By-law Amendment Z-12-07 to rezone the subject lands to (Holding) Multiple Residence-25. The Zoning By-law Amendment came into effect through By-law No. 2014-069, which contains the following Holding Symbol provision:

Council Meeting Page 231 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

1) Prior to the passing of a By-law to remove the Holding (H) Symbol, and prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the Owner of the lands shown on Schedule ‘A’ attached to this by-law shall: a. provide written evidence, to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and the City of Waterloo, that a Record of Site Condition has been accepted by the Province of Ontario. b. enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Waterloo pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act to secure the facilities, services and matters referred to below, which shall be registered against the title of the lands to which this by-law applies in the manner and to the extent specified in such agreement. The owner of the lands, at the owner’s expense and in accordance with and subject to the Development Agreement, shall provide the following facilities, services and matters in accordance with Section 12 of the Official Plan (2012) and to the satisfaction of the City, in exchange for an increase in density. Subject to the provision of the facilities, services and matters, the maximum density shall be 850 bedrooms per hectare, provided that no dwelling unit may contain more than 3 bedrooms. The details of the facilities, services and matters to be provided, which shall be informed by the requirements below, shall be contained in the Section 37 Development Agreement: i. Remediation of the subject lands, which shall include the submission and acceptance of a Record of Site Condition by the Province of Ontario with corresponding written evidence provided to the City of Waterloo and the Region of Waterloo; ii. The preparation and submission, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Integrated Planning and Public Works, of a Sustainable Building Design Report that demonstrates that the development can achieve LEED Silver (or higher) certification; iii. The provision of a car-share program parking space (available to any member of Grand River Car Share); iv. Purchase and donation of a bicycle repair centre and secure bicycle storage facility (as determined by the City), the location of which would be determined by the Waterloo Advisory Committee on Active Transportation (WACAT); v. The provision of electric car charging stations; vi. The provision of public art equal to 1% of the value of construction, not to exceed $150,000; 1. The applicant will prepare a Public Art Selection Plan, which will be submitted to the City for review. The Plan will include the proposed art, the location of the art, the budget for the art and the timing for installation

Council Meeting Page 232 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

vii. Enhanced Public Realm to be provided on the subject lands and within the road allowance (as appropriate) along the King St and Elgin St frontages, which shall 1. include hard landscaping (pavement treatments) distinguished from the sidewalk and representing an upgrade over a standard sidewalk and/or concrete entrance; 2. be maintained by the owner of the subject lands or a condominium corporation, should a condominium corporation be created for the proposed development; 3. include soft (vegetative) landscaping treatments designed to provide shade for pedestrians and those visiting the site, which shall include trees on site with a minimum 100mm caliper; 4. include the provision of seating areas to encourage interaction amongst residents of the neighbourhood;

SECTION 3 – APPLICATION REQUEST

The Owner is requesting that the City remove the Holding Symbol from the subject lands to permit the development of an apartment building with ancillary commercial uses consistent with the policies in the Official Plan and provisions of the site specific Zoning By-law.

SECTION 4 – PLANNING EVALUATION

Planning Approvals staff have no objections to the proposed lifting of the Holding Symbol. To satisfy the requirements of the Holding provision, the Owner has:

• Submitted a Record of Site Condition (RSC) to the Ministry of the Environment. The Ministry has acknowledged the RSC and copies of the acknowledgement have been provided to the City and the Region of Waterloo. The Region of Waterloo has provided correspondence to the City indicating that this requirement has been satisfied. • Entered into a Section 37 Development Agreement with the City of Waterloo to require the provision of the community benefits outlined in the site specific Zoning By-law, in exchange for additional density (up to 17 additional bedrooms).

In the opinion of Planning Approvals, the applicant has satisfied the requirements for lifting the Holding Symbol.

SECTION 5 – CONCLUSION

Based on the information submitted by the applicant, Planning Approvals supports the removal of the Holding Symbol from the subject property.

Council Meeting Page 233 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

SECTION 6 – RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15-11 for the lands known municipally as 128 King St N (128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St), be approved as follows: a. In regard to subsection 1.1.1 of By-law No. 2014-069, the Holding (H) Symbol shall be removed from the lands identified on Schedule ‘A’ to By- law 2014-069.

Council Meeting Page 234 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

MAP 1 – Lands Subject to Removal of the Holding Provision

(128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St)

Council Meeting Page 235 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX A – Site Plan

Apartment building with ancillary (ground floor) commercial uses spaces 7 parking

Council Meeting Page 236 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX B – Draft By-law

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO

BY-LAW NO. 2015 –

BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW 1108, AS AMENDED BY BY- LAW NO. 2014-069, BEING A ZONING BY-LAW CONTROLLING LAND USE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF WATERLOO

WHEREAS the Municipal Council of The Corporation of the City of Waterloo deems it desirable to amend its said By-law No. 1108 to remove the Holding Symbol applied to 128 King St N (128-138 King St N and 6 Elgin St).

THEREFORE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1. In regard to subsection 1.1.1 of By-law No. 2014-069, the Holding (H) Symbol shall be removed from the lands identified on Schedule ‘A’ to By-law No. 2014- 069.

2. This By-law shall come into force and effect on the date of its final passing thereof by the Council of The Corporation of the City of Waterloo, subject to the provisions of the Planning Act, 1990 and amendments thereto.

Enacted this day of ______, 2015.

______D. Jaworsky, Mayor

______O. Smith, Clerk

Council Meeting Page 237 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Corporate Services

STAFF REPORT Corporate Services

Title: Corporate Services Fees and Charges 2016-2018 – Follow- up to CORP2015-065 at July 13, 2015 Council meeting Report Number: CORP2015-072 Author: Paul Grivicic Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: Appendix A – Listing of Fees and Charges Ward No.: All

Recommendation:

1. That Council approve CORP2015-072.

A. Executive Summary

At the July 13, 2015 Council meeting, Council approved the updates to all Corporate Services fees and charges via report CORP2015-065 except for 3 fees within the Finance Division: Water Bill Reprint Fee, Water Shut-Off Fee, and Water Collections Trip Administration Fee. Council provided direction to staff to review these City of Waterloo fees in comparison to some other municipalities. To that end, staff have prepared this report which provides the information. The staff recommendation noted above is the same as the recommendation in report CORP2015-065 on July 13, 2015.

B. Financial Implications

In 2014 the Water Bill Reprint Fee did not generate any revenue due to no delivery beyond the first instance that is delivered at no charge. The Water Collections Trip Administration fee generated $9,450 to offset the cost of delivery of 175 notices and other collections activities associated with delivery. The Water Shut-Off Fee generated $972 to offset the cost of 9 Water Shut Offs.

If fees are reduced or eliminated these revenues would need to be recovered through an adjustment to the overall user fees for Water, Sewer and Storm Water.

Council Meeting Page 238 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Corporate Services

C. Technology Implications

None

D. Legal Considerations

Staff did not seek legal advice.

Corporate Excellence – Employ fiscally responsible practices and policies that ensure a balanced social, cultural, economic, and environmental approach. Staff reviewed fees to determine appropriate changes to fees, if any. This will ensure fees can effectively cover some or all the costs of providing services.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

CORP2014-062 – Corporate Services Fees and Charges – August 11, 2014 CORP2015-065 – Corporate Services Fees and Charges 2016-2018 – July 13, 2015

Council Meeting Page 239 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Corporate Services

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Paul Grivicic, CPA, CA Director: Paul Hettinga, CPA, CA Commissioner: Keshwer Patel CPA,

CGA Finance: Keshwer Patel CPA, CGA

CAO

Council Meeting Page 240 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Corporate Services

Corporate Services Fees and Charges 2016-2018 – Follow-up to CORP2015-065 at July 13, 2015 Council meeting CORP2015-072

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS

At the July 13, 2015 Council meeting, Council approved the updates to all Corporate Services fees and charges except for 3 fees within the Finance Division. Specifically, Council approved the following motion:

That Council approve the Corporate Services Fees and Charges for 2016-2018, attached as Appendix A to CORP2015-065 effective as of the dates noted, and that the Fees and Charges By-law is updated accordingly, save and except for the Water Bill Reprint Fee, Shut Off Fee and Collections Trip Administration Fee which is deferred to the August 10, 2015 meeting after further review and comparisons to neighboring municipalities for Council’s consideration.

Table 1 below provides a comparison of the various fees:

Table 1 – Fee Comparison Water Bill Reprint Collection Trip Fee Administration Fee Shut Off Fee Waterloo $3.00 (1st one free) $54.00 $108.00 Kitchener $5.00 (1st two free) $15.00 $50.00 Cambridge $16.15 $50.00 N/A (Note 1) Waterloo North $15.00 (1st one free) $15.00 $65.00 Hydro $70.00 (reg. hours) Brantford $15.00 $30.00 $165.00 (overtime) Residential: $63.00 (reg. hours) $91.00 (overtime) St. Catherine’s $8.85 $17.70 Non-Residential: $102.00 (reg. hours) $149.00 (overtime) Note 1: As a matter of policy, starting March 2015 City of Cambridge no longer maintains tenant accounts and does not shut off water for collections issues. Prior to March 2015, City of Cambridge charged a Shut off fee of $300 and maintained tenant accounts.

Council Meeting Page 241 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Corporate Services

City of Guelph and City of Stratford were also reviewed. However, their water billing is administered through their respective Hydro companies.

Comparison to other municipalities is usually the final factor in setting of fees. In this case, no real trend could be determined due to the wide variety in fee amounts being charged. Therefore, the City maintained their fee based on the estimated cost to delivery each service. The typical timeframe for delivering the Shut Off notice is about 50 days from the due date. The steps outlined below show that each process is quite involved and gives the customer ample opportunity to contact the city and negotiate a reasonable payment plan and thereby stop the collection process and avoid the fee. Actual results show that the majority of customers that are placed in the collections process do not reach the final steps. Below are the actual results from 2014 which confirms this statement.

Past Due Notices (minimum 5 days after due date) 17,264 Final Demand Notices (minimum 20 days after due date) 6,742 Shut-Off Notices (minimum 30 days after due date) 175

For the Collections Trip Administration Fee, there are a series of steps before the fee is charged, which include:

• Internal reports are prepared each week to determine which properties may be involved in a water shut off • Collections Officer continues to attempt to make contact with property owner or tenant to resolve the issue (Note: many notices and attempts are made by Revenue Services staff including the Collections Officer long before Shut off process starts) • List of potential Shut offs is sent to Municipal Enforcement staff so they can prepare for potential delivering of notices if needed, and to Water Services staff so they can locate and mark the curb stops • Internal records are checked and updated for any transactions that may have occurred since the internal reports were prepared. This is to ensure that any “last minute” transactions or communications are captured and the account is current. All staff are made aware of properties for potential Shut Off, and report any transactions to the Collections Officer immediately in order to avoid a potential Shut Off. • After all the above is done and the issue is still not resolved, Municipal Enforcement staff deliver the Shut Off notice to the Property owner or tenant, and the fee is charged to the water account.

For the Shut-Off Fee, this relates to the time and effort after delivering the Shut Off notice by Municipal Enforcement Officer to the potential shut off, which includes:

• If payment is made, then the property will not have water shut off

Council Meeting Page 242 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Corporate Services

• Staff monitor potential payment or communication from property owner to ensure transactions or discussions are confirmed in “real-time” so as avoid potential water shut off • If there is still no meaningful communications or payment, then the Collections Officer contacts the Lead Hand in Water Operations & Maintenance to arrange a time to shut off the supply of water • A Municipal Enforcement Officer posts a Notice at the service address at the same time as Water Services staff is shutting off the supply of water • The Collection Officer will notify the Water Distribution List (Fire Department, the Mayor’s Office, the CFO, Water Services Administration, Revenue Team, and Lead Hands at Water Operations & Maintenance) by email that the supply of water has been shut off at the service address • Once payment has been received the Collections Officer must discuss restoring water to the service address with the individual making payment • The Collections Officer will then advise Water Services staff at what time they can restore water at the service address • Once Water has been restored the Lead Hand will advise the Collections Officer • The Collections Officer will then forward an email to the Water Shut Off Distribution List to let them know water services have been restored • The Shut Off fee is applied to the water account

Every effort is made to communicate with property owners or tenants to resolve the issue. As long as meaningful progress is made, Collections Fees and Shut Offs are not pursued. It is when communications and cooperation essentially cease that staff use these measures. Staff do not take shutting off water lightly, and use it only as needed. Staff will also work with property owners or tenants to develop payments plans to resolve the situation.

For those with financial hardship, City of Waterloo staff coordinate the property owner with Region of Waterloo Social Services for Emergency Assistance. This is to ensure property owners facing financial hardship have another avenue to resolve the situation with no water shut-off occurring. Further information is available on the Region of Waterloo Website. http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/servicesForYou/FinancialAssistance.asp

In addition staff advise property owners of other provincial programs in place to assist with property taxes and energy payments.

Ontario Energy and Property Tax Credit http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/credit/oeptc/index.html

Ontario Senior Homeowners’ Property Tax Grant http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/credit/shptg/

Council Meeting Page 243 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Corporate Services

CORP2015-0XX – Appendix A – List of Fees and Charges

Revenue Services - Water/Sanitary/Stormwater

Water Bill Reprint - 1st reprint FREE per account if for current year, fee thereafter $ 3.00 1-Oct-2014 $ 3.00 1-Oct-2015 0.0% $ 3.00 1-Oct-2016 0.0% $ 3.25 1-Oct-2017 8.3% Shut Off Fee $ 108.00 1-Oct-2014 $ 110.00 1-Oct-2015 1.9% $ 112.00 1-Oct-2016 1.8% $ 114.00 1-Oct-2017 1.8% Collections Trip Administration Fee $ 54.00 1-Oct-2014 $ 55.00 1-Oct-2015 1.9% $ 56.00 1-Oct-2016 1.8% $ 57.00 1-Oct-2017 1.8%

Council Meeting Page 244 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Growth Management

Title: Recommended Uptown Community Improvement Plan Report Number: IPPW2015-074 Author: Janice Mitchell Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: PS-14-09 Attachments: Attachment 1: Recommended CIP Attachment 2: Minutes of a Public Meeting Attachment 3: Written Comments Ward No.: Ward 7 Uptown

Recommendation: 1. That Staff Report IPPW2015-074 be approved; 2. That Council approve the recommended Uptown Community Improvement Plan included as Attachment 1 to this report; 3. That Council approves capital funding for the Uptown Community Improvement Plan in the amount of $765,000, funded from the Uptown Development Reserve Fund, as approved in the 2015 Capital Budget Ref #705; and, 4. That Council authorize the award of a single source contract to RCI Consulting for the preparation of implementation and training materials as outlined in this report, at an approximate cost of $12,000.

A. Executive Summary

This report includes a recommended Uptown Community Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP is a tool to support and incent sustainable reurbanization, revitalization and heritage conservation within the Uptown area, and includes the following key components: • Delineation of an Uptown Community Improvement Project Area and community improvement goals for that area; • Incentive programs to encourage private sector involvement in Uptown reurbanization; • Framework for municipal property acquisition, disposal, investment and improvement; • High-level public realm strategy; and, • Framework for implementation and monitoring of the CIP.

Council Meeting Page 245 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

The CIP has been developed in consultation with key stakeholders, Committees of Council, municipal liaison groups, the Uptown BIA and the community. A proposed CIP was presented for information and discussion at a Public Meeting held pursuant to the Planning Act on July 13, 2015. Meeting minutes are included as Attachment 2 and written comments received in response to the proposed CIP are included as Attachment 3. Revisions have been made to the previously proposed CIP, resulting in the current recommended CIP (Attachment 1). Key changes between the previously proposed CIP and the recommended CIP have largely been the result of on-going consultation with the Uptown BIA and include: • Façade Improvement Grant Program – Grant amounts available to non-residential uses through this program have been doubled for the short term (i.e. from $10,000/$15,000 to $20,000/$30,000) within the BIA boundary; • Commercial Building Improvement Loan – Maximum loan amount increased from $20,000 to $30,000; • Parking Exemption Program introduced.

It is recommended that the attached CIP be approved by Council. If approved, notice of Council’s decision will be forwarded to the appropriate agencies, groups and individuals and if no appeals are received, the Plan will come into force. At that point, the CIP provides a legal framework for Council to initiate any or all of the programs and initiatives included in the CIP. It is further recommended that a consultant be retained to assist with the preparation of implementation and training materials.

B. Financial Implications

The immediate financial implications for Council approval of this report are limited to the costs associated with the preparation of implementation and training materials. Staff estimates these costs to be approximately $12,000.

If Council initiates any or all of the financial incentive programs included in the CIP, there will be further costs associated with administering and funding the programs. As such, further financial analysis and Council decisions will be required prior to initiating any of the incentive programs. Staff is requesting a portion of the approved 2015 capital budget funding to ensure that money is available if Council wishes to activate any of the programs during the remainder of 2015 and to fund the preparation of implementation and training materials. The 2015 capital budget includes $1,581,000 for the Uptown Community Improvement Plan (Ref# 705). Staff is requesting $765,000 of that amount, funded from the Uptown Development Reserve Fund. The remaining 2015 funding is to be re-budgeted to 2016 as part of the upcoming budget process.

C. Technology Implications – None.

D. Link to Strategic Plan/Economic Vitality (Strategic Pillars: Multi-modal Transportation, Strong Community, Corporate Excellence, Infrastructure Renewal, Environmental Leadership, Economic Development)

Council Meeting Page 246 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

The Economic Development pillar includes an objective to continue a growth management approach that encourages infilling, redevelopment, adaptive re-use and include culture and heritage aspects in new developments. An example initiative is the completion and implementation of the Uptown Community Improvement Plan (CIP).

This report delivers the Uptown Community Improvement Plan for Council consideration.

E. Previous Reports on this Topic • IPPW2014-086 “Uptown Community Improvement Plan Study: Terms of Reference” • IPPW2015-026 “Discussion Paper: Uptown Community Improvement Plan Study” • IPPW2015-053 and IPPW2015-053.1 “Proposed Uptown Community Improvement Plan”

F. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Janice Mitchell Director: Scott Nevin Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 247 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Recommended Uptown Community Improvement Plan

IPPW2015-074

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report includes a recommended Uptown Community Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP is an important tool for helping to achieve the City’s vision and objectives for lands within the Uptown Community Improvement Project Area. The community improvement goals for the Project Area are grounded in the OP and include: • Stimulating private sector investment through municipal incentive-based programs that support building improvements, expansions and the development of targeted land uses • Fostering implementation of environmental sustainability criteria and heritage conservation criteria through municipal incentive-based programs and initiatives • Directing public resources toward implementation of streetscape and public realm improvements • Defining a Municipal Leadership Strategy to provide a framework for the City to support and participate in the revitalization of Uptown by leveraging City-owned lands and municipal resources to support the economic vitality of Uptown

1.1 Purpose of a Community Improvement Plan

The Ontario Planning Act allows municipalities to designate areas within the municipality as ‘community improvement project areas’. Within those areas, a Council can then develop a CIP where Council is of the opinion that the improvement of the area is desirable because of age, dilapidation, overcrowding, unsuitability of buildings or other environmental, social or community economic development reasons. Once a CIP has been approved for an area, it provides the legal framework for the municipality to use a broader range of tools in the interest of supporting change within the area (e.g. acquiring, improving, selling lands or offering loans/grants to property owners) consistent with the City’s community improvement goals and objectives as defined in the CIP. CIPs are enabling plans that allow a municipal Council to offer the incentive programs and undertake the other initiatives specified in the CIP. The Council is under

Council Meeting Page 248 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

no obligation to implement any of the incentive programs or other initiatives contained in the CIP. In Ontario, many municipalities use CIPs to help achieve community objectives.

1.2 Uptown Community Improvement Project Area

The proposed Project Area is shown as Figure 2 within the recommended CIP and includes the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre as well as the MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District.

1.3 Process and Consultation

The CIP is the outcome of the Uptown Community Improvement Plan Study, which included the following key milestones: • Terms of Reference –Staff report IPPW2014-086 “Uptown Community Improvement Plan Study: Terms of Reference” (Council approved: August 11, 2014) • Discussion Paper – Staff Report IPPW2015-026 (Received by Council on April 13, 2015 and circulated as information) • Formal Public Meeting – Held July 13, 2015 to present the proposed CIP and receive feedback. Refer to Attachment 2 for minutes of the Public Meeting. • Proposed Uptown Community Improvement Plan – Staff Report IPPW2015-053 (Received by Council on June 15, 2015 and circulated as information). Refer to Attachment 3 for written comments received in response to the proposed CIP. • Recommended Uptown Community Improvement Plan – Staff Report IPPW2015-074 (Council Date: August 10, 2015).

The CIP has been developed in consultation with key stakeholders, Committees of Council, municipal liaison groups, the Uptown BIA and the community. The City has met the requirements of the Planning Act and can now consider adopting the recommended Community Improvement Plan. To accomplish this, Council will need to approve the following by-laws included on the August 10, 2015 Council agenda: • By-law to approve the Uptown Community Improvement Project Area; and, • By-law to adopt the Uptown Community Improvement Plan.

If adopted, the required notice will be given and if no appeals are received, the CIP will come into force and effect. Once the CIP is in effect, one or more of the programs can be activated, subject to Council approval of the implementation and funding of each program. Approval of the CIP enables, but does not obligate Council to implement the programs.

Council Meeting Page 249 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

2.0 OVERVIEW OF COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2.1 Proposed Incentive Programs

The proposed CIP includes a toolkit of incentive programs intended to support private sector building and development activity that addresses the community improvement goals for Uptown. Programs in the toolkit include: • Façade Improvement Grant Program – Intended to encourage business and property owners to improve the appearance of the streetscape, heritage properties and other buildings in the Project Area (maximum matching grant of $10,000 per street-facing façade to a maximum grant of $20,000 per project/property, provided further that maximum grant amounts are increased in the short term for non- residential properties within the BIA boundary) • Study Grant Program – To promote the preparation and submission to the City of high quality professional urban design studies and drawings as well as heritage feasibility studies and assessments (maximum grant of $3,000 per project/property) • Fee Grant Program – To facilitate renovations and small expansions through the provision of an additional financial incentive to offset fees (maximum grant of $10,000 per property/project) • Commercial Building Improvement Loan - To support business retention by helping to fund interior renovations and maintenance that improves the usability and/or accessibility of non-residential buildings within Uptown (maximum loan of $30,000) • Minor Activity Grant/Loan Program – To facilitate small expansions and new construction that create spaces of up to 5,000 square feet for affordable housing uses and/or office employment uses. The program provides additional incentive for development that includes heritage conservation and/or sustainable building design (maximum grant or loan of $50,000 per project/property) • Major Activity Grant – To promote large reurbanization projects that create new floor space for affordable housing uses and/or non-residential uses that include an office employment component. Additional incentive provided for development that includes heritage conservation and/or sustainable building design. The program provides a grant that reduces the property tax increase that can typically result from reurbanization projects • Parking Exemption Program – To facilitate small expansions or changes in use where the developer is unable to provide the on-site parking as required by the Zoning By-law. The program provides for parking exemptions, subject to the preparation of a parking analysis and Agreement

Council Meeting Page 250 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

2.2 Municipal Leadership Strategy: Framework for Municipal Property Acquisition, Disposal, Investment and Improvement

This CIP includes provisions to enable the City to leverage City-owned lands and municipal resources in order to advance the community improvement goals defined in this CIP. One example could include selling or leasing City-owned lands for below market value in order to attract or support the development of employment or affordable housing uses.

2.3 Public Realm

This CIP generally does not identify specific public realm projects, but rather, highlights several ‘categories’ of public realm initiatives including improvements to the King Street streetscape and LRT corridor, trail planning and amenities, and public art. The City may wish to initiate a comprehensive public realm strategy to identify and prioritize public realm initiatives.

2.4 Monitoring and Implementation

Activation of any or all programs within the CIP will be subject to further approvals and funding by Council and will be supported by the development of implementation materials outlining more detailed procedures, criteria and requirements. Once initiated, programs will be monitored to facilitate regular reporting to Council and the community with regard to the success of the programs and to enable refinement, as necessary.

3.0 AFFORDABLE HOUSING

The financial incentives toolkit included in this CIP contains some provisions for affordable housing in the form of grants or loans. Given land costs within the Uptown area, it is anticipated that significant financial resources would be required in order to incent developers to create affordable housing that would sell or rent at or below average levels for the Region. Based on the experience of other municipalities who have implemented affordable housing incentives within their CIPs, it is likely that the financial incentives included in the CIP will not be effective on their own. Options for additional consideration as part of or outside of this CIP process may include: • Continue discussion with Region of Waterloo staff to better understand how the City may collaborate with the Region, as a provider of affordable housing, to further the provision of affordable housing in Waterloo (staff has already initiated these discussions through this CIP process) • Developing a CIP for a broader geographical area (e.g. City-wide or within LRT Station Area) to address the provision of affordable housing within Uptown and beyond

Council Meeting Page 251 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Developing a policy and implementation framework for Uptown developers to make a financial contribution to support the off-site provision of affordable housing (e.g. in an area of the City where affordable housing is needed and land values may make the provision of affordable housing more financially viable). Staff anticipates that it would take additional resources to develop and administer such a program and that it would require significant collaboration between various groups (e.g. City, developer, non-profit housing provider) in order to be successful • Incorporate requirements for the provision of affordable (assisted or subsidized) housing into the sale or lease of City-owned lands • Support the provision of affordable housing through the application of density bonusing policies included in the current Official Plan

4.0 HIGH LEVEL FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

If Council chooses to initiate any or all of the financial incentive programs, there will be a cost to the City to administer and fund the programs. For Council’s information, high- level financial considerations for the various loan/grant programs proposed were included in staff report IPPW2015-053. More detailed financial analysis will need to be done prior to initiating the program(s).

5.0 COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITIES

The effectiveness of this CIP can be increased through collaboration with other groups. In particular, staff will continue to explore opportunities to advance collaborative initiatives in the following areas:

5.1 Region of Waterloo

Regional staff has provided comments indicating that “at this point, the Region does not see a role in participating in any new CIP incentives in Uptown besides what has already been approved, namely the DC Core Area Exemption and Brownfield Financial Incentive Program”. Regional staff is supportive of the City of Waterloo developing tools to support the creation of affordable housing and will continue to discuss the potential to align the City’s initiatives with tools or incentives available or administered at the Regional level.

Notwithstanding Regional staff comments at this time, the CIP leaves the door open for future funding participation, should that position change. Specifically, this CIP includes the framework to enable the Region to participate in the tax increment based program (Major Activity Grant Program) should the Region decide to do so in the future (subject to Regional Council approval). Should the Region not elect to participate, then the grant available under the Major Activity Grant Program will only include the City’s portion of the property tax increment.

Council Meeting Page 252 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Integrated Planning & Public Works

5.2 UpTown BIA

Businesses within the UpTown BIA are experiencing challenges associated with LRT construction and will continue to experience such challenges over the next several years. In an attempt to assist members during this transition period, UpTown BIA representatives have been engaged in the preparation of this proposed CIP and have submitted feedback to help define how the City may best support their members, particularly during the period of LRT and streetscape construction. The CIP includes several financial incentive programs that offer grants or loans to assist building owners and tenants wishing to make interior or exterior improvements to buildings. Although some of the programs are specifically intended to incent the development of employment space, others are more general and would be available to commercial businesses, including the Façade Improvement Grant, Study Grant, Planning and Building Fee Grant, Commercial Building Improvement Loan and Parking Exemption Program.

BIA representatives and City staff have explored options to enable the BIA to assist in the funding of improvements in Uptown to the benefit of BIA members. The provisions of the Municipal Act prevent the BIA from directly assisting in the funding of the grant/loan programs to the benefit of private property owners. However, the BIA can provide funds to support other improvements in Uptown (e.g. public realm, parking), thereby enabling the City to apply additional funds to the grant/loan programs available within the Project Area.

At the BIA’s request, a number of program revisions have been incorporated into the recommended CIP, resulting in a toolkit that better meets the needs of tenants and property owners in Uptown. These requested revisions will remain in place for the short-term (approximately 2-3 years from program initiation) in order to provide maximum assistance during construction periods, and include: • Façade Improvement Grant Program - Grant amounts available to non- residential uses through this program have been doubled for the short-term within the BIA boundary; • Commercial Building Improvement Loan – Maximum loan amount to be increased from $20,000 to $30,000; • Parking Exemption Program Introduced.

In recognition of these revisions and in the spirit of collaboration, the BIA Board approved a budget allocation of $200,000 toward Uptown improvements in conjunction with the Uptown CIP. It is the intent of the City and BIA to monitor the uptake of the CIP programs, with a view that the BIA would provide ‘offsetting funds’ in the amount equal to 50% of the cost of all loan and grants provided to BIA members,

Council Meeting Page 253 of 409 August 10, 2015 10 Integrated Planning & Public Works

save and except any funds dispersed through the Major Activity Grant. The City could then use these funds for Uptown improvements such as public realm and parking.

6.0 NEXT STEPS

To implement the CIP, certain materials will be required, including program guides, application forms, templates for legal agreements as well as a training program and materials for staff. Given that these types of loan/grant programs are relatively new to the City, staff is of the opinion that it is appropriate to retain consultant assistance with their preparation. It is critical that these materials be user-friendly and make the application process as simple as possible, while addressing the City’s need to ensure that the appropriate legal framework and securities are in place for the incentive programs.

In conjunction with preparing this CIP, the City retained RCI Consulting (RCI) to ‘peer review’ staff’s work on the CIP. Staff is of the opinion that it would be appropriate and cost effective to also retain RCI to assist in preparing implementation documents for the following reasons: • RCI has extensive experience and specializes in the preparation of CIPs, implementation materials and training; • RCI is familiar with the Waterloo context, having prepared the Northdale CIP and implementation materials and having ‘peer reviewed’ the Uptown CIP documents (Discussion Paper and Proposed CIP); • Retaining RCI will provide for continuity between the first phase of this process (i.e. CIP preparation) and the second phase (Implementation).

Staff has obtained a cost estimate of approximately $12,000 for the preparation of implementation materials including: • General application form • Intake, approval and disbursement letters • Program guides • Legal agreements • Training manual (binder format) including administrative flow charts and step-by-step instruction for program administration • ½ day to full day training session for staff

Should Council wish to support retaining RCI for the preparation of implementation materials, staff has included a recommendation to facilitate the award of a ‘single source’ contract to RCI, with the cost of approximately $12,000. In accordance with Section 6 of the Purchasing By-law, Council approval is required for any single source contract.

Council Meeting Page 254 of 409 August 10, 2015 11 Integrated Planning & Public Works

7.0 CONCLUSION

The CIP provides a toolkit that can be used to help achieve the goals for lands within the Uptown Project Area. The financial incentive programs and Parking Exemption Program have been specifically designed to support reurbanization, revitalization, and heritage conservation within the Uptown Project Area by stimulating private sector investment in targeted areas.

The CIP also provides some high-level direction related to streetscape and public realm improvements for Uptown. Further, a framework is provided to enable the City to leverage City-owned lands and municipal resources to support achieving community improvement objectives in the Uptown Project Area.

On Council’s direction, and subject to decisions around funding, any or all of the programs in this CIP can be initiated. Successful implementation of the CIP will require resources to implement and administer the financial incentive programs and to monitor and report on outcomes. Experience in other municipalities has shown that early and effective implementation and marketing of the incentive programs will result in a more successful CIP. On-going monitoring of the performance of the incentive programs and adjustment of the programs as required will also help to ensure effectiveness of the CIP.

Council Meeting Page 255 of 409 August 10, 2015 12 Integrated Planning & Public Works

ATTACHMENT 1 To Report IPPW2015-074

UPTOWN COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN AUGUST 2015

Council Meeting Page 256 of 409 August 10, 2015 13 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 257 of 409 August 10, 2015 14 Integrated Planning & Public Works

UPTOWN COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 What is a Community Improvement Plan (CIP)? 1.2 The Previous Community Improvement Plan (2000) 1.3 CIP Goals 1.4 CIP Process and Consultation 1.5 Community Improvement Project Area 1.6 Related Initiatives

2.0 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT 2.1 The Municipal Act 2.2 The Planning Act 2.3 Ontario Heritage Act 2.4 Development Charges Act

3.0 MUNICIPAL CONTEXT 3.1 City Official Plan 3.1.1 Uptown Urban Growth Centre 3.1.2 MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District 3.1.3 Community Improvement Policies 3.2 Other Uptown Initiatives

4.0 UPTOWN INCENTIVE PROGRAMS 4.1 Overview 4.1.1 The Incentive Program ‘Toolkit’ 4.1.2 Regional Funding Participation 4.1.3 General Program Requirements 4.2 Façade Improvement Grant Program 4.3 Study Grant Program 4.4 Fee Grant Program 4.5 Commercial Building Improvement Loan Program 4.6 Minor Activity Grant/Loan Program 4.7 Major Activity Grant Program 4.8 Parking Exemption Program

5.0 MUNICIPAL LEADERSHIP STRATEGY: PROPERTY ACQUISITION, DISPOSAL, INVESTMENT AND IMPROVEMENT 5.1 Purpose of the Municipal Leadership Strategy 5.2 Description of the Municipal Leadership Strategy

6.0 PUBLIC REALM STRATEGY

7.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING 7.1 Initiating the Incentive Programs 7.2 Description of Monitoring Program 7.3 Program Adjustments

8.0 CONCLUSION

Council Meeting Page 258 of 409 August 10, 2015 15 Integrated Planning & Public Works

LIST OF APPENDICES * Appendix ‘A’ – City of Waterloo Official Plan Community Improvement Policies Appendix ‘B’ – Affordable Housing Definition (City Official Plan) Appendix ‘C’ Table C-1 Application Evaluation Matrix (Minor Activity Program) Table C-2 Loan Repayment Matrix (Minor Activity Program and Commercial Building Improvement Loan Appendix ‘D’ - Major Activity Program: Evaluation Matrix

* NOTE: Appendices A to D of this CIP contain background material and the administrative description for each of the incentive programs contained in Section 6.0 of the CIP. As such, the Appendices to this CIP do not form part of the formal CIP.

Council Meeting Page 259 of 409 August 10, 2015 16 Integrated Planning & Public Works

UPTOWN COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 What is a Community Improvement Plan (CIP)?

Section 28 of the Ontario Planning Act allows municipalities to designate an area as a community improvement project area and prepare a community improvement plan (CIP) for that area if in the opinion of the Council, the improvement of that area “is desirable because of age, dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement, unsuitability of buildings or for any other environmental, social or community economic development reason.” A CIP provides the framework for, and works in conjunction with, other municipal policy documents such as the official plan, zoning by-law, and urban design guidelines to guide reurbanization of a community improvement project area, including building rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, infill, intensification, and redevelopment.

Once a CIP containing appropriate enabling policies has been adopted by a municipality and comes into effect, it allows that municipality to: i) Acquire, hold, clear, grade or otherwise prepare land for community improvement; ii) Construct, repair, rehabilitate or improve buildings on land acquired or held by it in conformity with the CIP; iii) Sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of any land and buildings acquired or held by it in conformity with the CIP; iv) Make infrastructure and public space improvements; and v) Make grants or loans, in conformity with the CIP, to registered owners, assessed owners and tenants of land and buildings within the community improvement project area, and to any person to whom such an owner or tenant has assigned the right to receive a grant or loan, to pay for the whole or any part of the eligible costs of the CIP.

A CIP provides a municipality with a strategic, comprehensive, coordinated and flexible approach to promoting the long-term improvement of an area in need of improvement. While a CIP is an enabling plan that allows a municipal Council to offer the incentive programs and undertake the other initiatives specified in the CIP, the municipal Council is under no obligation to implement any of the incentive programs or other initiatives contained in the CIP. The implementation of the incentive programs and other initiatives contained in the CIP is entirely at the discretion of Council.

Council Meeting Page 260 of 409 August 10, 2015 17 Integrated Planning & Public Works

1.2 The Previous Community Improvement Plan (2000)

The previous CIP was approved in 2000 (replacing a Plan from 1988) and was intended to provide a long-range planning program for projects in the Uptown area. The Plan identified community improvement initiatives in a number of categories including: (i) City parks and open spaces; (ii) potential redevelopment areas; (iii) transportation systems and utilities; (iv) urban design; and, (v) residential community improvement projects. For the most part, the projects were municipally-led initiatives and many have been completed with some key projects including Barrel Warehouse Park, portions of the railway corridor, gathering place at the Clay and Glass Gallery, Boot and Shoe Factory redevelopment, Bauer property redevelopment, Silver Lake Boardwalk and Victorian Gardens in Waterloo Park as well as transportation improvements along Willis Way, William Street, Willow Street, Father David Bauer Drive and Erb/Caroline Street.

Though many successful projects have been completed, the CIP needs to be updated in order to remain current with the City’s vision, objectives and policies for Uptown. Like the previous Plan, a new CIP can be used as a tool to enable private and public sector investment in Uptown, subject to more detailed analysis and Council decisions related to the financial implications of various incentives and/or initiatives. The CIP will do this by offering a framework for incentive programs and outlining municipal leadership actions designed to support specific types of development within the Uptown Project Area, consistent with the vision and objectives of the City Official Plan.

1.3 CIP Goals

The CIP is an important tool for helping to achieve the City’s vision and objectives for lands within the Uptown Community Improvement Project Area. The community improvement goals are grounded in the OP, are intended to support the overall economic vitality of the Project Area, and include: • Stimulate private sector investment through municipal incentive-based programs that support building improvements, expansions and the development of targeted land uses • Foster implementation of environmental sustainability criteria and heritage conservation criteria through municipal incentive-based programs and initiatives • Direct public resources toward implementation of streetscape and public realm improvements • Define a Municipal Leadership Strategy to provide a framework for the City to support and participate in the revitalization of Uptown by leveraging City-owned lands and municipal resources to support the economic vitality of Uptown

Council Meeting Page 261 of 409 August 10, 2015 18 Integrated Planning & Public Works

1.4 CIP Process and Consultation

An Uptown CIP Study was initiated in 2014 in response to an identified desire to support the development of additional employment land uses in Uptown (Refer to Terms of Reference IPPW2014-086). The Uptown CIP Study Discussion Paper, prepared in April 2015 (IPPW2015-026 available under separate cover), provides background to this CIP and has been used to facilitate consultation with interested individuals, groups and agencies.

Consultation throughout the CIP Process has been on-going, including information exchange and input from Council, Committees of Council, liaison groups, key stakeholders and the community in conjunction with the following timeline.

Figure 1 Key Process and Consultation Milestones

• TERMS OF REFERENCE (IPPW2014-086) • Identified employment and afforable housing as key objectives • Stakeholder workshop (January 2015) to discuss Development August 2014- Charges Review as well as employment and affordable housing in January 2015 Uptown

• DISCUSSION PAPER (IPPW2015-026) • Overview of Uptown context, best practices and options presented to Council April 2015 • Circulated to Committees of Council, liaison groups, agencies and stakeholders

• PROPOSED CIP (IPPW2015-053) • Draft CIP presented to Council at a formal public meeting and circulated to Committees of Council, liaison groups, agencies and Summer 2015 stakeholders

• RECOMMENDED CIP (IPPW2015-074) • Final CIP presented to Council for adoption August 2015

Council Meeting Page 262 of 409 August 10, 2015 19 Integrated Planning & Public Works

As the study progressed, there were several changes to the scope of the study based on research and consultation, including; • Scope was broadened to include consideration of incentives or initiatives to support heritage conservation and green building initiatives, as addressed in the Discussion Paper • Study area was expanded to include the MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District (discussed below)

1.5 Community Improvement Project Area

The Study Area for the Uptown CIP initially consisted of the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre as defined in the City Official Plan. The basis for this decision was a well-defined policy framework for the Growth Centre in Provincial, Regional and local policy frameworks that establish the Uptown area as an economic, administrative and residential focal point within the City. Through the consultation process, it was determined that it would be beneficial to extend the project area to also include the MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District, recognizing that the proposed incentives include consideration of loans and/or grants to support heritage conservation. Therefore, the recommended Uptown Community Improvement Project Area (also referred to herein as the “Project Area”) is shown on Figure 2 on the following page and includes the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre as well as the MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District.

1.6 Related Initiatives

Several additional reports have been prepared by the City and relate to other incentives being requested or considered in the Uptown area. These include the following: a) Development Charges Review: Council considered the following reports in relation to a Review of the Development Charges (DC) By-law. On June 15, 2015, Council considered and did not approve a DC reduction in Uptown: • CAO2015-005 “Discussion Paper: Uptown Development Charges” • CAO2015-005.1 “Development Charges: Final Recommendation Report” b) Heritage Incentives: • IPPW2015-036 “Staff Response to Committee Recommendations for Heritage Conservation Incentives”, accompanying a Municipal Heritage Committee (MHC) Report CTTEE2015-002 • IPPW2015-040 “Built Heritage Strategy Discussion Paper” c) Parkland Dedication Fees: CAO2015-12.1 “Parkland Dedication By-law and Policies Report” - Council approved a reduced residential parkland dedication fee in Uptown and exempted parkland dedication fees for office and commercial uses in mixed-use buildings in Uptown

Council Meeting Page 263 of 409 August 10, 2015 20 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 264 of 409 August 10, 2015 21 Integrated Planning & Public Works

2.0 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT

2.1 The Municipal Act, 2001

Section 106 of the Municipal Act sets out that municipalities shall not assist any manufacturing business or other industrial or commercial enterprise through ‘bonusing’, or more specifically, by: a) giving or lending any property of the municipality, including money; b) guaranteeing borrowing; c) leasing or selling any property of the municipality at below fair market value; or, d) giving a total or partial exemption from any levy, charge or fee.

The legislation also provides for exceptions to this ‘bonusing rule’. For example, the prohibition does not apply to a Council exercising its authority under subsection 28(6) or (7) of the Planning Act (Community Improvement Plans). It is this exception that allows municipalitites to adopt CIPs that may include a range of initatives and/or financial incentives to support development in areas requiring community improvement. A similar exception to the bonusing rule applies to properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, described further below.

2.2 The Planning Act

Community improvement planning, as enabled by Section 28 of the Planning Act, provides the framework for municipalities to plan and finance development activities (both private and public) that effectively use, reuse and restore lands, buildings and infrastructure. The purpose of a Community Improvement Plan (CIP) is to provide a long-range, comprehensive planning program for the implementation of community improvement initiatives within a defined Project Area.

Through normal City operations, the City has the authority to acquire, construct, improve and/or dispose of land and buildings to achieve municipal objectives. However, in the course of doing so, the City cannot grant assistance to (i.e. bonus) individual property owners or businesses (e.g. selling or leasing a property for below market value) unless such action is enabled though other legislation. The community improvement provisions of the Planning Act are one example of this. Where a municipality adopts a CIP, the legislation gives the municipality the authority to grant assistance to property owners or businesses in conjunction with the following types of activities, consistent with community improvement objectives: • Acquiring, holding, clearing, grading or otherwise preparing land for community improvement

Council Meeting Page 265 of 409 August 10, 2015 22 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Constructing, repairing, rehabilitating or improving buildings on municipal land • Selling, leasing or otherwise disposing of municipal land • Providing grants or loans to owners, tenants and their assignees to pay the whole or any part of identified eligible costs • Providing tax assistance for environmental remediation purposes by reference to s. 365 of the Municipal Act

The Planning Act, as amended by the Strong Communities through Affordable Housing Act, 2011, includes a specific reference to the provision of affordable housing (as a component of a full range of housing) as a matter of provincial interest.

2.3 Ontario Heritage Act

The Ontario Heritage Act allows municipalities to pass by-laws that provide for loans or grants to owners of properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. The purpose of the grants and loans is to pay for all or part of the costs of alterations to such designated buildings, consistent with terms and conditions that may be set out by the municipality. The bonusing rule included in the Municipal Act does not apply to grants or loans made under this Section of the Ontario Heritage Act.

2.4 Development Charges Act

The Development Charges Act allows a municipality to totally or partially exempt development from a development charge (DC) in order to promote community improvement initiatives such as downtown employment or brownfield redevelopment. Because this financial exemption is usually offered before construction (i.e. at Building Permit issuance), it is a very powerful incentive. However, where an exemption is given, any resulting shortfall in the municipality’s development charge reserve fund must be funded by the City and cannot be made up through higher development charges for other types of development.

The City of Waterloo has completed a recent review of the DC By-law as it is applied to lands in Uptown. On June 15, 2015, Council made a decision to not implement a DC reduction in Uptown. The DC By-law is subject to review beginning in 2016/7.

Council Meeting Page 266 of 409 August 10, 2015 23 Integrated Planning & Public Works

3.0 MUNICIPAL CONTEXT

3.1 City Official Plan

The City of Waterloo Official Plan (OP) guides long range land use and development in the City. It establishes the Uptown area as a focal point within the City and sets a clear framework for community improvement in Waterloo.

The Study Area for the CIP includes both the Uptown Urban Growth Centre and the MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District as defined by the City Official Plan. The Official Plan policies related to these areas and the rest of the City are comprehensive and address each of the four pillars of a strong community – social, cultural, economic and environmental.

The intent of this CIP is to build on the pillars established in the OP by helping to focus private and public sector investment and collaboration on several targeted areas (shown adjacent). As a result, the goals of this CIP have been developed with consideration given to the objectives and policy frameworks established in the Official Plan for the Uptown Urban Growth Centre and the MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District, described in the following sections. Figure 3 Key Community Building Pillars

3.1.1 Uptown Urban Growth Centre

The Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre (Uptown) is delineated in the City OP and comprises a substantial portion of the CIP Project Area (Refer to previous Figure 2). Key OP policies related to Uptown set out that Uptown will be planned to: • Serve as a major focal point and destination for investment within the City • Accommodate and support major transit, pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure • Accommodate a significant share of the City’s future population and employment growth (with a particular focus on office employment) in a compact urban form • Supporting a strengthened commercial centre, with continued market growth in Uptown • Accommodate development that conserves cultural heritage resources, supporting Uptown as a community focal point for arts and culture • Include land uses that support a high quality, safe and attractive streetscape and public

Council Meeting Page 267 of 409 August 10, 2015 24 Integrated Planning & Public Works

realm, including the Laurel Creek open space access system • Include collaboration with the private sector in efforts to improve and redevelop Uptown • Address the risk to life and property associated with the regulatory flood plain in Uptown

3.1.2 MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District

The MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District is a neighbourhood designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. Located adjacent to, and partly within, the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre, the District is comprised of 137 properties that collectively have historical, architectural and contextual value. Change in the District is guided by City Official Plan policies as well as a Heritage Conservation District Plan that contains policies and guidelines to conserve and enhance the neighbourhood’s special character.

3.1.3 Community Improvement Policies

The City Official Plan includes policies to guide the development of Community Improvement Plans (Appendix “A”). These policies specify that the City may use Community Improvement Plans to promote and focus public and private sector investment into maintenance, rehabilitation and redevelopment activities that improve the living and working conditions in the City.

Historically, the City has used this tool in the Uptown area, approving previous Community Improvement Plans in 1988 and in 2000. The 2012 Official Plan includes a community improvement planning policy framework that includes the following key goals of relevance to this community improvement plan: • To preserve, redevelop and rehabilitate the built environment, including residential, commercial, industrial and mixed-use areas • To ensure private and public community improvement activities are coordinated • To assist the City in identifying priorities for municipal expenditure regarding community improvement projects

The objectives for community improvement in the Official Plan outline that CIPs may be prepared and adopted to achieve a range of objectives, many of which could apply to Uptown. For the purpose of this CIP, there are several objectives of particular relevance described in Figure 4 on the following page.

Council Meeting Page 268 of 409 August 10, 2015 25 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Figure 4 Relationship to Official Plan Community Improvement Policies

KEY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT OBJECTIVES IN THE FOCUS OF THIS CIP INCLUDES OFFICIAL PLAN PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENT Maintaining and enhancing the Uptown Waterloo AND COLLABORATION IN: Urban Growth Centre as a major focal point for investment in institutional and region-wide public services, regional-serving land uses and activities such as recreational, social, cultural, entertainment, office, tourism and significant employment uses Creating employment opportunities and affordable Facilitating improvements to the built form or housing, streetscape giving consideration to:

Improving environmental, social, cultural, economic development or safety conditions Heritage conservation and Encouraging private sector renovation, repair, sustainable building criteria rehabilitation, redevelopment or other improvement of land and/or buildings...

City OP policies also outline the types of actions that the municipality may undertake to address community improvement goals and objectives and these generally include:

• Using public monies to repair or upgrade community infrastructure • Funding grants and/or loans to owners of land for the purposes of carrying out the Community Improvement Plan, including rehabilitation of contaminated properties; • Municipal acquisition, and subsequent clearance, rehabilitation, redevelopment or sale/lease or otherwise dispose of land and buildings • Supporting conservation of cultural heritage resources • Participation in senior level government programs that provide assistance to municipalities and/or private landowners for the purpose of community improvement

Council Meeting Page 269 of 409 August 10, 2015 26 Integrated Planning & Public Works

3.2 Other Uptown Initiatives

Uptown Vision Committee - The City’s Uptown Vision Committee (UVC), a Committee of Council, has developed a Vision (Uptown Vision 2025) to support enhancing Uptown in terms of built form, safety and livability, mobility, economic prosperity and as an entertainment and cultural destination. The areas of focus for this Uptown CIP (i.e. to support investment in employment uses and affordable housing) align well with the components of the vision related to ‘working’ and ‘living’ in Uptown.

Council’s Uptown Priorities - The City undertook a ‘scoping’ process in 2013 to identify Council’s Core priorities for Uptown with the objectives of guiding future discussions relative to City-owned lands, providing additional clarity to the development industry, and advising other parties as to Council’s core priorities. A set of priorities were identified by Council as set out in Staff Report PPW2013-019: “Council’s Core Uptown Priorities” and summarized in the Discussion Paper for this CIP Study. The areas of focus for this Uptown Community Improvement Plan align well with Council’s priority to enhance Uptown as an employment and innovation centre and to make strategic use of surplus City-owned lands.

4.0 UPTOWN INCENTIVE PROGRAMS

4.1 Overview

The incentive programs contained in the CIP were specifically developed to address the key critical community improvement needs in the Uptown Project Area that lend themselves to being addressed via private sector building and development activity that would respond to the provision of incentive programs by the municipality. These key critical community improvement needs are based on the results of the policy framework review and input from Council, Committees of Council, Uptown BIA representatives, developers and the public. Community improvement needs include the promotion of: a) Reurbanization in the form of employment and mixed use infill, intensification, adaptive reuse and redevelopment; b) Affordable housing opportunities in Uptown; c) Conservation of built heritage resources; and, d) Sustainable and environmentally progressive development that incorporates environmental innovation and green technologies and building construction.

Council Meeting Page 270 of 409 August 10, 2015 27 Integrated Planning & Public Works

4.1.1 The Incentive Program ‘Toolkit’

The primary purpose of most CIP incentive programs is to generate reurbanization in the form of building rehabilitation, infill, intensification, and redevelopment. In addition to these goals, this CIP is focused on promoting specific land uses in Uptown (i.e. employment and affordable housing) that have been identified in the Official Plan as a high priority, accompanied by heritage conservation and sustainable design. Collectively, the programs can be thought of as a ‘toolkit’ that is available to the City to help achieve its planning goals for the Uptown Community Improvement Project Area.

Once initiated, the duration of the programs will vary. The Major Activity Program will be approximately 3-5 years from the date that the CIP is approved by Council and the Commercial Building Improvement Loan will have a duration of 3 years. All other programs in this CIP will have a duration of approximately 5 years (unless otherwise noted in the individual program), with the option for Council to extend the duration of any or all of these other programs by up to approximately 5 years.

Figure 5 Uptown CIP Toolkit

UPTOWN CIP TOOLKIT Once the Uptown CIP is adopted and comes into effect, Incentive programs in the the incentive programs in the CIP can be activated by Council, one or more at a time, based on Council ‘toolkit’ include: approval of the implementation of each program, subject to the availability of funding. • Façade Improvement Program • CIP enables Council to implement the Uptown Study Grant Program incentive programs, but does not obligate Council to • Fee Grant Program implement these programs. Council can decide if and • Commercial Building when to implement each 'tool' in the kit. Improvement Loan • Minor Activity Grant/Loan Once activated, these programs can be used Program individually or together by an applicant as the • Major Activity Grant Program programs apply to that applicant’s particular development. • Parking Exemption Program

Council Meeting Page 271 of 409 August 10, 2015 28 Integrated Planning & Public Works

FIGURE 7 OVERVIEW OF PROGRAMS PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Façade Purpose: To support improvements to streetscape and exterior building facades. Improvement Matching grant to a maximum of $10,000/per street-facing building facade, and a maximum of $15,000 where improvements occur on both facades on a corner lot. In recognition of the challenges anticipated Grant Program as a result of streetscape and LRT construction, maximum grant amounts available to non-residential buildings within the BIA boundary will be doubled to $20,000/$30,000 in the short term. Additional grant of $5,000 per building available where a property is designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. Availability of the grant is tied to conformity with Urban Design Manual and heritage conservation criteria.

Study Grant Purpose: To promote the preparation and submission to the City of high quality Program professional urban design studies, drawings and heritage assessments. Matching grant of up to $3,000 per property, based on 50% of the cost to prepare an urban design study and/or professional architectural/design drawings and/or Heritage Impact Assessment.

Fee Grant Purpose: To facilitate reurbanization projects through the provision of an additional Program financial incentive that will complement and augment the Minor Activity Program. Grant equal to 100% of the fees paid on planning/development applications, building permits and sign permits to a maximum total grant of $10,000 per property/project.

Commercial Purpose: To support business retention by helping to fund interior renovations and Building maintenance that improves the usability and/or accessibility of non-residential buildings within Uptown. Improvement Loan to be provided as an interest-free 5 year term loan and loan forgiveness is available for a portion of the Loan loan.

Minor Activity Purpose: To facilitate interior building renovations and small building expansions that Grant/Loan create additional floor space for affordable residential units or office employment uses. Program also supports heritage conservation and/or sustainable buildings. Program Grants or loans equal to an amount per square foot of floor space constructed or renovated, to a maximum amount per property. Availability of the grant/loan is tied to as-built performance in terms of the desired land uses of affordable housing and/or office employment uses, with an increased amount available for projects that also meet sustainability and/or heritage conservation criteria. Loan to be provided as an interest-free 5 year term loan and loan forgiveness is available for a portion of the loan.

Major Activity Purpose: To promote major redevelopment projects that create a substantial amount of Grant Program employment or affordable housing land uses as a priority, while supporting development that includes heritage conservation and/or sustainable buildings. Annual grant equal to a percentage of the increase in municipal property taxes for up to 10 years after project completion. Amount of the grant is tied to as-built project performance, with an increased grant available to projects that meet sustainability and/or heritage conservation criteria.

Parking Purpose: To facilitate small expansions or changes in use where the developer is Exemption unable to provide the on-site parking as required by the Zoning By-law. The program Program provides for parking exemptions, subject to the preparation of a parking analysis and Agreement. NOTES: 1. Additional details on the evaluation of applications for the Minor and Major Activity Programs is provided in Appendices C and D. The appendices to this CIP do not form part of the formal CIP, and may be revised or updated from time to time, as required, without formal amendment to this Plan.

Council Meeting Page 272 of 409 August 10, 2015 29 Integrated Planning & Public Works

4.1.2 Regional Funding Participation

The Region of Waterloo Official Plan contains community improvement policies that allow the Region to provide grants and loans to the local municipalities for the purpose of carrying out programs as described in local municipal CIPs. Therefore, once this CIP is adopted and approved, the mechanism is in place for the Region to participate with the City of Waterloo in funding some of the incentive programs contained in the CIP. If the Region of Waterloo were to partner with the City of Waterloo in funding some of the incentive programs contained in this CIP, this would increase the ability of the City to fund more grant/loan applications in the Project Area, thereby improving the effectiveness of this CIP.

In order to avoid an amendment to this CIP should the Region decide in the future to participate in the Major Activity Program contained in this CIP, this property tax increment based program is shown as applying to the municipal property tax increment (i.e. which could include both the City and Regional portion). However, future Regional participation in this program is entirely subject to approval by Regional Council. Should the Region elect not to participate in the Major Activity Program, then the property tax increment based grant available under this program will apply only to the City property tax increment.

4.1.3 General Program Requirements

In order to help achieve the vision for Uptown while protecting the City’s financial, planning and other interests, all of the financial incentive programs contained in this CIP are subject to the following general requirements as well as the individual requirements specified under each program. The general and program specific requirements contained in this CIP are not necessarily exhaustive, and the City reserves the right to include other requirements and conditions as deemed necessary on a property specific basis:

a) Application for any of the incentive programs contained in this CIP can be made only for properties within the Uptown Community Improvement Project Area and only for eligible works commenced after approval and of this CIP and activation of the program(s) by Council;

b) Each program in this CIP is considered active if Council has approved implementation of the program, and Council has approved a budget allocation for the program (as applicable);

c) An application for any financial incentive program contained in this CIP must be

Council Meeting Page 273 of 409 August 10, 2015 30 Integrated Planning & Public Works

submitted to and approved by the City prior to the commencement of any eligible works to which the financial incentive program will apply and prior to application for building permit; d) If the applicant is not the owner of the property, the applicant must provide written consent from the owner of the property to make the application; e) An application for any financial incentive program contained in this CIP must include plans, drawings, studies, reports, estimates, contracts, construction values, rental rates, sale prices, certifications, and other details and information as required by the City to satisfy the City with respect to costs, design, performance and implementation of the project and conformity of the project with the CIP; f) The City may require that an applicant submit a professional urban design study and/or professional architectural/ design drawings that are in conformity with applicable design guidelines in the City’s Urban Design Manual; g) Review and evaluation of an application and supporting materials against program eligibility requirements and applicable built performance guidelines/criteria will be done by City staff, who will then make a recommendation to City Council or Council’s designate. The application is subject to approval by City Council or Council’s designate; h) Proposed works, approved drawings and as-built projects approved under the financial incentive programs must conform to the City’s Official Plan, District Plan, Zoning By-law, applicable Block Plan, applicable urban design guidelines, and all other City guidelines, by-laws, policies, procedures, and standards; i) As a condition of application approval, the applicant may be required to enter into a grant or loan agreement with the City. This Agreement will specify the terms, duration and default provisions of the grant/loan to be provided. This Agreement is also subject to approval by City Council or Council’s designate; j) All works completed must comply with the description of the works as provided in the application form and contained in the program agreement, with any amendments as approved by the City;

Council Meeting Page 274 of 409 August 10, 2015 31 Integrated Planning & Public Works k) Where other sources of government and/or non-profit organization funding (Federal, Provincial, Regional, CMHC, Federation of Canadian Municipalities, etc…) that can be applied against the eligible costs are anticipated or have been secured, these must be declared as part of the application. Accordingly, the grant/loan may be reduced on a pro-rated basis; l) The City reserves the right to audit the cost of any and all works that have been approved under any of the financial incentive programs, at the expense of the applicant; m) The City is not responsible for any costs incurred by an applicant in relation to any of the programs, including without limitation, costs incurred in anticipation of a grant and/or loan; n) If the applicant is in default of any of the general or program specific requirements, or any other requirements of the City, the City may delay, reduce or cancel the approved grant and/or loan, and require repayment of the approved grant and/or loan; o) The City may discontinue any of the programs contained in this CIP at any time, but applicants with approved grants and/or loans will still receive said grant and/or loan, subject to meeting the general and program specific requirements, and applicants with approved loans will still be required to repay their loans in full (subject to any approved performance based loan forgiveness); p) All improvements made to buildings and/or land shall be made pursuant to a Building Permit, and/or other required permits, and constructed in accordance with the Ontario Building Code and all applicable zoning requirements and planning approvals; q) When required by the City, outstanding work orders, and/or orders or requests to comply, and/or other charges from the City must be satisfactorily addressed prior to grant and/or loan approval/payment; r) Property taxes and any other municipal financial obligations must be in good standing at the time of program application and throughout the entire length of the grant/loan commitment; s) City staff, officials, and/or agents of the City may inspect any property that is

Council Meeting Page 275 of 409 August 10, 2015 32 Integrated Planning & Public Works

the subject of an application for any of the financial incentive programs offered by the City prior to application approval, or after application approval at any time during the term of the grant or loan; t) Eligible applicants can apply for one or more of the incentive programs contained in this CIP that are offered by the City, but no two programs may be used to pay for the same eligible cost. The Major Activity Grant Program cannot be combined with other grant/loan programs; u) The total of all grants, loans and tax assistance provided in respect of the particular lands and buildings for which an applicant is making application under the programs contained in this CIP and any other applicable CIPs shall not exceed the eligible cost of the improvements to those particular lands and buildings under all applicable CIPs; v) Where a loan or grant approval is associated with the creation of affordable residential units, in order to ensure that the residential units remain affordable for a minimum defined period of time, the City may require, as a condition of loan or grant approval, that the applicant post such security as may be required by the City, including registration of such security against title of the property; and w) Grants or loans awarded under any CIP program are only available to the owner or tenant that signed the original grant/loan agreement and are not transferable. If all or part of a property is sold within a grant or loan eligibility period, all grant payments would immediately be discontinued and all outstanding loan payments would be immediately payable to the City. However, the City may, at its discretion, transfer all or part of a grant or loan amount to a new property owner, subject to a new owner entering into an agreement (where applicable) with the City that fulfills the requirements of the original agreement, plus any new requirements.

4.2 Façade Improvement Grant Program

4.2.1 Purpose - To encourage businesses and property owners to improve the appearance of the streetscape, heritage properties and other buildings in the Uptown Project Area. In recognition of the challenges anticipated as a result of LRT and streetscape construction, maximum grant amounts available to non- residential uses within the Uptown Business Improvement Area will be increased in the short-term. 4.2.2 Description - This program will provide a grant equal to 50% of the cost of eligible exterior building maintenance and property improvement works to

Council Meeting Page 276 of 409 August 10, 2015 33 Integrated Planning & Public Works

buildings. The grant amounts are as follows and availability of the grant is tied to conformity with applicable design guidelines and heritage conservation criteria: • maximum total grant per street-facing façade is $10,000 or up to $15,000 where improvements are occurring on both street-facing frontages on a corner lot; • notwithstanding the above, for a period of 2 years following the initiation of this program, and subject to potential further extensions at the City’s discretion, grants available to non-residential buildings within the BIA boundary will be increased to a maximum total grant per street-facing façade of $20,000 or up to $30,000 where improvements are occurring on both street-facing frontages on a corner lot; • additional grant of $5,000 is available where a property is designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.

4.2.3 Program Requirements - Applicants are eligible to apply for funding under this program, subject to meeting the general program requirements and the specific program requirements set out below:

a) The following types of exterior building maintenance and property improvement works are considered eligible for a matching grant under this program: • Cleaning, painting, repair or replacement of exterior façade materials; • Repair/replacement of front doors, windows, porches, signage; • Repair/replacement of cornices, parapets, eaves and other architectural details; • Landscaping, including walkways and permanent plant materials, to a maximum of 15% of the grant amount; • Design or consultant fees, to a maximum of 10% of the grant amount; and, • Other similar repairs/improvements as may be approved.

b) All eligible works must be visible from the road right-of-way and must be acceptable to and approved by the City.

c) In the case of properties designated or listed under the Ontario Heritage Act, all eligible works must also be in conformity with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada.

d) All eligible works must be in conformity with the Urban Design Manual.

Council Meeting Page 277 of 409 August 10, 2015 34 Integrated Planning & Public Works

4.3 Study Grant Program

4.3.1 Purpose - To promote the preparation and submission to the City of high quality professional urban design studies and drawings as well as heritage feasibility studies and assessments.

4.3.2 Description – This program offers a grant equal to 50% of the cost of preparing an urban design study and/or professional architectural/design drawings and/or a heritage feasibility study and/or Heritage Impact Assessment, up to a $3,000 grant per property/project.

4.3.3 Program Requirements - Applicants are eligible to apply for funding under this program, subject to meeting the general program requirements and the specific program requirements set out below:

a) All urban design studies/drawings: • must be submitted to the City in electronic and hard copy format for the City’s review, approval and retention; • must be to the satisfaction of the City and must meet the City’s Urban Design Manual applicable to Uptown and any other City guidelines, by- laws, policies, procedures and standards; • must be completed by a qualified professional as determined by the City of Waterloo

b) All Heritage Impact Assessments must be completed in conformity with the City of Waterloo’s Terms of Reference for the Preparation of Heritage Impact Assessments.

4.4 Fee Grant Program

4.4.1 Purpose - To facilitate renovations and small expansions through the provision of an additional financial incentive that will complement and augment other programs.

4.4.2 Description - The program offers a grant equal to 100% of the fees paid on City planning/development applications, building permits and sign permits to a maximum grant of $10,000 per property/project.

4.4.3 Program Requirements - All planning and application fees: • must be associated with a project approved under the Minor Activity Grant/Loan Program, Commercial Building Improvement Program or Façade

Council Meeting Page 278 of 409 August 10, 2015 35 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Improvement Program; • must be paid as normal at the time of application. The grant will be paid upon project completion, subject to the project meeting the performance criteria and other requirements of the applicable program(s) under which the project was approved.

4.5 Commercial Building Improvement Loan Program

4.5.1 Purpose - This program is intended to support business retention by helping to fund interior renovations and maintenance that improve the usability and/or accessibility of non-residential buildings. The duration of the program will generally coincide with the LRT and streetscape construction period and a period of transition thereafter in order to provide additional support for businesses in the Uptown that would particularly benefit from improvements and renovations done during this construction period.

4.5.2 Description – This program offers a loan based on $20/square foot to a maximum loan of $30,000 per project/property. The program will provide an interest-free 5 year term loan equal to an amount per square foot of floor space renovated or improved to a maximum amount per project. Loan forgiveness is available based on as-built project performance where the portion of loan to be forgiven will be paid as a grant at the end of the loan period as defined in the Table C-2 of Appendix C

4.5.3 Program Requirements – Applicants are eligible to apply for funding under this program, subject to meeting the general program requirements and the specific requirements set out below:

a) Projects involving the repair, renovation and/or redevelopment of up to 5,000 square feet of non-residential building floor area are considered eligible to apply for funding under this program.

b) As a condition of loan approval, the City may require the applicant to: i. post such security as may be required to secure a commercial loan, including registration of such security against title of the property; and, ii. meet specific insurance terms to protect the municipality’s interests.

c) If during the loan period, a building receiving a loan is demolished, all loan advances from the City shall cease, and all loan advances already made by the City will be immediately repayable to the City.

Council Meeting Page 279 of 409 August 10, 2015 36 Integrated Planning & Public Works

4.6 Minor Activity Grant/Loan Program

4.6.1 Purpose - To facilitate small expansions and new construction that results in new floor space to accommodate affordable housing uses (as defined in Appendix B) or office employment uses.

4.6.2 Description – This program is intended to support projects that involve expansions, conversions and/or new construction up to 5,000 sq. ft. to accommodate affordable housing and/or office employment. The program may be offered as a loan or a grant by the City as shown in Appendix “C” and described below.

4.6.2.1 Grant

If offered as a grant, the Minor Activity Program will provide a grant equal to an amount per square foot of floor space included in the building expansion, conversion or construction, to a maximum amount per project/property. Availability of the grant is tied to as-built performance in terms of affordable residential units or office employment floor space, with increased grant values available for projects that meet sustainability and/or heritage conservation criteria, as defined in the Table C-1 of Appendix C.

4.6.2.2 Loan

If offered as a loan, the Minor Activity Program will provide an interest-free 5 year term loan equal to an amount per square foot of floor space included in the building expansion, conversion or construction, to a maximum amount per project/property. Availability of the loan is tied to as-built performance in terms of affordable residential units or office employment floor space, with increased loan values available for projects that meet sustainability and/or heritage conservation criteria (Table C-1). Loan forgiveness is available based on as- built project performance where the portion of loan to be forgiven will be paid as a grant at the end of the loan period as defined in the Table C-2 of Appendix C.

4.6.3 Program Requirements – Applicants are eligible to apply for funding under this program, subject to meeting the general program requirements and the specific requirements set out below:

a) The following types of projects are considered eligible to apply for funding under this program: i. Projects involving the conversion, expansion and/or construction of up to 5,000 square feet of building floor area intended for office

Council Meeting Page 280 of 409 August 10, 2015 37 Integrated Planning & Public Works

employment uses and/or a minimum of 2 affordable housing units.

4.7 Major Activity Grant Program

4.7.1 Purpose - To promote large reurbanization projects that include affordable housing uses and/or non-residential uses that include an office employment component. This program is also intended to support and off-set the costs associated with compliance with environmental sustainability and, where applicable, heritage conservation criteria. This program provides a financial incentive that reduces the property tax increase that can typically result from reurbanization projects and is also designed to assist in securing project financing.

4.7.2 Description – The Major Activity Grant Program provides that a tax increment grant (TIG) would be offered by the City. A TIG is a grant equal to the full amount, or a portion of the amount of the estimated property tax increase after a property is redeveloped and reassessed. The increase in taxes, or ‘tax increment’, is calculated by subtracting the municipal portion of property taxes before reassessment from the municipal portion of property taxes after reassessment. The City may provide a grant equal to any proportion of the increment for any length of time that Council deems is appropriate. The tax increment does not include any increase/decrease in municipal taxes due to a general tax rate increase/decrease, or a change in assessment for any other reason.

The Major Activity Grant Program will provide for a TIG on a “pay-as-you-go” basis. The approved applicant would first construct and complete the reurbanization project. This program will then provide an annual grant equal to a percentage of the municipal property tax increase for up to 10 years following completion of an eligible project where that project creates an increase in assessment, and therefore an increase in property taxes. The grant will be paid annually once the eligible project is complete, building inspection has taken place, the property has been reassessed, and the new property taxes have been paid in full for the year.

Council Meeting Page 281 of 409 August 10, 2015 38 Integrated Planning & Public Works

The availability of the grant and the amount of the grant to be paid out by the City on an approved project is tied to as-built project performance of that project. As-built performance of a project is evaluated by the City using criteria as set out in Appendix “D” of this CIP, including: • the inclusion of affordable housing land uses or office employment land uses as a component of the development; • LEED certification or other sustainable design/construction standards recognized by the City; and, • where applicable, conformity with Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada.

The City may elect to establish a maximum grant that can be paid under this program per application/project.

4.7.3 Program Requirements - Applicants are eligible to apply for funding under this program, subject to meeting the general program requirements, the following program requirements, and subject to the availability of funding as approved by Council:

(a) The following types of projects are considered eligible to apply for funding under this program: i. Repair, renovation, expansion or redevelopment of existing buildings where said activity results in an increase in the assessment value and taxes on the property; or, ii. New buildings on vacant lots where said activity results in an increase in the assessment value and taxes on the property; and iii. Said activity referred to in either item i) or item ii) above results in a minimum of 5,000 square feet of new or renovated building floor area, provided further that: • A minimum of 10% of the residential units are provided as affordable rental or ownership housing, with no fewer than 10 affordable units provided; and/or • The building floor area provided for office employment uses within the building has a minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 1.

(b) If during the grant period, a building receiving a Tax Increment Grant is demolished, all grant payments shall cease and the City reserves the right to require immediate repayment of the grant payments.

Council Meeting Page 282 of 409 August 10, 2015 39 Integrated Planning & Public Works

4.8 Parking Exemption Program

4.8.1 Description - Uptown Waterloo is intensely developed, with many properties built at or close to their property line. This may limit the ability of property owners to satisfy the requirements of the Zoning By-law to provide additional parking in conjunction with floor area conversions and/or small expansions to existing buildings. This program is intended to provide parking exemptions to facilitate small scale building conversions and expansions that result in additional non- residential floor space in the Uptown Project Area.

4.8.2 Description – This program offers an exemption from the parking requirements of the Zoning By-law for small scale conversions (changes in use) and building expansions that result in additional non-residential floor space.

4.8.3 Program Requirements – Applicants are eligible to apply for this program, subject to meeting the general program requirements and the specific requirements set out below:

a) Projects requiring a Building Permit in association with: i. the conversion (change in use) of up to 185 square metres (2,000 sq. ft.) to create new non-residential building floor area within an existing building; or ii. the expansion of an existing building (addition) by up to 185 square metres (2,000 sq. ft.) for non-residential floor area purposes; are considered eligible to apply under this program.

b) The applicant will be required to submit a detailed parking analysis confirming that sufficient parking is available to address parking demand for the revised development, to the satisfaction of the City. Such analysis may give consideration to off-site parking opportunities, transportation demand management, visitor and delivery parking demands and parking management by owner, among other things.

c) Pursuant to Section 40 of the Planning Act, the applicant will be required to enter into an Agreement in a form and with content satisfactory to the City to provide for an exemption from the provision of parking as required by the Zoning By-law, provided further that a nominal payment shall be required by the City of Waterloo as consideration for the granting of the exemption.

Council Meeting Page 283 of 409 August 10, 2015 40 Integrated Planning & Public Works

5.0 MUNICIPAL LEADERSHIP STRATEGY: PROPERTY ACQUISITION, DISPOSAL, INVESTMENT AND IMPROVEMENT

5.1 Purpose of the Municipal Leadership Strategy

As outlined in Section 4.0 of this CIP, the Municipal Incentives Toolkit provides a set of specific loans and/or grant programs designed to incent private sector development, redevelopment and revitalization in the Project Area. The purpose of this Municipal Leadership Strategy is to complement the incentives toolkit by establishing a general, high-level framework that allows the City to directly participate in and lead development, redevelopment and revitalization initiatives that reinforce and improve the economic vitality of Uptown as a thriving business centre and innovation hub with strong employment growth.

It is well recognized that economic vitality is closely linked to a municipality’s social, cultural and environmental systems. As such, and in order to maximize the effectiveness of the CIP, the City’s efforts to increase economic vitality within the Uptown Project Area can and should encompass a range of initiatives that focus both on job creation as well as complementary goals related to supporting heritage conservation and environmental sustainability. These initiatives will help to reinforce Uptown as a primary institutional, economic, social, cultural and recreational destination, and to generally maintain a high quality of life that includes a diverse range of housing, including affordable housing, for a broad demographic. The Municipal Leadership Strategy provides the framework for the City to take a lead role or supporting role in a range of initiatives that further these goals, making use of the City’s ability to acquire, improve and dispose of lands and to use other municipal resources to support community improvement.

5.2 Description of the Strategy

The Strategy is a general program of municipal property acquisition, disposal, investment and improvement, and may include involvement in public-private ventures. The focus of the Strategy will be larger scale community improvement projects that address the goals of this CIP and the Official Plan that seek to advance Uptown as a major focal point and destination for investment in institutional and Region-wide public services, as well as residential, commercial, employment, social, cultural, entertainment, recreational, accommodation and public open spaces. Such projects include but are not necessarily limited to: • Supporting the creation of a community arts hub that could include uses such as museums, theatres and/or studio and incubator space for artists • Supporting the creation of an innovation hub that could include space to support start-up businesses (e.g. office, meeting space, amenities)

Council Meeting Page 284 of 409 August 10, 2015 41 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Developing parking structure(s) • Supporting a range of housing types that are affordable to a range of income groups, including affordable housing • Supporting the conservation and adaptive re-use of cultural heritage resources • Supporting the development of open spaces that are accessible to the public and may be located on public or private lands

Consistent with the provisions of section 28(3) and 28(6) of the Planning Act, Council may undertake any, or a combination of, the following after the CIP has been approved and comes into effect: (a) Acquire, hold, clear, grade or otherwise prepare land for community improvement; (b) Construct, repair, rehabilitate or improve buildings on land acquired or held by the City in conformity with the CIP; and, (c) Sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of any land and buildings acquired or held by it in conformity with the CIP.

To facilitate the Municipal Leadership Strategy, upon approval of this Plan, the City may use all of its powers under the Municipal Act, 2001, and other applicable statutes and regulations, in order to lead or participate in the initiatives outlined in the Municipal Leadership Strategy, recommended actions in other approved plans and reports that apply to the Uptown Project Area, and recommendations identified and approved by the City in the future that apply to the Project Area.

6.0 PUBLIC REALM STRATEGY

The City may initiate a comprehensive Public Realm Strategy for Uptown in order to identify and prioritize opportunities for public realm improvements and to develop a comprehensive approach to: • Identification of principles or standards for road/sidewalk reconstruction • Addressing the interface between public and private lands • Considering how future public spaces are provided in Uptown • Rehabilitation and/or redevelopment of existing public spaces for municipal purposes

In the interim, the following areas have been identified as potential areas to focus on public realm initiatives: • Waterworks Park (William Street) – At such time as the site may be decommissioned, the opportunity to establish a park or other land use should be

Council Meeting Page 285 of 409 August 10, 2015 42 Integrated Planning & Public Works

considered. • Public Art – Consistent with the City’s policy and the City Official Plan, staff encourages developers (during redevelopment) to financially contribute toward the creation and acquisition of public art. • Light Rail Transit Corridor – With LRT under construction, there are opportunities for public realm improvements that will improve connectivity to and within station areas and can improve user comfort. • Trail planning and amenities, including bicycle parking areas, has been and should continue to be a priority in Uptown. • King Street Streetscape (Central Street to Erb Street) - This project is intended to make King Street more accessible for all modes of transportation, including pedestrians, to generally create an attractive, safe and vibrant streetscape and to coordinate design elements to support business and economic life in Uptown. • Laurel Creek open space system – Consistent with the Official Plan, improvements to the Laurel Creek open space system can improve the natural system, open space opportunities and connectivity within and around Uptown.

7.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING 7.1 Initiating the Incentive Programs

On Council’s direction, any or all of the financial incentive programs outlined in Section 4.0 or Section 5.0 of this CIP can be initiated, subject to further approvals and funding. Prior to initiation of any program included in Section 4.0, staff will develop a Program Guideline outlining more detailed procedures, criteria and requirements.

7.2 Description of Monitoring Program

This CIP is not intended to be a static document. It is intended to be a proactive and responsive plan to support reurbanization, revitalization and heritage conservation within the Project Area. As a result, the use of the programs will be monitored to facilitate regular reporting to Council and the community with regard to the success of the program and to enable the City to refine the programs, as necessary to achieve maximum effectiveness relative to the City’s community improvement objectives. Key variables to be monitored on a project-by-project and aggregate basis include: • Number of applications; • Amount of employment floor space created or renovated; • Number of affordable housing units created for ownership or rent; • Value of tax assessment pre and post-development amount of tax increment; • Value of grant/loans provided;

Council Meeting Page 286 of 409 August 10, 2015 43 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Number of new businesses by type; and, • Number of jobs created.

7.3 Program Adjustments

The individual incentive programs contained in this CIP can be activated, deactivated or discontinued by Council without amendment to this Plan. Increases in funding provided by the financial incentives contained in this CIP, the addition of any new incentive programs to this CIP, or an expansion of the Community Improvement Project Area will require a formal amendment to this Plan in accordance with Section 28 of the Planning Act. The City may periodically review and adjust the terms and requirements of any of the programs contained in this Plan, without amendment to the Plan. Such minor changes or discontinuation of programs will be provided to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for information purposes only.

8.0 CONCLUSION

The CIP provides a toolkit that can be used to help achieve the vision for lands within the Uptown Project Area. The financial incentive programs have been specifically designed to support revitalization, reurbanization and heritage conservation within the Uptown Project Area by stimulating private sector investment in targeted areas. The document also provides high-level direction related to streetscape and public realm improvements for Uptown. A framework is also provided to enable the City to leverage City-owned lands and municipal resources to support achieving community improvement objectives in the Uptown Project Area.

On Council’s direction, and subject to decisions around funding, any or all of the programs in this CIP can be initiated. Successful implementation of the CIP will require resources to administer the financial incentive programs and to monitor and report on outcomes. Experience in other municipalities has shown that early and effective implementation and marketing of the incentive programs will result in a more successful CIP. On-going monitoring of the performance of the incentive programs and adjustment of the programs as required will also help to ensure effectiveness of the CIP.

Council Meeting Page 287 of 409 August 10, 2015 44 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Appendix A City of Waterloo Official Plan - Community Improvement Policies

12.3.2 Community Improvement Plans

Under Section 28 of the Planning Act, Council may by By-Law designate part of, or the entire City, as a Community Improvement Project Area. It is the intent of Council to utilize Community Improvement Plans to promote and focus public and private sector investment into maintenance, rehabilitation, and redevelopment activities that improve the living and working conditions in the City.

(1) The goals of community improvement are to: (a) Preserve, redevelop and rehabilitate the built environment, including residential, commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas; (b) To make efficient use of existing community uses and other amenities; (c) To ensure private and public community improvement activities are coordinated; (d) To address existing land use conflicts, and minimize or mitigate future land use conflicts; (e) To assist the City in identifying priorities for municipal expenditure regarding community improvement projects; and, (f) To participate, wherever possible, in Federal and/or Provincial programs that facilitate community improvement.

(2) Community Improvement Plans may be prepared and adopted to achieve one or more of the following objectives: (a) Encouraging private sector renovation, repair, rehabilitation, redevelopment or other improvement of lands and/or building, including environmental remediation, development, redevelopment, construction and reconstruction of lands and buildings for rehabilitation purposes, or for the provision of energy efficient uses, buildings, structures, works, improvements or facilities; (b) Improving or upgrading community uses; (c) Encouraging or facilitating intensification or transit-oriented development; (d) Preserving and enhancing the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre as a major focal point and destination for investment in institutional and region- wide public services, regional-serving land uses and activities such as recreational, social, cultural, entertainment, office, tourism, and significant employment uses;

Council Meeting Page 288 of 409 August 10, 2015 45 Integrated Planning & Public Works

(e) Maintaining and improving the transportation network and associated transportation infrastructure, including the active transportation network, and provide sufficient parking facilities, particularly within the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre; (f) Facilitating improvements to the built form or streetscape; (g) Eliminating, mitigating or relocating incompatible land uses; and, (h) Improving environmental, social, cultural, economic development, or safety conditions.

(3) For an area to be designated as a Community Improvement Project Area, it must satisfy one or preferably more than one of the following criteria: (a) Building stock or property in need of rehabilitation or redevelopment; (b) Opportunities exist to realize energy efficiency improvements or expand housing opportunities through redevelopment or conversion of residential lands and/or buildings; (c) Known or perceived contamination of land or buildings; (d) The presence of incompatible land uses or activities, including non-conforming uses, that disrupt the land use and/or lifestyle of the citizens of the area due to factors such as noise, odour, vibration, parking, loading, and traffic circulation; (e) Deterioration or deficient community infrastructure, such as, but not limited to, road, sanitary and storm sewers, water mains, curbs and sidewalks, community facilities, open spaces, parks, streetscapes, and utilities; (f) The presence of cultural heritage resources which would benefit from enhancement; (g) Opportunities exist to facilitate intensification or support transit-oriented development within the Built Boundary; (h) Deteriorated or insufficient parking facilities, road access or traffic circulation; (i) Built form and/or streetscapes being incoherent or detracting from a neighbourhood; and (j) Other significant environmental, social or community economic development reasons for community improvement.

(4) The City may create Community Improvement Plans to address the goals and objectives in policies 12.3.2 (1) and 12.3.2(2), and may include any of the following actions within defined Community Improvement Project Areas: (a) Strategically use public monies to repair or upgrade community infrastructure; (b) Utilize public monies to fund grants and/or loans to owners of land and their assignees for the purposes of carrying out the Community Improvement Plan, including rehabilitation of contaminated properties; (c) Municipal acquisition, and subsequent clearance, rehabilitation,

Council Meeting Page 289 of 409 August 10, 2015 46 Integrated Planning & Public Works

redevelopment or sale/lease or otherwise dispose of land and buildings; (d) Support of the conservation of cultural heritage resources through authorities provided in the Ontario Heritage Act, and the use of funding programs under that Act; and, (e) Participation in senior level government programs that provide assistance to municipalities and/or private landowners for the purpose of community improvement, including application for financial assistance from such senior government programs.

(5) The phasing of community improvements shall be prioritized according to: (a) The ability for the City to fund community improvement projects; (b) The availability of senior level government programs that provide assistance for community improvement; and, (c) The alignment of required capital expenditures to undertake community improvement with departmental priorities and associated capital budgets.

(6) In developing Community Improvement Plans, Council will ensure that the public is involved in the planning process.

(7) In accordance with the Planning Act, for furthering the community improvement goals and objectives and under such terms as Council considers appropriate, the City of Waterloo may provide grants or loans to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo for carrying out a Regional community improvement plan that has come into effect.

Council Meeting Page 290 of 409 August 10, 2015 47 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX B Affordable Housing Definition

For the purpose of this CIP, the definition of affordable housing will be consistent with the definition included in the City of Waterloo Official Plan as follows:

Affordable – (a) In the case of ownership housing, the least expensive of: (i) housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation costs which do not exceed 30 percent of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or (ii) housing for which the purchase price is at least 10 percent below the average purchase price of a resale unit in the regional market area; (b) In the case of rental housing, the least expensive of: (i) a unit for which the rent does not exceed 30 percent of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or (ii) a unit for which rent is at or below the average market rent of a unit in the regional market area.

For the purposes of this definition, low and moderate income means, (i) in the case of ownership housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60% of the income distribution for the regional market area; (ii) in the case of rental housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60% of the income distribution for renter households for the regional market area.

Council Meeting Page 291 of 409 August 10, 2015 48 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX C

Table C-1 APPLICATION EVALUATION MATRIX (MINOR ACTIVITY PROGRAM)

As-Built Project Achieves a maximum of 5,000 square Grant/Loan Amount in $/sq. ft. feet AND:

Minimum 2 affordable residential units $25/sq. ft., up to $20,000/project

Minimum 400 sq. ft. of office employment floor space

(no designated heritage resource and no environmental design/construction certification) Minimum 2 affordable residential units $40/sq. ft., up to $50,000/project

Minimum 400 sq. ft. of office employment floor space

AND • Includes a designated heritage resource; OR, • Achieves LEED certification or other sustainable design/construction standards recognized by the City

Council Meeting Page 292 of 409 August 10, 2015 49 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX C

Table C-2 LOAN REPAYMENT MATRIX (MINOR ACTIVITY PROGRAM AND COMMERCIAL

BUILDING IMPROVEMENT LOAN

Payment Required

Year 1 No Payment Required

Year 2 25% of total loan

Year 3 25% of total loan

Year 4 25% of total loan

Year 5 25% of total loan. If loan is in good standing at the end of loan period, this final 25% portion of the payment will be forgiven. (To be paid as a grant at the end of the loan period).

Council Meeting Page 293 of 409 August 10, 2015 50 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX D MAJOR ACTIVITY PROGRAM (Tax Increment Grant) Grant Application Evaluation Matrices

Table D-1 Employment Uses

As-Built Project Achieves a minimum overall Amount of Grant Duration of building floor area of 5,000 square feet; AND as (Percentage of Grant Municipal tax increment associated with employment uses) Level 1 Building floor area for office employment has a 80% 6 years minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) 1.0

(no designated heritage resource and no sustainable design/construction certification) Level 2 90% 8 years Building floor area for office employment has a minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) 1.0 AND • Includes either a designated heritage resource; OR, • Achieves LEED certification or other sustainable design/construction standards recognized by the City Level 3 100% 10 years Building floor area for office employment has a minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) 1.0 AND • Includes a designated heritage resource; AND, • Achieves LEED certification or other sustainable design/construction standards recognized by the City

Council Meeting Page 294 of 409 August 10, 2015 51 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Table D-2 Affordable Housing Uses

Amount of Grant as Duration of As-Built Project Achieves a minimum overall (Percentage of Grant building floor area of 5,000 square feet; AND Municipal tax increment associated with all residential units included in the building) Level 1 A minimum of 10% of residential units provided in a 50% 6 years residential or mixed-use building are affordable as defined by this CIP, with no fewer than 10 affordable residential units

(no designated heritage resource and no sustainable design/construction certification or standards) Level 2 A minimum of 10% of residential units provided in a 50% 8 years residential or mixed-use building are affordable as defined by this CIP, with no fewer than 10 affordable residential units

AND • Includes either a designated heritage resource; OR, • Achieves LEED certification or other sustainable design/construction standards recognized by the City Level 3 50% 10 years A minimum of 10% of residential units provided in a residential or mixed-use building are affordable as defined by this CIP, with no fewer than 10 affordable residential units

AND • Includes a designated heritage resource; AND, • Achieves LEED certification or other sustainable design/construction standards recognized by the City

Council Meeting Page 295 of 409 August 10, 2015 52 Integrated Planning & Public Works

ATTACHMENT 2 To Report IPPW2105-074

Minutes of a Formal Public Meeting July 13, 2015

Council Meeting Page 296 of 409 August 10, 2015 53 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 297 of 409 August 10, 2015 54 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Attachment 3 Written Submissions

1. Uptown Vision Committee – Meeting of June 12

As written and approved during meeting:

The UVC has considered and endorse the three reports (IPPW2015-053; CAO2015- 012; and CAO2015-005.1) and the intent behind the changes proposed. The UVC believes these proposed changes are to the benefit of the Uptown and the City of Waterloo. These changes will support a healthy and vibrant Uptown where people can work, play and live. These reports reflect the principles of the Vision 2025 document.

Council Meeting Page 298 of 409 August 10, 2015 55 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 299 of 409 August 10, 2015 56 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 300 of 409 August 10, 2015 57 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Council Meeting Page 301 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Community Services

STAFF REPORT Community Programming & Outreach Services

Title: Museum & Collections Strategy- Discussion Paper Report Number: COM2015-021 Author: Karen VandenBrink, Manager Museum & Archival Collections & Beth Rajnovich, Policy & Performance Analyst Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: Draft Museum & Collections Strategy Ward No.: All Wards

Recommendation:

1. That Council approve report COM2015-021.

2. That Council authorize commencement of a second phase of public consultation during August – September 2015 to facilitate feedback on Appendix A: Draft Museum & Collections Strategy.

A. Executive Summary In 2014, Council approved report CCRS2014-10 giving staff approval to commence work on a Museum & Collections Strategy. Since that time, the consultant firm of TCI Management and staff have completed research and public consultation to develop a draft Museum & Collections Strategy (Appendix A). Phase 1 of public consultation gathered input from more than 300 participants.

The draft strategy includes a proposed vision, mission, guiding principles and goals for the strategy, along with 20 recommendations to achieve the vision and goals. It also includes a situational analysis and background information about current museum operations that point opportunities and areas for improvement going forward. For each core area, key issues are explored based on findings from the public consultation process, analysis of operational challenges, and trends and best practice research. Suggested recommendations to address each key issue are proposed at this time.

Council Meeting Page 302 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Community Services

The strategy proposes the following 5 goals for the museum: 1) To tell the unique and compelling stories of the growth and evolution of the City of Waterloo. 2) To follow a collections plan that reinforces and reflects the stories identified. 3) To ensure broad community awareness of the value of the museum and its contribution to a unique City of Waterloo brand. 4) To ensure that the museum operation is easily accessible to the public. 5) To ensure proper compliance and accountability in all museum operations.

Staff is seeking approval from Council to obtain input from the community on the draft strategy through a second round of public consultation from August to September 2015. Once public consultation is complete, staff anticipates bringing the final Museum & Collections Strategy for Council consideration in October 2015.

Phase 2 of public consultation will include in-person community engagement at the Museum, as well as a survey using Open City Hall.

Input gathered through Phase 2 of public consultation will be used to draft the final Museum & Collections Strategy, to be implemented over a 10 year period.

B. Financial Implications Section 5.2 of the Draft Museum and Collections Strategy contains estimates of the financial impact of implementing each recommendation. While many of the recommendations can be implemented within existing budgets, some would require additional operational funding, or one-time project funding.

Over the ten year timeframe of the plan, the potential operating impacts are estimated to be approximately $30,000, and the potential capital impacts are estimated to be approximately $135,000 however, the financial implications will be refined in consultation with financial services staff and will be included in the staff report accompanying the final Museum & Collections Strategy. Potential sources of funding to support implementation of the strategy, such as the Heritage Reserve, will also be explored further.

C. Technology Implications Not applicable.

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

Council Meeting Page 303 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Community Services

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Strong Community - At the core of a community are people. Those individuals that call it home, visitors that travel to the area, volunteers, workers and all those that drive its local economy through established businesses. People want to be safe, healthy and active. Fostering resilient, safe, inclusive and vibrant communities is at the heart of strong and progressive municipal governance and is the base of the City of Waterloo’s success.

This strategy responds to the strategic objective by identifying the future role of the City of Waterloo Museum and its collection in enhancing the community. It also considers opportunities for growth of the City of Waterloo Museum, and looks at new innovative models of collaboration with other community organizations to enable growth and sustainability.

Economic Development - A key and influencing pillar for municipalities to drive tax revenue, business development, and expansion, and a vibrant cultural scene. A strong competitive economy fosters the city’s entrepreneurship, stimulates opportunity, creates jobs, fuels talent development and enhances the community’s attractiveness.

This strategy responds to this strategic objective because the museum can contribute to creating a strong sense of place, as well as to a higher quality of life and a more vibrant social and cultural scene. As a result, greater numbers of talented and creative people may wish to live in Waterloo, and more knowledge-economy firms may relocate to benefit from the creative environment.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

COM2015-12 Heritage Strategy, Museum & Collections Update COM2014-10 Cultural Heritage Strategy RFP14-19 Consulting Services for Museum & Collections Strategy CCRS2012-012 Train Station Proceeds CAO2013-12 Waterloo’s Culture Plan

Council Meeting Page 304 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Community Services

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Karen VandenBrink June 26, 2015

Director: Jim Bowman Commissioner: Acting Steve Heldman Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 305 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Community Services

Museum & Collections Strategy- Discussion Paper COM2015-021

Background In 2009, the City of Waterloo’s heritage artifacts collection was moved from its temporary location at the Canadian Clay & Glass Gallery to its new home at Conestoga Mall, creating Waterloo’s first civic museum. The opening of the City of Waterloo Museum began an exciting chapter in the cultural development of the city, providing a home for the preservation and exhibition of Waterloo’s community history.

While there are other museums in the area, such as the Waterloo Region Museum, residents’ feedback showed that they value the important civic role the City of Waterloo Museum fills and appreciate the distinctive Waterloo-based collection. Through the development of the City’s Culture Plan, residents indicated they would like to see the museum extend its hours of operation, promote exhibits more, and offer opportunities for expanded programming.

To continue to build on the museum’s success and to ensure museum sustainability, a long-term strategy for the museum and its collection was identified in the Culture Plan.

In June 2012, Council approved report CCRS2012-012 to provide $80,000 towards developing a cultural heritage strategy for the City of Waterloo, addressing the museum and the city’s building heritages, as identified in the Recreation and Leisure Services Master Plan (November 2008) and Waterloo’s Strategic Plan 2011-2014.

In recognition of the different needs, objectives and policy frameworks for managing built heritage compared with the city’s museum and collections, and the new accountabilities resulting from 2013 Forward, staff proposed the development of two distinct but integrated heritage strategies. The funds approved in report CCRS2012-012 were divided between the two projects; the development of a Museum and Collections Strategy under the leadership of the Manager, Museum and Archive Collections, and a Built Heritage Strategy, under the leadership of the City’s Heritage Planner.

The Museum and Collection Strategy explores opportunities in areas such as collections management, programming, future storage needs, and examines the sustainability of the Conestoga Mall partnership. It also considers opportunities for growth of the City of Waterloo Museum, and looks at new innovative models of collaboration with other community organizations to enable growth and sustainability.

Council Meeting Page 306 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Community Services

Purpose of the Museum & Collections Strategy

The overall purpose of the Museum and Collections Strategy is to:

1. Guide long term planning for the city’s museum and collections, including programming opportunities. 2. Capitalize on the city’s existing strengths in its museum and collections, and built heritage assets. 3. Address potential gaps and/or weaknesses in the city’s cultural heritage. 4. Assist Council and staff decision making with developing operating and capital budget strategies and business planning for creating additional community interest and support for heritage. 5. Identify to the public the importance and value that the city places on our heritage assets and to promote these assets. 6. Encourage and provide opportunities for local residents to become more engaged in their own community and for tourists to be drawn to the area. 7. Contribute to Waterloo’s prosperity and quality of life.

Summary of completed work

The development of this strategy involved research and significant consultation. Areas of focus included:

1. a review and analysis of museum operations; 2. an assessment of existing tools and approaches for museum management; 3. a needs analysis and analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats; and 4. development of strategic recommendations and setting proposed priorities for action.

The specific activities undertaken to inform the strategy included:

• site visits to the museum, Elam Martin Farmstead, and the collection storage areas by the project consultants; • consultation with key stakeholders: museum staff, other municipal staff, Council members, and others in the heritage, academic and culture communities; • review of background documents and policies of the city that are relevant to the museum operation; • benchmarking of other community museums to identify key performance metrics and best practices in terms of community engagement; • a community survey (which received over 300 responses); • a ‘museum workshop day’ (February 18, 2015) consisting of two focus group sessions;

Council Meeting Page 307 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Community Services

• preparation of a Situation Analysis report and presentation to Council on April 20, 2015 (COM2015-12); and • preparation of this Draft Museum and Collections Strategy.

The draft Museum & Collections strategy was developed by TCI Management Consultants, (Jon Linton, director) who specialize in strategic planning for museums and other cultural institutions were retained in August 2014 to assist staff with developing the Museum & Collections Strategy Terms of Reference presented in staff report COM2014-10. TCI has teamed up with Reich + Petch, museum architects, and Maltby & Associates Inc., experts in museum collections, to undertake the project. The project team was made up of staff in the Community Serves Department’s Business Services unit who are responsible for planning and policy development as well as Museum & Archival Collections unit staff, under the guidance of the Director of Community Programs and Outreach.

Draft Strategy Overview

The strategy takes a broad look at the role of the Museum & Collections unit and the services they provide, highlighting strengths and challenges, as well as what was heard from the community through the initial phase of public consultation involving more than 300 community members and stakeholders. Based on this information, the plan suggests a new vision and mission for the museum along with five goals and 20 recommendations for change and improvement that are anticipated to respond to the current operations.

Vision The City of Waterloo Museum is a vibrant heritage portal where residents and visitors personally connect with Waterloo’s past, building shared experiences and enhancing culture in our community.

Mission The City of Waterloo Museum serves as a community gathering place where residents and visitors celebrate their stories, both local and global, which are unique to the City’s growth and evolution. Through its collections, exhibitions, volunteers, staff and programs, the Museum interprets the fabric of our past and points the way to its future.

Goals 1. To tell the unique and compelling stories of the growth and evolution of the City of Waterloo. 2. To follow a collections plan that reinforces and reflects the stories identified. 3. To ensure broad community awareness of the value of the museum and its contribution to a unique City brand. 4. To ensure that the museum operation is easily accessible to the public. 5. To ensure proper compliance and accountability in all museum operations.

Council Meeting Page 308 of 409 August 10, 2015

DRAFT Museum and Collections Strategy

July 22, 2015

in association with Reich + Petch Design International and Maltby & Associates Inc.

Council Meeting Page 309 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report City of Waterloo Museum Organization Review and Strategic Plan Table of Contents

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 5 1.1 Purpose ...... 6 1.2. Guiding Principles ...... 6 1.4 Description of Current Operations ...... 9 1.5 Developing the Strategy - Activities Undertaken ...... 10 1.6 Context and Assumptions ...... 10 PART A. SITUATION ANALYSIS...... 13 2. Research, Consultation and Data Collection Activities ...... 13 2.1 Background Materials Reviewed ...... 13 2.2 Interviews and Workshop Session ...... 14 Key Consultation Themes ...... 15 Museum Operations ...... 15 Short Term: ...... 15 Long Term/Future:...... 16 Elam Martin Farmstead ...... 16 2.3 Community Survey ...... 17 2.4 Benchmarking Selection of Benchmark Comparables ...... 24 Key Findings and Conclusions ...... 25 Implications ...... 26 A Note on Museums in Shopping Malls ...... 28 3. Situation Analysis ...... 30 3.1 SWOT Assessment Approach ...... 30 3.2 Strengths ...... 30 3.3 Weaknesses ...... 32 3.4 Opportunities ...... 33 Short Term Opportunities ...... 33 Longer Term Opportunities ...... 35 3.5 Threats ...... 36 3.6 Assessment of Existing Tools and Approaches for Museum Management ...... 36 Provincial Framework ...... 37 Municipal Framework ...... 37 Existing City Processes ...... 38

2 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 310 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

PART B. STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT ...... 40 4. Strategic Recommendations and Rationale ...... 40 4.1 Vision, Mission, and Goals for City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy ...... 40 4.1.1 Vision and Mission ...... 41 4.1.2 Goals ...... 42 The strategic recommendations that follow speak to tactics and actions that will help achieve these goals...... 42 4.2 Strategic Recommendations ...... 42 4.2.1 Intent Underlying Recommendations ...... 42 4.2.2 Short-Term Recommendations (1-2 Year Timeframe) ...... 43 4.2.3 Medium-Term Recommendations (3 – 5 Year Timeframe) ...... 47 4.2.4 Longer-Term Recommendations (5+ Year Timeframe 2020 and beyond) ...... 48 5. Strategy Implementation Plan ...... 51 5.1 Implementation Framework ...... 51 5.2 Implementation Plan ...... 53 5.3 Evaluation Considerations ...... 54 5.3.1 Reporting Frequency ...... 54 5.3.2 Evaluation Metrics ...... 54 Appendix A. Benchmark Comparisons 2014 Budget Year ...... 56

3 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 311 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report Strategy at a Glance

Goals

1. To tell the unique and compelling stories of the growth and evolution of the City of Waterloo.

2. To follow a collections plan that reinforces and reflects the stories identified.

3. To ensure broad community awareness of the value of the museum and its contribution to a unique City brand.

4. To ensure that the museum operation is easily accessible to the public.

5. To ensure proper compliance and accountability in all museum operations.

Recommendations

Short Term (1-2 years) Medium Term (3-5 years) Long Term (5+ years) 1. Update the Collections Plan 12. Develop a marketing strategy 16. Address need for expanded and 2. Undertake an audit of the collections 13. Develop dedicated web site and consolidation of collections storage database related social media materials space 3. Transfer responsibility for the fine art 14. Consider expansion of museum 17. Address need for more exhibitions collection to the museum mandate to encompass city archives pace 4. Identify appropriate offsite storage 15. Develop greater orientation to 18. Address the need for dedicated options for current collection overflow programming and education programming space 5. Develop a plan for exhibition content at 19. Undertake feasibility study for a new the former Seagram Museum (now facility CIGI) 20. Consider the role for a ‘Friends of the 6. Improved way finding signage Museum’ Group to provide support 7. Expand hours of operation and guidance on the future of the 8. Explore greater orientation to in-mall museum markets 9. Continue development of required Provincial policy standards 10. Continue to build new strategic partnerships 11. Resolve branding confusion

4 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 312 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

1. Introduction In 2009, the City of Waterloo’s heritage artifacts collection was moved from its temporary location at the Canadian Clay & Glass Gallery to its new home at Conestoga Mall, creating Waterloo’s first civic museum. The opening of the City of Waterloo Museum began an exciting chapter in the cultural development of the city, providing a home for the preservation and exhibition of Waterloo’s community history.

The City of Waterloo Museum’s unique collection features artifacts that relate to the Seagram family and their role in the early industrial development of Waterloo through the Seagram Distillery and Canada Barrels and Kegs (Canbar). Artifacts in this collection also provide insight into the daily work of former employees of the Seagram plant, highlighting the four key working areas of the distillery: production, maturation and warehousing, bottling, and administration. Along with the Seagram collection, the collection has a number of significant special collections, including historic glassware, ceramic vessels, scientific instruments and technological equipment used in the production, storage and service of alcohol. (Prior to the Museum, the collection was kept at the Canadian Clay & Glass Gallery, with an annual opportunity to display it with themed exhibitions.)

The City of Waterloo Museum is also home to municipal history artifacts including: mayoral portraits, sports memorabilia, souvenir ware, archival documents, fine art, and artifacts from the Martin Farmstead, a Mennonite home located in RIM Park.

The partnership with Conestoga Mall is seen as an innovative model to providing space for a community museum. This arrangement has enabled the city to operate a cultural facility, with a minimal budget, that provides a broad on-site audience for the museum. Close to 6,000 people visit the museum annually, indicating success as well as interest in the city’s heritage.

While there are other museums in the area, such as the Waterloo Region Museum, residents appreciate the distinctive Waterloo-based collection. Through the development of the City’s culture plan, residents indicated they would like to see the museum extend its hours of operation, promote exhibits more; and offer opportunities for expanded programming.

To continue to build on the museum’s success and to ensure museum sustainability to share the city’s heritage collection, a long-term strategy for the museum and its collection was identified in the Culture Plan as critical for continued growth and success.

In response, this strategy was developed to identify the future role of the City of Waterloo Museum and its collection. It explores opportunities in areas such as collections management, programming, future storage needs, and examines the sustainability of the Conestoga Mall partnership. It also considers opportunities for growth of the City of Waterloo Museum, and looks at new innovative models of collaboration with other community organizations to enable growth and sustainability.

5 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 313 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

1.1 Purpose The overall purpose of the Museum and Collections Strategy is to:

1. Guide long term planning for the city’s museum and collections, including programming opportunities. 2. Capitalize on the city’s existing strengths in its museum and collections, and built heritage assets. 3. Address potential gaps and/or weaknesses in the city’s cultural heritage. 4. Assist council and staff decision making with developing operating and capital budget strategies and business planning for creating additional community interest and support for heritage. 5. Identify to the public the importance and value that the city places on our heritage assets and to promote these assets. 6. Encourage and provide opportunities for local residents to become more engaged in their own community and for tourists to be drawn to the area. 7. Contribute to Waterloo’s prosperity and quality of life.

1.2. Guiding Principles To provide a framework for the development of the strategy, the following guiding principles were identified:

1. The City of Waterloo’s powerful historical narrative is a unique offering. 2. The City of Waterloo’s cultural heritage assets can contribute to a more livable, creative and inclusive community. 3. Waterloo’s cultural heritage assets have a direct and indirect positive impact on the city’s economic vitality. 4. Integration of the City of Waterloo’s built heritage strategy and the museum and collections strategy with each other and with corporate goals, processes and procedures is critical to their successful implementation.

6 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 314 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

1.3 Purposes and Functions of a Community Museum

Museums are institutions that care for (conserve) a collection of artifacts and other objects of artistic, cultural, historical, or scientific importance and makes them available for public viewing through exhibits that may be permanent or temporary1. At the outset of this strategy, it is important to distinguish a ‘community’ museum from a special interest museum – such as one devoted to art, dinosaurs, shoes, etc. The distinction is that community museums tell the human history of how a particular community or region came to be: the integrated story of how the community started, grew, developed and evolved over time. And possibly what might lie in its future.

The purpose of community museums is to provide residents, as well as visitors, some context in terms of the environment and society that they are immersed in. Accordingly, community museums attempt to explain the physical environment of the community; its economic base; the built history and heritage of streets and buildings; the social traditions and customs of the community; the community’s role in history – how it influenced and was influenced by national and world events; and the story of key individuals who have helped shape the life of the area. Successful community museums do this in a compelling and memorable way.

Secondarily, successful community museums can have the additional benefits of acting as ‘economic engines’ in their communities. This occurs by attracting visitors as well as being visible demonstrations of community pride and quality of life that can attract potential new residents and investors into the community2.

When a museum contributes to creating a strong sense of place, it also contributes to a higher quality of life and a more vibrant social and cultural scene. More talented and creative people may wish to live in the vicinity, and more knowledge-economy firms may relocate there to benefit from the creative environment.

A visible museum nurtures the collective imagination such that people are likely to associate a prominent museum with the impression they have of the entire city.

There may also be an element of pride and prestige in this city-museum relationship. Residents can have an almost patriotic feeling towards their museums, especially if these play a decisive role in the community.3

Museum planning experts define ‘successful’ vs. ‘not successful’ community museums along a spectrum of dimensions which are summarized overleaf:

1 Edward Porter Alexander, Mary Alexander; (September 2007). Museums in motion: an introduction to the history and functions of museums. Rowman & Littlefield, 2008. 2 See American Alliance for Museums, section “Museums as Economic Engines” 3 Gail Dexter Lord, Ngaire Blankenberg; (2015). Cities, Museums and Soft Power. The AAM Press, (2015).

7 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 315 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Characteristics of Characteristics of Dimension ‘Unsuccessful’ Community ‘Successful’ Community Museums Museums Storytelling • they tell stories and narratives • they just show objects about the community Uniqueness • they portray unique or particular • they show essentially the ‘same aspects of the community that as can be seen everywhere else’ are different from anywhere else, and that may relate to a common theme or identity Experience • they provide a memorable, and • the experience is uniform often multi-dimensional, throughout the museum and not experience particularly memorable

Risk-Taking • they take occasional risks in • they play it safe engaging the community and challenging the audience (which may engage the community in a discussion of the role and relevance of a museum in society) Community • by giving citizens a better sense • because stories and artifacts are Building of their history, values and fragmented, community community, they help to members may not feel attached promote pride in the community, to their history or a sense of engagement and a better sense belonging of being connected to and a value contributor to the local community Economic • are seen to be expressions of • are disconnected from the Development community pride and quality of community itself; not seen to be life actively endorsed by the • reinforce the identity and ‘brand’ municipality of the municipality

Another perspective on what constitutes a ‘successful’ community museum is the list of ‘10 reasons to visit a museum’, published on the web site ‘Know Your Own Bone – a resource for creative engagement in museums and cultural centres’.4 These are:

1. museums make you feel good 2. museums make you smarter 3. museum provide an effective way of learning 4. museums are community centres

4 See: 10 Reasons to Visit a Museum

8 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 316 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

5. museum inspire 6. museums help bring change and development to communities 7. museums are a great way to spend time with friends and family 8. a museum may be your next community endeavor or business partner 9. museums may be free sometimes but they all need your support to keep the doors open 10. there is a museum close to you

‘Successful’ community museums would embrace all of these dimensions. In developing this strategic plan, the aspiration of positioning the City of Waterloo Museum so that it is a ‘successful’ community museum has been foremost in the planning.

In addition, the Province of Ontario, through the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, maintains provincial policy standards that are considered as key benchmarks governing the governance, management and operation of museums including conservation of artifacts.5 Like the above, these standards outline what is considered a ‘successful’ community museum. These standards specifically apply to museum management and technical operations. These do not speak to successful community museums from the perspective of stories and content. This strategy aims to provide additional direction in this regard, based on public consultation findings.

1.4 Description of Current Operations

To understand where the City of Waterloo’s Museum can go in the future, an understanding of its current operations is needed.

Key metrics relating to the museum’s current operations are: • operating expenditures of $244,000 (in 2014) of which 98% comes from the municipality; approximately 84% of this is salaries and wages, with the remainder being other general operating costs • 3 full-time staff positions are in place as of March 2015 (previous to this there was one full- time position and two part-time positions) • the total size of the facility at Conestoga Mall is 4,000 sq. ft., of which 1,500 sq. ft. is exhibit area – additional off-site storage facilities are maintained • the museum attracts approximately 6,000 visitors per year • the collection consists of some 10,000 artifacts (The majority of which relate to the history of the Seagram enterprise and the distilling industry. The City of Waterloo acquired this collection to ensure this significant piece of Waterloo’s past remained in the public domain thereby enriching the community’s ability to understand the local cultural context.

5 The 10 standards represent the minimum requirements for the operation of a good community museum. Regardless of a museum's size or scope, whether it is in a new building or a heritage structure, or whether it is a seasonal or year-round operation, there are certain functions, responsibilities, and activities common to all. These are the areas highlighted by the standards,. To assist museums in meeting the revised standards, the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sports provides advisory services, resource materials and museological information pertinent to the standards. Museum standards must continue to evolve as museums find new ways to serve their communities and fulfill their mandate. In due course, revision of this edition of standards will be necessary to reflect these changes. The province has a fundamental commitment to the preservation and presentation of the material culture of Ontario, through the community museums of the province. In achieving these new standards, Ontario's museums will continue along the path to excellence and remain an asset to the communities they serve.

9 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 317 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report 1.5 Developing the Strategy - Activities Undertaken

In developing this strategy, four areas of focus were outlined. These were:

The specific activities undertaken to inform the strategy included:

• site visits to the museum, Elam Martin Farmstead, and the collection storage areas by the project consultants; • consultation with key stakeholders: museum staff, other municipal staff, council members, and others in the heritage, academic and culture communities; • review of background documents and policies of the city that are relevant to the museum operation; • benchmarking of other community museums to identify key performance metrics and best practices in terms of community engagement; • a community survey (which received over 300 responses); • a ‘museum workshop day’ (February 18, 2015) consisting of two focus group sessions; • preparation of a Situation Analysis report and presentation to Council on April 20, 2015 (COM2015-12); and • preparation of this Draft Museum and Collections Strategy.

1.6 Context and Assumptions

To ensure the strategy was developed considering the broader context of operations, several influencing factors and assumptions were identified. These should be kept in mind when reviewing the strategy. These are:

• Rich historical/museum offering provided by the Region of Waterloo: Unlike many other communities in Ontario, the City of Waterloo operates in a unique cultural environment where the upper-tier level of government (Region of Waterloo) offers a wide range of historical and cultural services to the larger community. The Region of Waterloo operates the Waterloo Region Museum, Doon Heritage Crossroads, Joseph Schneider Haus, and McDougall Cottage to portray various aspects of the history and culture of the Region. No other upper tier or single tier government in Ontario offers as complex a ‘museum offering’ to its community. It should be noted that none of these regional facilities are actually located in the City of Waterloo, and none tell exclusively the story of the City of Waterloo.

In addition to the sites operated by the Region of Waterloo, the Region, along with the City of Kitchener and City of Waterloo, provide funding to THEMUSEUM located in Kitchener. It should be noted, however, that despite its branding, THEMUSEUM does not fit the

10 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 318 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

conventional definition of a heritage museum: the collection, stewardship, conservation, preservation, interpretation and exhibition of physical artifacts of historical or other significance to its jurisdiction or stakeholders. Rather, THEMUSEUM primarily presents exhibitions that are curated or produced by other galleries, museums, science centres, institutes or private entities, and these exhibitions do not necessarily tell the stories of Waterloo Region.

• Rich history of innovation in the City of Waterloo: Waterloo has a rich history of innovation and being on the leading edge of technological development: from its industrial beginnings, the impact of the Seagram family and the distilling industry along with the insurance industry; to the development of the post-secondary institutions (largest in Canada in terms of the ratio of student to resident population); the story of research, science and technology (exemplified by BlackBerry, the Perimeter Institute, etc.) – even the location of the museum in Conestoga Mall is something of an innovation. In 2007, the City of Waterloo was recognized as the Top Intelligent Community worldwide. This unique positioning of the city is something that the City of Waterloo Museum should reflect and reinforce, as existing and potential new citizens increasingly expect the city to exemplify this positioning.

• Tradition of community collaboration and co-operation: Another rich tradition that characterizes the city and the surrounding region is that of co-operation and collaboration. Exemplified by the tradition of ‘barn-raising’, this spirit lives on to the present time in the form of community cooperation on a wide range of fronts. The museum’s recent partnership effort with a number of community organizations is further evidence of this contextual element.

• City support for the museum function: The City of Waterloo clearly supports its community museum function. Recently, the city’s museum unit was augmented by moving two part-time positions into full-time ones, in part recognizing the positive impact that the museum is having upon the community. The City’s Culture Plan clearly recognized and endorsed the importance of the community museum to the cultural life and vitality of the community.

• Greater accessibility through the LRT: The light-rail transit (LRT) development for the Region of Waterloo will make the Conestoga Mall location even more accessible, as one of the stops in the new system will be located at the mall (albeit at the far end of the mall from the museum location). Note that the Conestoga Mall location will be the northern hub of the LRT, and thus a nodal concentration point. As well, for those proponents of an eventual location for the museum in the uptown area (discussed later in this strategy), the LRT will have multiple stops serving this location. Either way, the LRT will bring greater connectivity to the entire region, which should be factored into the short and long-term visioning for a museum location.

• Simultaneous development of Built Heritage Strategy: Simultaneously with the development of this Museum and Collections Strategy, the City is preparing a Built Heritage Strategy, which will provide a long-term plan for the conservation and management of the city’s built heritage resources. These two strategies working collaboratively will provide staff and council direction to managing our city’s heritage resources.

11 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 319 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

• City of Waterloo 2015-2018 Strategic Plan: The City of Waterloo has recently approved an overarching strategic plan. This plan can provide further reinforcement (in addition to the already-approved Culture Plan) for the important and strategic role of the museum in building a strong community and supporting economic development.

• Positive nature of the input received over the course of this review: It is important to note that when undertaking a project involving public consultation, the input received is generally polarized, either from those who are strong advocates or adversaries of the institution, organization or issue being reviewed. In the case of a museum, generally the input received is positive and supportive, as the institution is perceived to be a positive and beneficial influence in the community. It should be noted that in this project, the degree of positive support from those aware of the museum was higher than we expected, even given this ‘positive bias’, indicating a particularly high regard for the City of Waterloo Museum function.

12 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 320 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report PART A. SITUATION ANALYSIS 2. Research, Consultation and Data Collection Activities

This strategy is based on a comprehensive program of research, data collection and public consultations. This section describes the research undertaken to identify the operational and strategic issues that exist, to which the strategy developed must ultimately respond. First, the key background documents reviewed are listed and summarized. Next, the primary themes and perspectives resulting from the interviews and workshop sessions held are reviewed. This is followed by the key findings emerging from the community survey. Finally, the results of the benchmarking assessment comparing the City of Waterloo Museum with other community museum operations are presented. These results then provide the basis for the findings and conclusions found in the Situation Analysis in the next section. 2.1 Background Materials Reviewed

There are several key documents that provide context for this Museum and Collections Strategy. These are briefly discussed below.

City of Waterloo Culture Plan (2013) The main policy document of the City of Waterloo that touches on the operation of the museum is the Culture Plan: A Catalyst for Culture 2014 – 2024, prepared in 2013. The purpose of this plan was to define the community’s vision for culture over the next 10 years; identify the city’s role in supporting local cultural development to achieve the community’s vision; and to establish strategic goals and recommended actions for the City to pursue to support the community’s vision. The community vision for culture in Waterloo was identified to be: “Remaining true to our past, building on present strengths, and making the most of opportunities, Waterloo is a culturally transforming city – vibrant and resilient”.

There are three strategic goals and associated recommended actions in the plan where the museum is seen as playing a significant role. These are:

Goal# 2 of the plan is to ‘strengthen the community’s cultural heritage identity by uniting Waterloo’s past with its present and future through management and education’. Several strategies under this goal are directly relevant to the operation of the museum: 2.2 Develop a strategy that encompasses growth and long-term management for the City of Waterloo Museum and archival collections (i.e. the present study) 2.3 Increase programming capacity to recognize heritage as a strong educational component of culture 2.4 Digitize the city’s heritage collections to provide online access 2.5 Continue development of the series of provincial standards for community museums to support the City of Waterloo Museum

Goal #4: Enhance engagement of community diversity to build a stronger, shared sense of belonging 4.6 Work with Aboriginal stakeholders to share Aboriginal culture and heritage with the broader community – Here the museum was seen to be able to play a role in an exhibit recognizing

13 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 321 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

the significant contributions that Aboriginal residents have made to the growth and development of the community

Goal #5: Expand community awareness and appreciation of culture 5.1 Promote local culture to residents – Here the museum was seen to be one key delivery agent (along with others in the community) to promote local culture to residents

Recreation and Leisure Services Master Plan (2008) This policy document sets the stage for the development of the current museum facility at Conestoga Mall: “Despite the development of a new regional history museum in Kitchener, city residents value the City’s collection for its distinctive Waterloo industrial heritage profile related to the Seagram family business. Many continue to mourn the loss of the former Seagram Museum (now the Canadian Institute for Governance Innovation) as a cultural anchor in the downtown core. As well, the City lacks a retention method and dedicated archival space for the conservation and management of historically significant documents generated by the City and other sources.” (p. 7-12).

Elam Martin Farmstead Preservation Master Plan (2003) The Elam Martin Farmstead was purchased by the City of Waterloo in 1999. In 2003, the firms of Goldsmith, Borgal and Company, and Landplan developed a plan for the preservation and interpretation of the Elam Martin Farmstead. The report evaluated several options, from ‘do nothing’ to an extensive redevelopment option. Costs were not considered in this assessment. The recommended option, adopted by the city, was:

“Based on the options evaluated, the recommended option is that the site remain occupied by the current tenant until such time as it is mutually suitable for his, and his family’s relocation. In the absence of a clear use for the site and due to lack of substantial operating resources for major upgrading and development, such an option is the right decision for the interim to allow the development of the site to meet future needs while ensuring its current preservation.”

As a heritage asset, the idea that this site could be used by the museum for programming purposes has come forward from residents and council members over the years, necessitating further exploration of the opportunities for the Elam Martin Farmstead and its connection to the museum in this strategy. 2.2 Interviews and Workshop Session

In late November 2014, a two-day intensive series of individual and group interviews was held with several community members including members of the City of Waterloo Advisory Committee on Culture (ACC), the Municipal Heritage Committee, the ad hoc Museum advisory committee, museum staff and volunteers, community and academic representatives who have an on-going and informed knowledge of the City of Waterloo Museum’s role and opportunity in the community, and key staff from across city departments. A standardized interview guide was developed. In mid-February, two half-day workshops were conducted with a cross section of those interviewed in November, along with city staff and managers, with the full consulting team. The format included a

14 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 322 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report series of presentations on the current trends and directions that museums such as the City of Waterloo Museum are taking relative to facilities, programming, collections, as well as a report on the preliminary results of the public survey results.

Following the workshop, participants enjoyed a lively facilitated discussion of a series of ‘Big Questions’ that the consultants, with city project staff, jointly developed around some of the major issue areas that had been identified but for which directions forward were not readily apparent. The ‘Big Questions’ and the order of the questions varied between the two sessions based on initial reaction and the opportunity for the attendees to put forward their own ‘Big Questions’. The list included:

• How can the museum collections, exhibits and programming (education and public) better serve the Waterloo community? • Where does the present mall site fit in our future plans today and tomorrow? • If there is a future new museum site where should it be and should other community facilities be part of the concept? • What about the farm (Elam Martin Farmstead)?

Key Consultation Themes

Both the interviews and the workshops provided similar observations and conclusions for the future directions of the City of Waterloo Museum. Three key baseline themes were apparent to all these being:

. Museum Operations • Short Term • Longer Term/Future . The Elam Martin Farmstead . Collections

A summary of both the interview and workshops principal themes follows:

Museum Operations Short Term:

• Hours and days of operation6: Times that the museum is open to the public need to be harmonized with overall mall operation: open into evenings on weekdays – e.g. open until 8 p.m., open Saturdays (year round, not just summer).

• Diversify the collection to be more representative of overall Waterloo history: Reflect technology; financial services; universities; possible overall themes of innovation, entrepreneurship; creativity; idea: undertake a public consultation program to identify what stories / themes are meaningful and relevant to the citizens and then build the collection

6 Current situation: The museum is open Tuesday to Friday from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Additional hours in July and August - Saturday: 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Sunday: 12 to 5 p.m.

15 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 323 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

around these.

• Better signage to museum: a) from the community to the mall; b) on the outside of the mall; c) within the walkable spaces in the mall

• Branding: tremendous confusion between ‘THEMUSEUM” in downtown Kitchener and the Waterloo Region Museum – re-brand to think about moving away from the word museum (pre-empted by others) - also related, need to identify / clarify the unique role of the City of Waterloo Museum in the mix of other museum and cultural activities in the region

• Awareness: low levels of awareness – the museum needs to be better promoted and marketed to city residents – current visitation has high proportion of ‘accidental’ visitors (i.e. those not originally intending to visit the museum but find themselves in the vicinity and who decide to drop in)

• More strategic partnerships: partnerships with a variety of community organizations is useful from a variety of perspectives: a) gives museum credibility; b) leverages museums resources; c) helps market & promote

• Greater programming orientation to school groups: take programming to the schools

Long Term/Future:

• UpTown location: There is aspiration and interest for a more central site that can accommodate additional exhibitions, programming and storage space that would enhance the profile of the current museum.

• Co-location possibilities: Should investigate possibility of co-location with other complementary activities: library, artist space, tourist information, business incubation – use of heritage building as part of a cultural hub.

• Permanent display on history of growth, development, evolution of the city: should be a key part of the permanent collection.

Elam Martin Farmstead

No consensus was seen here, other than:

a) the Farmstead has potential to consume considerable resources (and will increasingly do so if it is to be used for public programming);

b) the Farmstead is not an outstanding historical asset, despite its local designation as a historically significant site;

16 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 324 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

c) similarly there is much room for improvement if it were to be an interpretive asset. There are also many greater examples within the region telling the Mennonite story, including Brubacher House on the University of Waterloo campus; the Steckle Heritage Farm in Kitchener; the Visitor Centre in St. Jacobs (where the ‘Mennonite Story’ can be experienced); and living history sites Joseph Schneider Haus in Kitchener and Doon Heritage Crossroads in Kitchener. These are all established attractions that tell various aspects of the Mennonite story in the region and arguably feature better examples of that culture’s buildings and traditions than at the Elam Martin Farmstead.

Many thought that regardless of the future of the farmstead, it should not be seen as tied to the City of Waterloo Museum as a programming site or part of the museum’s collection. Following clarification that future use of the site should not be seen connected to the museum, other options for use of the site to meet community needs and interests should be explored.

2.3 Community Survey

An on-line survey was promoted on the City’s website, and notifications were sent out by city staff to those on the arts/culture and museum mailing lists, as well as through social media and newspaper ads. The survey ran from mid-December to mid-March 2015. Some 301 responses were received, which is impressive for a survey of this type. Key findings from the survey were:

Question 1: Location of Residence

While most respondents were from the City of Waterloo (61%), there was good representation as well from the City of Kitchener (24%), elsewhere in Waterloo Region (9%) and some even from outside the Region (6%)

Question 2: Age

All ages were represented, from under 20 to 81 and above – the bulk of responses (60%) were in the 31 to 60 age brackets

Question 3: Employment Status

Most respondents were employed full-time (62%), with retirees being the largest next group (20%); students, part-time and homemakers constituted the remaining 18%

17 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 325 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Question 4: Cultural venues visited in the last year by respondents were:

% indicating they Cultural Venue had visited in last year THEMUSEUM 58% Waterloo Region Museum 57% Doon Heritage Crossroads 43% City of Waterloo Museum 36% Joseph Schneider Haus 34% McDougall Cottage 13%

Question 5: An information question, asking respondents if they would like further information about the collection: 68% replied ‘yes’

Question 6: Should the Seagram collection remain the dominant focus of the museum?

Answer Choices Percentage Yes, it should remain the dominant focus of the collection 13% No, but it should remain as one of the collections maintained by the 81% museum No, it is a minor part of our history and should be phased out 1% Not sure 5%

Question 7: Are there other aspects of the city’s history that should be included in our collecting activities?

Answer Choices Number of Responses History of manufacturing beyond just Seagram’s 42 responses * Early settlement, Mennonite and German history 31 responses History of the growth of the Universities 30 responses Research and technology (inc. RIM and BlackBerry) 30 responses Histories of individuals (Erb, Lazaridis, etc.) 21 responses Urban growth and development including architectural history 20 responses Social and sports life of the community 14 responses History of First Nations 10 responses History of insurance and financial services industry 10 responses Military contributions of Waterloo residents 5 responses Arts and culture in the community 5 responses Multicultural history of the community 5 responses Brewery history 4 responses Ecological / natural history of the city 3 responses History of the button industry 3 responses History of relationship with Berlin / Kitchener 2 responses Musical history 2 responses History of photography in Waterloo 2 responses * of 162 who answered this open-ended question

18 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 326 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Question 8: Should more information about the collection be made available on-line?

Answer Choices Percentages Yes 69% No 6% Don’t Know 25% Question 9: Ways to more effectively promote the museum (note that this was an open-ended question):

Answer Choices Number of Responses - more effective use of social media 44 responses * - change the hours of operation 20 responses - improved signage within the mall 14 responses - through greater use of print media 13 responses - co promote with other cultural organizations 11 responses - move to a more central location 10 responses - more effective partnerships with the schools 10 responses - through more radio promotion 6 responses - more partnerships with the library 5 responses - through television advertising 5 responses - dedicated website 4 responses - kiosks and pop-up museums throughout the city 4 responses - hold more events 3 responses - more affordable entry fees (!) 3 responses - advertise on bus shelters 2 responses - more ads 2 responses * of 160 who answered this open-ended question

Question 10: At present the museum changes its exhibition themes every 3-4 months. In your view, is this the right frequency of changeover for exhibits?

Answer Choices Percentages Yes, it’s about right 73% No: too long between exhibitions 9% No: too short between exhibitions 5% Don’t Know / Can’t Say 13%

Question 11: Should there be some sort of permanent exhibit on the history of the growth and development of the City of Waterloo?

Answer Choices Percentages Yes 74% No 3% Uncertain – there are pros and cons 21% No idea 3%

19 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 327 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Question 12: Is there value in bringing in temporary exhibitions from other institutions to the museum?

Answer Choices Percentages Yes 82% Question 13: Do No 8% you have any Uncertain 10% other ideas for exhibitions, programs or events that could be mounted or hosted at the museum?

Answer Choices Number of Responses History of the growth and development of Waterloo 12 responses * Make the hours of operation more convenient 5 responses Feature local artists and artisans more prominently 5 responses More interactive / participatory / hands-on exhibits 5 responses More exhibits on the history of local manufacturing 5 responses Local bands and music 3 responses Research and technology (including RIM and BlackBerry) 3 responses More touring exhibits 3 responses Should tackle tough social justice and environmental issues 2 responses History of prohibition in the community 2 responses More talks, presentations, discussion around specific exhibits 2 responses More high-tech stories 2 responses * of 103 who answered this open-ended question

Question 14: Since 2009 the City of Waterloo Museum has been located at Conestoga Mall. Prior to this survey, did you know where the City of Waterloo Museum was located?

Answer Choices Percentages Yes 62% No 35% Uncertain 3% Question 15: What would you say are the major advantages of the current location?

Question 16: What would you say are the major disadvantages of the current location?

Answer Choices Percentages Poor signage 66% Days and hours of operation not consistent with Mall hours 65% Question 17: Not in the centre of town 51% The City’s Location is not in the main part of the Mall – off to the side 43% Culture Plan Noise and crowds not conducive to museum visit 27% identifies that the museum needs to look at ‘new innovative models of collaboration with other community organizations to enable growth’. In your view is the museum’s current location an advantage or a disadvantage when considering this direction? (Question 18 allowed for further commentary)

Answer Choices Percentages

20 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 328 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Answer Choices Percentages An advantage 18% A disadvantage 35% Some of both 40% I have no idea 7%

Question 19: The museum does not currently offer education or programming activities on-site due to the lack of space and staff. Should this be an area of focus in future? (note that these are open-ended comments)

Answer Choices Number of Responses Response generally indicating ‘yes’ (of 222 responses) 158 responses Response generally indicating ‘no’ 22 responses Response generally indicating ‘unsure’, ‘don’t know’, ‘possibly’ 30 responses Other comments 7 responses

Question 20: The museum has presented a number of exhibitions in partnership with other organizations. Should further partnerships be pursued as a strategic priority? (note that these are open-ended comments)

Answer Choices Number of Responses Response generally indicating ‘strongly yes’ (of 214 responses) 191 responses Response generally indicating ‘yes, but not a strategic priority’ 7 responses Response generally indicating ‘no’ 3 responses Response generally indicating ‘unsure’, ‘don’t know’, ‘possibly’ 32 responses Other comments 4 responses

Question 21: The museum also partners with the private sector to place artifacts and exhibits in public spaces. Should more of this type of activity be considered a priority? (note that these are open-ended comments)

Answer Choices Number of Responses Response generally indicating ‘strongly yes’ (of 214 responses) 163 responses Response generally indicating ‘yes, but not a strategic priority’ 20 responses Response generally indicating ‘no’ 7 responses Response generally indicating ‘unsure’, ‘don’t know’, ‘possibly’ 16 responses Other comments 5 responses

21 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 329 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Question 22: Preferred hours of operation:

Answer Choices Percentages They are fine the way they are 19% They should be changed 72% No idea / don’t know 10%

Question 23: Specific comments relating to hours of operation:

Answer Choices Number of Responses Should be open all weekends – both days 83 responses* Should be open all Saturdays 25 responses Should be open all Sundays 6 responses Should be open evenings 49 responses Hours should be consistent with Mall hours 20 responses Open Friday Nights 2 responses Should only be closed 1 day a week (some specific suggestions for 8 responses Monday, Wednesday) Suggestions for specific hours - 10 to 6 1 – 2 responses each - 10 to 8 - 11 to 5 - 12 to 9 - 1 or 2 to 8 * of 174 open-ended responses received

Question 24: An information question, asking respondents if they would like further information about the Elam Martin Farmstead: 63% replied ‘yes’

Question 25: Before this survey, had you known about the Elam Martin Farmstead?

Answer Choices Percentages Yes 41% No 55% Not sure 4% Question 26: Should the City consider the Elam Martin Farmstead as a potential location for cultural programming?

Answer Choices Percentages Yes 69% No 8% Not sure 23% Question 27: Do you have any thoughts or suggestions as to how the Farmstead might be best used in the pursuit of Waterloo’s museum program?

Number of Answer Choices Responses teach about the agricultural and Mennonite history of the city 46 responses * concern about duplication with Doon, Steckley, Joseph Schneider 11 responses Haus

22 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 330 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Number of Answer Choices Responses would make a better location for the Museum than the current 8 responses location at Conestoga Mall venue for events and workshops 8 responses no idea what to do with it 7 responses good venue for school groups 6 responses venue for community gardening / market garden 3 responses teach about nature and environmental themes 3 responses Make sure it generates revenue to offset operating costs 2 responses * of 97 who answered this open-ended question

Question 28: At the conclusion of the survey was an open-ended question of the ‘Any Other Comments?’ variety. (100 respondents commented on this question.) Below is a summary of common responses:

General Appreciation: Many respondents commented on their appreciation of the heritage and culture of Waterloo and the value of the museum in preserving and displaying the city’s heritage and culture. Respondents were complementary of the staff and volunteers at the museum.

Lack of Awareness: Many responses that focused on how little of the Waterloo population and visitors were aware of the museum. The most common reason for lack of awareness was the location and hours of the museum. The majority of respondents believed that the current location of the museum in Conestoga Mall is a poor choice because of its low profile, poor signage, and many do not want to have to go to the busy mall to visit the museum. As well, the current hours of the museum do not attract business. For example, several responded that they cannot visit the museum because they are at work during the hours that the museum is open. Many respondents suggested new museum sites located in the Uptown core of the city. It is believed that Uptown sites would better support heritage and culture and museum visitors could walk or bike to these sites.

Need for Increased Promotion: Apart from a new location and hours, respondents believed that increased promotion and marketing of the museum, as well as a larger variety of interactive exhibits that focused on current social issues rather than just history, would attract more residents and visitors to the museum.

Funding Options: here were mixed responses in terms of funding the museum. Some respondents were glad to see more attention being paid to the museum and indicated an interest in seeing it grow and become more prominent in the community. Other respondents want the museum to change for the better, but are concerned about the cost to residents in light of many competing priorities.

23 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 331 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

2.4 Benchmarking

Selection of Benchmark Comparables

An important part of the development of the strategy was to benchmark or to compare the City of Waterloo Museum to select other community museums in Ontario. Nine Southwestern Ontario community museums were identified based on knowledge, relationships, previous experience and relevancy to the City of Waterloo Museum’s situation. A summary table showing the results of this benchmarking task can be found in Appendix B.

Several criteria were considered in the selection of the potential candidate institutions including,

• Situations where there is both a local and regional (or county level) municipal museum operating within a geographic and market area e.g. the Guelph Civic Museum and the Wellington County Museum & Archives • Municipal museums from communities with a similar population size to the City of Waterloo (not too big and not too small) • Inclusion of some museums with a joint role as both a museum and archives • Museums that are well regarded in Southwestern and Central Ontario by museum peers for their programs and contributions to the community

Based on these criteria, the selected museums that agreed to participate included:

• Waterloo Region Museum (regarded as the best and largest regional level museum in Ontario) • Guelph Civic Museum and the Wellington County Museum and Archives (municipal and regional context) • Niagara Falls History Museum - a relatively new facility that has a lot of competition for attracting audiences • St. Catharines Museum – an interesting shared space facility • Leading county level museums that have the prime role as museums and archives (3 of the 4) and are well regarded for their community based programming, including Dufferin County, Grey Roots Museum, Bruce County, and Chatham-Kent.

The categories of information sought were focused on some of the principal metrics of any museum’s operations and designed not to be to time intensive for the participating museum directors and at the same time to provide relevant comparisons to assist the City of Waterloo. The information is presented in several category areas including:

• Context (population served, size of the county or city budget, the physical site of the museum (downtown, suburban or rural)) • Municipal financial data for museums including: annual operating budgets, municipal share or contribution of the museum’s budget and the per capita cost per person for the operation of the museum

24 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 332 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Museum metrics including: average number of visitors of the past five years, staffing levels, physical size, allocation of space between the front and back of the house (administration, storage, etc.) and collection size.

The findings from this benchmarking exercise must be considered as directional as they may not account for differences in the accounting practices between municipalities, the fact that some of the institutions share facilities with other functions, and different methodologies between museums in reporting and the breakdown of visitors. The information presented is generally accurate and indicative of the situation for each of the participating museums. The museum information was provided by the participating museum directors. The municipal data was taken from the most recent budget documents and verified as being correct by most of the participating museum directors.

Inclusion of the Waterloo Region Museum in this study warrants some discussion. While the Waterloo Region Museum is intended to be a community museum like the others included in this study, its much larger size and its success lead to a slight upwards skewing in the overall comparative metrics given its particularly larger footprint, budget and number of visitors for a community museum. For this reason, in the analysis below data from the Waterloo Region Museum was removed to provide a more accurate reflection of the situation of the City of Waterloo Museum compared to the other more similar institutions in the sample. The Waterloo Region Museum data can be found in Appendix A to provide comparison between this institution and other community museums. For the ‘Municipal Contribution’ row in the table, the percentage reflects the municipal portion of the budget as a percentage of the total operating budget in the last fiscal year of operation. Other sources of revenue would be earned revenues such as admissions, gift shop sales, grants, endowment income, etc. A very high percentage of municipal contribution could indicate an unhealthy reliance upon just one source of funding.

Note that the in-kind provision of resources is another dimension of support, but was not measured here due to wide variation in practice, and the fact that such support is never quantified and thus is very difficult to measure. It should be noted that all municipalities support their local museums with some level of in-kind support to some extent, but this is not reflected in the chart. This data is consolidated in the table below. An overview of all participating municipally operated museums is contained in Appendix A.

Key Findings and Conclusions Average City of Waterloo Museum Category Among the Other Participating (2014) Museums* $244,000 $1,180,000 Museum Operating Budget (including salaries) (including salaries) Municipal Contribution As Percent of the Museum Total 98% 82% Operating Budget Per Capita Cost of the Museum to all Residents of the $2.45 $15.20 Community Size of Museum in Square Feet 4,000 SF 33,500 SF Average Number of Annual 6,000 29,600 Visitors Last Five Years

25 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 333 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Average City of Waterloo Museum Category Among the Other Participating (2014) Museums* Staffing Levels Full Time & Part 1 FT 12 FT Time 2 PT 3 PT • Guelph Civic Museum, Wellington County Museum & Archives, Niagara Falls History Museum, St. Catharines Museum, Dufferin County Museum, Grey Roots, Bruce County Museum & Cultural Centre, and Chatham-Kent Museum. The Waterloo Region Museum was specifically excluded.

Implications

The information obtained and presented shows that the City of Waterloo, among the sample of nine other municipal museums in Southwestern and Central Ontario, is sub-optimal compared to the performance measures for most of the other museums and the municipal governments. This is summarized in the following table that considers the facts and the implications for the City of Waterloo and its museum. It should be noted that the City of Waterloo Museum’s current mandate is to service a smaller niche market than many of these other museums, as the Waterloo Region Museum is intended to serve the regional market and tourist populations. It would not be reasonable to expect the City of Waterloo Museum to compete with the larger Waterloo Region Museum. Rather the City of Waterloo Museum should play a complementary but distinct role in telling the unique stories of Waterloo.

26 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 334 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Comparisons and Implications for City of Waterloo Museum from Benchmarking Data (2014) Area Facts Possible Implications Visitor Levels Taking out the large attendance (80,000 in 2014) Measures should be taken to increase attendance at the Waterloo Region Museum leaves an average at the museum annual attendance of 22,000 among the eight other museums in the sample Museum operating hours could be adjusted to match traffic volumes by time of day The City of Waterloo Museum has an annual average of 6,000 visitors, approximately one- Programming designed for a mall quarter of the average of other community situation/clientele undertaken museums. Better external and internal signage at the mall The present City of Waterloo Museum mall location reportedly has over 6 million annual visitors (mall website) passing through its doors

The mall will be a major public transit hub with an LRT station

The space is rent free with only utility maintenance costs

Size of Museum The City of Waterloo has the smallest operating When strategic and operating plans for the Operating Budget budget ($244k) for a museum in the museum are completed and aligned with the City benchmarking sample priorities and resources, consideration could be given to provision of additional levels of funding The City of Waterloo compared to all the other for the museum institutions in the survey provides one-fifth of the sample average funding the extent to which this strategy can be implemented and goals achieved will be influenced by available resources Staffing Levels The sample average full time staffing level was 12 The recent move to enhance staffing will allow including the 24 FT employees at the Waterloo some extension of operating hours Region Museum The museum may require additional levels of Eliminating the Waterloo Region Museum FT staff staffing to fully implement this strategy from the sample provides and an average of 8 FT employees

The City of Waterloo Museum had 1 FT and 2PT employees in 2015 (3FT in 2015)

The City of Waterloo Museum’s staffing is approximately one-third of the adjusted average from the survey

27 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 335 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Area Facts Possible Implications Size of the Museum The present City of Waterloo Museum location has The present museum space is relatively small 4,000 SF of which 1,500 SF is front-of-house (public and is not large enough to facilitate an active access areas) and 2,500 SF is for back-of-house exhibit and programming effort activities (administration, storage etc.)

The average total museum space in the sample without the Waterloo Region Museum (94,000 SF) for the other 8 institutions is 23,000 SF.

The present City of Waterloo space is just under one-fifth of the average for the other participating museums. It should be noted that the City of Waterloo Museum does not pay any rental fees. Per Capita Museum In 2014 the per capita investment in the museum The City of Waterloo among the 10 municipal Investment by the City of Waterloo was $2.45. jurisdictions included in the benchmarking sample was the lowest apparent investor of The sample per capita investment in museums taxpayer funds towards museum related included in the survey was $15.20. activities.

The City’s museum per capita investment is less than one-fifth of the sample average.

A Note on Museums in Shopping Malls

There are only a small number of museums located in shopping malls world-wide. In Canada, the New Brunswick Museum (note that this is a provincial, not a community, museum) has been located in a shopping mall that is a renovated historical warehouse area (Market Square) in the harbour area of Saint John since 1999. This however, is not a standard ‘suburban shopping mall situation’. It is very different from Conestoga Mall, as it is part of an interconnected mall complex formed by linking several heritage and commercial structures together by means of overhead bridges, and is in the heart of the downtown. Moreover, the New Brunswick museum acts as part of a larger cultural complex with the library, and other cultural facilities such as the Imperial Theatre. Conestoga Mall, on the other hand, is a purpose built facility in a suburban area, without links to other tourist-oriented or cultural sites.

There is a more extensive record of public art galleries located in shopping malls often to maintain public access during temporary periods of construction or renovation. Aquariums located in mega shopping malls are a growing trend in the United States and Europe. A few specialized museum collections are located in certain U.S. malls (ethnic heritage or automobile collections dominate). Recent major new shopping mall developments with dedicated museums have opened in Barcelona, Spain (Rock and Roll) and in Isfahan, Iran (7,000 years of Iran’s history).

28 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 336 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

There are advantages and disadvantages to a museum in a shopping mall. These tend to be:

Advantages Disadvantages • free parking (in most cases) • difficulty of attracting patrons into the • public transit access (again, in most cases) museum when they are busy on other • “built in” audience of pass-by traffic errands or focused on other interests (shopping, etc.) • high rental obligations (not a factor for the City of Waterloo Museum) • often lack of proximity to other cultural attractions • lack of distinct image and identity of the museum • questionable long-term future of many mid-sized suburban shopping malls as a result of competition from stand-alone big box specialty stores, on-line shopping, etc.

29 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 337 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

3. Situation Analysis

This section of the Report contains a Situation Analysis in the form of a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) assessment. First, the logic of using a SWOT assessment as the basis for a strategic plan is outlined. Next, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats are presented, based upon the data collection activities described in the previous section, as well as upon the consultant and project teams judgment and expertise. Finally, the Situation Analysis section concludes with some comment on existing tools and approaches for museum management. 3.1 SWOT Assessment Approach

A SWOT assessment is a well-recognized foundational framework used to develop a strategic plan for cultural and historical resource management. It ensures that the strategy ultimately developed is grounded in a clear understanding of the advantages possessed by, and challenges and opportunities facing a community. Below we discuss first the underlying logic of a SWOT approach, then the application of this approach to this Museum and Collections Strategy.

A SWOT analysis can provide the basis for a strategic plan. Different elements (strengths, weaknesses, and so on) will logically imply different types of strategic actions and initiatives, as shown in the chart below:

How Defined Strategically? Strategic Actions

Strengths • unique or very strong factors that • protect an advantage provide current advantages or benefits • further develop or capitalize upon an in the provision of services to residents existing advantage and visitors

Weaknesses • areas of current disadvantage in the • strengthen areas of weakness provision of services to residents and • reposition to eliminate weakness (in visitors reality, or through the creation of alternative perceptions)

Opportunities • situations that present opportunities • feasibility testing for future advantage or benefit • implementation planning

Threats • situations that present dangers of • risk assessment future disadvantage • contingency planning

3.2 Strengths

Following are the key strengths articulated through the consultation process, and as revealed by the benchmarking exercise, for the City of Waterloo Museum.

30 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 338 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

1. Free and available parking – The availability of free and ample parking at Conestoga Mall was mentioned by virtually all respondents as a key strength of the museum. There are two aspects to this strength: the first, that it is free of charge (highly unusual for a museum operation) and second, that it is convenient and ample. Most times parking is within easy line- of-sight to the front door.

2. Available (‘built in’) market – Another key strength identified was the availability of patrons already at the Mall for other shopping purposes. While this may be a difficult market to tap into, given that most of those at the mall are intent on making purchases or other business, and many may not be traditional ‘museum people’ to begin with, a strength of the museum nonetheless is that it is located where potential markets are congregating. A related strength is the positioning of the museum within the mall itself – adjacent to the food court, which itself would draw mall patrons.

3. Lower costs – As a result of the arrangement between the City of Waterloo and Ivanhoe Cambridge, the City has access to its space at Conestoga Mall rent-free, the only obligation being to pay its share of utility costs. This is a considerable advantage, as the rental costs for a prime location such as this would be tens of thousands of dollars per year. Of course, as a ‘tenant’, even at a favorable cost advantage, the Museum does not have complete control over its surroundings and thus there may be some element of risk associated with this location in this regard (relating to image, long-term security, compatibility of surrounding uses, etc.).

4. High exhibit rotation – The frequency with which exhibits at the museum are rotated (on average 3 to 4 times per year) is very high relative to other community museums (which may average 1 to 2 rotations per year). This ensures that there is always something new for the public to see. (This ‘retail’ philosophy of always having something new to cater to a local audience fits very well with the mall location.) For community museums, which tend to rely primarily upon catering to a local market rather than acting as a tourist attraction, the ability to have high exhibit rotation must be considered as a major strength.

5. Recent staffing increase and demonstrated council support – The museum currently has three full-time staff, just recently (early 2015) increased from one full-time and two part-time positions. Not only does this recent staff increase recognize the positive impact that the museum has in the community, but it also reflects council’s commitment to having a community museum function present in the municipality.

6. High community regard – The community survey has demonstrated that, of those who are aware that the City of Waterloo has a museum operation, there is very high regard for the exhibits, programs, and services that it offers.

7. Signature Seagram collection – The Museum holds the finest collection of artifacts from the Seagram Distillery, one of the largest distilleries in Canada, that was headquartered in Waterloo. This is a key unique resource.

31 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 339 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report 3.3 Weaknesses

In undertaking a SWOT analysis, the weaknesses quadrant requires identification of the factors that place the City of Waterloo Museum at a comparative disadvantage in the marketplace. This considers other museums or potentially other options of where and what one does with one’s leisure or educational time. These time/destination decisions are increasingly complex because of the growing entertainment and technology driven options and alternatives.

1. Collection Scope - The number of artifacts in the City of Waterloo Museum’s collection is 10,000 of which the largest part (>90%) is the Seagram’s collection relating the spirits and distillery story in Waterloo. When the Seagram’s museum was closed in 1997, arrangements were made to donate the collection to the City of Waterloo, which at the time of the donation had a modest collection of largely municipal related items. The present collection of the City of Waterloo Museum consists of a comprehensive library of product bottles and glassware together with some distillery manufacturing equipment and related items. This represents only a small portion of the much broader “Waterloo Story” that covers several centuries of human history and a much longer natural history story. The current narrow scope of the collection constrains the ability to develop programming for various audiences. The interviews and workshops provided many suggested possible themes and collection areas to move the collection to more than “mostly bottles”.

2. Constrained Space – The current free space (4,000 SF) in the Conestoga Mall has several constraints. It is very small for a museum and the front of the house (public space 1,500 SF) means there can only be one exhibition at a time, there is no room for a permanent exhibit, and there are significant constraints on programming and educational opportunities.

3. Need for Additional Storage Space – At the present time the City of Waterloo Museum requires off-site storage space for much of the collection (for which they are currently paying approximately $5,000 per year). The collection will only be able to grow, thereby supporting the ability to tell a broader range of Waterloo stories, if more storage space is acquired. Storage will also become an issue if artifacts located in the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) owned former Seagram museum space, which is currently up for lease, need to be relocated.

4. Location - The location of the museum is not central to most residents of Waterloo and removed from the main urban core and other cultural amenities. The trend of most cities in North America is to concentrate cultural assets in central downtown areas7.

7 In this context it should be noted that traditional retail models, such as indoor shopping malls, are undergoing change as a result of the dramatic increase in on-line shopping; the rise of highly specialized ‘big box’ stores and large scale general merchandise chains (such as Costco and Walmart); outlet shopping; and retail consolidation (such as the recent closure of Target in Canada, and the Best Buy/ Future Shop consolidation). With ongoing change in the retail sector, indoor shopping malls may also see change in the years to come. This creates a very dynamic environment of change for the Waterloo Museum in its current location at Conestoga Mall.

32 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 340 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

5. Low Awareness of Museum and Location – It was frequently reported that in the present location the City of Waterloo Museum has a low visibility in the community and there is a limited awareness of the existence of the museum in the Conestoga Mall location.

6. Poor Internal and External Signage – The one external sign for the museum on the outside of the Conestoga Mall only says “Museum”. There is no further signage provided such as “City of Waterloo Museum”. Within the internal space of the mall, navigation to the museum location is challenging – the signage is small, up high and visually difficult to locate.

7. Low Impact of Marketing, Branding and Promotion Efforts – To address the issue of low awareness it was often stated that the museum must undertake more marketing, brand development and promotion activities including the use of social media and other contemporary techniques to attract larger and younger audiences. Special note is made for the requirement for improved branding development for the museum to provide distinctness to the museum and what it represents, especially given widespread confusion between the City of Waterloo Museum, the Region of Waterloo Museum, and THEMUSEUM.

8. Hours of Operation – The museum is not open for most of the time that the mall is open, leading to some frustration on the part of mall patrons who might wish to visit. This is particularly an issue on weekends and in the evenings. It should be noted that recently expanded hours of operation have been implemented.

9. Low Attendance – For the past several years the City of Waterloo Museum has annually attracted about 6,000 visitors (admission is free). This is a very modest level of attendance for a municipal museum in a community the size of the City of Waterloo (98,000). Many Ontario municipal museums in communities smaller and slightly larger than the City of Waterloo attract between 20,000 and 30,000 annual visitors. The Conestoga Mall reportedly has about 6 million annual visitors. This means the museum’s visitor penetration rate is less than 0.1% of mall visitors. There are several reasons for this including the museum is not open during major mall visitation periods (evenings and weekends). Additionally, the City of Waterloo Museum is a small museum in a niche market, with other larger cultural institutions nearby.

3.4 Opportunities

Following are some of the opportunities potentially available to the City of Waterloo Museum. These have been segmented into short and long term opportunities. A number of the short-term opportunities identified arise from readdressing weaknesses identified in the previous section.

Short Term Opportunities

1. Extend hours of operation - As noted previously, the hours of operation for the museum are Tuesday to Friday 9:30 am to 4 pm. It is also open Saturday (9:30 am to 4 pm) and Sundays (12 to

33 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 341 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

5 pm) during July and August. Extending weekend hours for additional months throughout the year would clearly provide the community with greater access to the facility.

2. Expand scope of the collection - As previously noted, ‘successful’ museums have to decide, “what is the story or stories that we are going to tell” which in turn defines museum’s collection policy that then influences what the facility requirements are going to be.

The museum would benefit by expanding the scope of its collections, through an updated collections plan and policy, to align with the new vision and mandate identified in this strategy. The collection plan should clearly articulate what is within its mandate and scope. The revised collections plan should include the historic Seagram collection and add other Waterloo specific themes and story lines. These story lines could include geological beginnings, interaction between people and the landscape, stories about agriculture and industry, innovation, entrepreneurship, collaboration, universities, culture, sports, technology and diversity. These story lines will help frame the context for permanent and temporary exhibitions. It should be noted that there may be funding requirements to facilitate an accelerated approach to increasing the collection rather than acquisition through donors as is the focus currently.

3. Improve signage - The museum is not particularly well signed. The City should work with mall management to improve signage within the mall. There may also be opportunities to add signage at key points on the exterior roadway system within the mall property to help first-time visitors find the museum within the mall’s extensive property.

4. Improve marketing and communications - Recognizing the museum does not have extensive resources for marketing; the museum should do what it can to raise awareness of itself. This will require enhanced support from corporate communications staff. There may also be opportunities to work with mall management to raise awareness of the museum on a permanent or temporary basis within the mall itself, thus increasing the number of visitors to the mall who combine shopping with a visit to the museum. This might be done through improved interior signage identified above, temporary promotions or possibly through the creation of an exhibit within the mall’s more public interior space that alerts and reminds visitors to the existence of the museum and its current programming.

5. Over time, improve online access to the collection - This was an item highlighted in the City’s Culture Plan. Improving online access to the collections will help raise the awareness of the museum and its collections both for the local community and for those who are virtual visitors. It will also help give visitors a better sense of what to expect, and if well done, gives a good impression, thus adding to the anticipated quality of the museum visitor experience.

6. Establish greater engagement with school groups - Museums offer important educational opportunities for the community and as schools are central places of learning, there are opportunities for schools and the museum to work together. The museum should take steps, such as working with teachers and designing exhibits and programs that can be used to enhance the school curriculum, in order to encourage increased visitation from school groups. In the longer term, and with increased resources, it may be possible to re-align resources to add staffing to

34 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 342 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

work more actively with school groups. It should be noted that the current size of the museum possesses challenges for offering programing to school groups.

7. Develop more strategic partnerships - Currently museum staff collaborate regularly with other local museums and cultural institutions, as well as community organizations. These collaborations have contributed to high quality exhibits. The museum should consider developing additional strategic partnerships with organizations that are ‘friendly’ to the museum and aligned with its objectives. Partnerships could be developed for a wide variety of reasons including mounting permanent or special exhibitions, paying for school programming, hosting special events, paying for advertising and communications, as well as fundraising for capital or operating purposes. At the moment, human resource limitations pose a considerable barrier to effectively moving forward on this opportunity.

8. Continue Provincial policies development - The museum should continue to work on developing the 10 provincial policy standards necessary to qualify for provincial funding through Community Museum Operating Grants. The sooner these can be completed the sooner the museum will be eligible for additional grant funding to support its operations. This need was identified in the City’s Culture Plan.

9. Seek alternative opportunities for future use of the Elam Martin Farmstead - While there has been past exploration of opportunities to program the Elam Martin Farmstead as a heritage site displaying Mennonite farming, current assessment of the site suggests that it would not be feasible for the city to take on such an initiative given the cost and similar sites in Waterloo Region.

By moving away from the idea that this site should be a programmed heritage site, it becomes possible to contemplate other opportunities to use this site for the benefit of the community. There is an opportunity for the municipality to develop a clear long term plan for the Farmstead as a municipal built asset that does not focus on heritage programming, but could still preserve heritage features of the site, while responding to other community needs. Consideration should also be given to the future of the family living on the site.

Longer Term Opportunities

1. Relocate to a larger facility located in a cultural hub (or that helps create a cultural hub) – The longer term opportunity is predicated on sufficient resources to enable a move to a larger facility with consideration given to the UpTown area of Waterloo. The move would provide expanded space and would allow for consolidation of the museum’s functions (e.g., collections, storage, exhibits, programming, administration, visitor services, etc.) into a single purpose-designed facility. Clearly, a feasibility study would need to be undertaken to investigate this opportunity in some detail to establish detailed space, staffing and resource requirements. Also, the possibility of co-locating with one or more other cultural attractions would potentially create a cultural hub and thus add to the appeal of this longer term option.

35 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 343 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

3.5 Threats

Following are some of the threats that need to be considered. Identifying these threats allows the museum and the city to assess the risks of these events occurring and to undertake contingency planning and mitigation in the event some of these threats materialize.

1. Uncertainty regarding the Elam Martin Farmstead – the City of Waterloo purchased the Elam Martin Farmstead property, a sixth generation Mennonite family farm, in 1999 which is on 7.5 hectares of land incorporated into RIM Park. There are 17 buildings on the site. The Martin family still lives in the farm and park visitors are discouraged from interfering with the family or farming operations. The city is responsible for maintenance of the buildings on the site. Capital requirements identified by a city report to address the identified maintenance needs are substantial. There is no clear plan regarding the future of the Elam Martin Farmstead, including the family living on the site.

A separate assessment of capital repair requirements for the farmstead suggested that on the order of $3.6 million (in current dollars) would be required to bring it up to a point where it would be useable by the public. Given the uncertainty with respect to the future of this facility, as well as opportunities for future use of the site, this farmstead remains an open question at this point.

2. Uncertainly regarding status of artifacts in the former Seagram Museum (CIGI) – The museum still uses a significant amount of space in the former Seagram Museum where some of the former Seagram’s industrial collection is fixed in place and numerous smaller and midsized artifacts are still on display. The facility is currently owned by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) and is currently up for lease. Therefore the future of these artifacts is uncertain.

3. Lack of sufficient consolidated controlled collections storage – Some of the collection is stored off-site. Easy access is an issue and some items are stored in areas that are not climate controlled. This makes collections management inefficient and may place the artifacts at risk of deterioration in the longer term.

3.6 Assessment of Existing Tools and Approaches for Museum Management

A part of this assessment considers various tools and approaches for museum management, and the extent to which these were being embraced and utilized by the City of Waterloo Museum. The three areas for review are: 1) provincial and municipal policy frameworks; 2) existing City processes; and 3) community involvement in supporting the future direction of the museum. Each of these is addressed in turn.

36 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 344 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Provincial Framework

Community museums across the province are strongly encouraged to adhere to the Community Museum Operating Guidelines (CMOG) standards, which the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport puts forth as the ‘standard of good performance’ for museums. In fact, community museums cannot qualify for funding unless they meet CMOG guidelines, and they are evaluated annually on the basis of performance against them. CMOG articulates 10 ‘standards’ that cover the full scope of operations for community museums. They are:

1. Governance Standard 2. Finance Standard 3. Collections Standard 4. Exhibition Standard 5. Interpretation and Education Standard 6. Research Standard 7. Conservation Standard 8. Physical Plant Standard 9. Community Standard 10. Human Resources Standard

These provincial standards provide an excellent ‘tool’ or ‘framework’ for museums to follow in their own development and evolution. The City of Waterloo Museum is currently in the process of developing policies in these areas (several are in development and/or have already been approved) and this momentum should continue both to enable access to additional grant funding, but also to support operation of a high quality institution.

Municipal Framework

Section 2.1 of this Report discussed the City’s Culture Plan that provides an inclusive policy and strategic framework for the museum operation. The Plan endorses the important role heritage and culture have in the community, and clearly demonstrates the key role of the museum in being the delivery agency for part of the plan. In addition, there are three other policy initiatives in the development stages that will reinforce the role of the museum and provide a strong foundation for its operations. These are:

• this plan: the Museum and Collections Strategy, outline in detail the vision, mission, and goals of the Museum;

• the Built Heritage Strategy, being developed simultaneously with this plan, which while not directed at the museum operation specifically, should reinforce its role as an interpreter of built heritage, and place where built heritage can be understood; and

• the City’s new Strategic Plan, approved in June 2015, which underscores the importance of culture and heritage to the life of the community, and indicates the importance of the community museum function to the city (see Section 1.5 of this Report)

37 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 345 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

In terms of a fundamental tool to guide the museum operations, however, it is clearly the Museum and Collections Strategy that will be the guiding policy; the other documents referred to above simply reinforce and support this direction of this strategy.

Existing City Processes

A number of existing museum practices and processes were reviewed while developing this strategy to identify operational and management successes and areas for improvement.

1. Collections data management and tracking: The city has recently migrated to using the PastPerfect protocol to manage and track data on the museum collection (not without some attendant difficulties in the transition). This is a perfectly acceptable tool, and its use should be continued.

2. Day-to-day operations: Our interviews with staff and stakeholders revealed no significant issues with respect to the day-to-day internal operations of the museum.

3. Cultural heritage resources co-managed: As mentioned, the city is also undertaking a Built Heritage Strategy, which will be a ‘companion’ policy to the Museum and Collection Strategy. They will guide staff in taking an integrated approach to the management of all the city’s heritage resources. Another option to be considered is whether the Heritage Planner, currently a contract position, should be made permanent in order to ensure more coordinated and concerted effort on the built heritage front, as well as ensuring that this key resource is in place, enabling museum staff to work most effectively.

4. Education and information tools: The consultation portion of the strategy (both interviews and the survey) revealed the desirability of an increased on-line presence of the museum. This would take the form of providing access to the on-line catalogue, as well as (in future) on-line (or virtual) exhibitions and programs. Our benchmarking review of other museums also revealed that increasingly they are providing information and education tools on-line. Accordingly, this will be a key element of the strategy to be developed.

5. Public confusion about the brand/mandate of institutions in the region: The consultation process also revealed that there is a high degree of confusion between the City of Waterloo Museum, the Waterloo Region Museum, and THEMUSEUM in downtown Kitchener given the similarity in names and general lack of understanding of the different mandates among these organizations. This issue is not totally within the city’s control as contributing players in the misunderstanding are the Region and THEMUSEUM. However, rebranding the City of Waterloo Museum is within the City’s purview and this may be an option worth pursuing.

6. Community involvement in supporting the museum and informing future directions: The City of Waterloo currently has an Advisory Committee on Culture, which advises Council and staff on cultural matters across the city. The scope of this committee covers arts,

38 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 346 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

culture and heritage, which includes the museum operations. The museum staff does engage an ad hoc committee made up of community members and local professionals as a best practice commitment to museum operations. In future, however, when the museum pursues its longer-term vision and becomes a larger entity with a broader range of collections, exhibits, programs and events, it may be useful to consider other models such as formalizing this group into an official ‘Friends of the Museum’ group. Given that there are many models and precedents that exist, the terms of reference for, and composition of, this committee should be considered carefully. A group of community members can be a key tool staff use on various aspects to do with the management and operation of a community museum. As well, community members can play a key role as promoters of the museum in the community, helping to spread awareness and generating interest.

39 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 347 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

PART B. STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT 4. Strategic Recommendations and Rationale

This section of the Report contains the strategy and recommendations that respond to the Situation Analysis developed. First a proposed Vision, Mission and Goals are presented. This is followed by a set of specific recommendations that are characterized as short-term (now until the end of 2016), medium-term (2017 to the end of 2019), and longer-term (2020 and beyond).

4.1 Vision, Mission, and Goals for City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy For this project a Vision, Mission and Goals for the City of Waterloo Museum was developed. These, in turn, drive the strategic recommendations contained in this plan. There were five major themes emerging from the Situation Analysis that influenced the Vision, Mission and Goals contained in the pages that follow. These are:

1. Telling a more complete story: The museum should be the place where the ‘integrated’ story of the growth, development and evolution of the city is told. Beyond just the history of the Seagram operation, which is what the current collection largely represents, the museum should tell stories that represent a more complete history of the city, and the interplay of development between Waterloo and Kitchener, and the rest of the Region. This is a story unique to Waterloo, and that should be told from a Waterloo (not a Regional) viewpoint.

2. The themes of innovation, entrepreneurship, and collaboration: While there are a number of possible story-lines and narratives that emerged through the consultation process as being desirable for the museum, there was one point of consensus in terms of ‘meta-themes’ that underlay most of them. These were the linked themes of ‘innovation’, ‘entrepreneurship’ and ‘collaboration’. Innovation and entrepreneurship is present in many of the stories of the city - from the establishment of Seagram’s, to the founding of the Universities, the development of the BlackBerry, the work of the Perimeter Institute – all of these and many other stories of the city reflect the ‘innovation’ and ‘entrepreneurship’ theme. Closely related to this is the idea of collaboration, building on the Mennonite barn-building traditions of the area and many other collaborative ventures. The foundational idea of innovation and entrepreneurship, followed by collaboration, to create new institutions and industries, is “what Waterloo is” and should be reflected in the museum’s exhibitions and programs.

3. Being future-oriented as well as celebrating the past: Another key idea emerging from the consultation process was that the museum should look ahead to the future of the city as well as interpret its past. This dual focus on what lies ahead for the city given where it has come from and where it is today (‘the trajectory of our future informed by our past’ as one respondent put it) is a perspective that would inform all or most of the programs and exhibitions at the museum. In many respects, it would answer the ‘so what?’ question that is posed by most museum exhibitions. (Note that this perspective by itself could be another example of the ‘innovation, entrepreneurship and collaboration’ themes identified above.)

4. Being a community hub: The consultation process also validated the ideal that the museum should be a community hub, bringing residents of, and well as visitors to, the city together for

40 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 348 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

a variety of activities. This idea holds regardless of where the museum would be located. At its current home in the Conestoga Mall, it was felt that there was significant potential to increase utilization through improved signage, adjusted hours of operation and the development of programs and exhibits that reflected to a greater degree the themes mentioned above. In the longer term, were the museum to become part of a larger community cultural complex somewhere else in the city, the potential for its operation to be even more of a central gathering place would be even greater.

5. Being part of a cultural complex: A strong longer-term vision for the museum was that it would be relocated in a more central area of the city, as part of a larger cultural complex. Many favoured an UpTown location, which would be more reflective of the overall history of the Waterloo, as this was where most of the oldest businesses and commercial establishments were located. This, however, is a longer-term ideal and in no way precludes the museum from pursuing the other points of vision as stated above.

4.1.1 Vision and Mission

Given the five themes articulated above, a proposed Vision and Mission for the City of Waterloo Museum has been developed. In terms of differentiating between the two, the Vision Statement expresses a desired future state for the museum, once the strategy developed here has unfolded. (One way to think of this is that it will describe the museum as it will be in (say) 5+ years’ time, once the various initiatives outlined in this plan have come to fruition.) The Mission Statement, on the other hand describes the core purpose and focus of the organization which normally remains unchanged over time.

The proposed Vision Statement for the City of Waterloo Museum is:

VISION: The City of Waterloo Museum is a vibrant heritage portal where residents and visitors personally connect with Waterloo’s past, building shared experiences and enhancing culture in our community.

Similarly the proposed Mission Statement which guides the activities of the museum on a daily basis is:

MISSION: The City of Waterloo Museum serves as a community gathering place where residents and visitors celebrate their stories, both local and global, which are unique to the City’s growth and evolution. Through its collections, exhibitions, volunteers, staff and programs, the Museum interprets the fabric of our past and points the way to its future.

The Vision and Mission Statements proposed ultimately outline several of the dimensions of the desired current operation and future state of the Museum, as expressed through the consultation

41 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 349 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report process. Note as well that they are in some sense ‘location-independent’ – that is, they could equally describe a small –scale operation located at Conestoga Mall, just as they could a larger operation located somewhere else. (Of course, a larger facility in a different location might enable the Vision to be achieved to a much greater degree than the existing location.)

4.1.2 Goals

The Vision and Mission developed above in turn generates several goals (broad statements of general intent) and objectives (more specific deliverables that can include projects, processes, target accomplishments, etc.). The five proposed goals for the Museum and Collections Strategy are:

1. To tell the unique and compelling stories of the growth and evolution of the city. 2. To have a Collections Plan that reinforces and reflects the stories identified. 3. To ensure broad community awareness of the value of the museum and its offering. 4. To ensure that the museum operation is easily accessible to the public. 5. To ensure proper compliance and accountability in all museum operations.

The strategic recommendations that follow speak to tactics and actions that will help achieve these goals. 4.2 Strategic Recommendations

4.2.1 Intent Underlying Recommendations

Drawing from the consultation with the community as described in the Situation Analysis (Part A of this Report) there are several key intentions underlying the recommendations made here. These are:

• The importance of a long-term vision for the museum to support success: Waterloo is a unique community for at least three reasons: 1) its unique demographic of highly educated, creative and curious residents; 2) its large annual influx of students and new Canadians keen to learn about their new home; and 3) the number of compelling stories of innovation, entrepreneurship and community-building that are characteristic of the city. A city such as this needs a proper museum to tell these stories and serve these audiences. The current museum facility at Conestoga Mall is inadequate for the needs of the community in this regard. A reinvented vision for a larger and more complex City of Waterloo Museum is required. A starting point for this process should be the proposed vision and mission as described in the previous section.

• Need for a central location: To fully achieve the vision, in the longer-term, the museum will need to expand beyond its current space and facilities in order to properly accommodate and exhibit collections that relate more completely to the integrated history and future possibilities of the City of Waterloo. Practically, this expansion could not occur at the museum’s current site in Conestoga Mall. A central location, close to (or possibly co-located with) other cultural service sector facilities, and near to the LRT is preferable.

42 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 350 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

• Continuing short-term use of Conestoga Mall location: The City of Waterloo has a very attractive arrangement with Ivanhoe Cambridge Real Estate (owners of Conestoga Mall) that provides low cost access to space for public cultural programming purposes8. The space has several additional compelling advantages including free parking, public accessibility (with the LRT), proximity of food services, and a ‘built-in’ audience of mall patrons (according to the mall’s website it generates 6 million visits each year). Until the parameters of the longer-term vision are worked out in detail, the City should continue to use this space for museum purposes. Even after a longer-term plan is developed, the City could continue to utilize this space for cultural programming as a possible satellite location for other cultural/community programming.

• Short-term and a longer-term timeframe for planning: Given the above, this strategy should adopt both a short-term and long-term focus. The short-term strategy will focus upon ways and means to optimize the current operation at the current location, while the longer term vision should be to examine opportunities to create cultural capital with the vision of expanding the museum’s operation, with sufficient exhibit, program, storage and conservation space to satisfy long-term needs.

• Consider non-heritage programming options for the Elam Martin Farmstead: At the moment, while there has been some push to see the farmstead programmed as heritage site, it is unclear what the museum’s responsibility might be regarding developing programming for the Martin Farmstead. There is some risk, however, that as it is seen to be an ‘historical asset’ there will be an expectation that the museum function take over responsibility for its operation. However, the site’s lack of particular unique relevance for historical or museum purposes, and the cost of bringing it up to a point where it is safe and useable for public purposes, it is recommended consideration of the site for heritage programming telling the Mennonite story be reconsidered.

There are several other examples of Mennonite history in the area, including Brubacher House on the University of Waterloo campus; the Steckle Heritage Farm in Kitchener; the Visitor Centre in St. Jacobs (where the ‘Mennonite Story’ can be experienced); and living history sites Joseph Schneider Haus in Kitchener and Doon Heritage Crossroads in Kitchener. These are all established attractions that tell various aspects of the Mennonite story in the region and arguably feature better examples of that culture’s buildings and traditions than at the Elam Martin Farmstead.

Alternatively, the Farmstead should be considered an important municipal built asset and thought should be given to other ways in which the site could be used to meet community needs, while conserving some of the heritage features of the site.

4.2.2 Short-Term Recommendations (1-2 Year Timeframe)

Part of the logic underpinning the short term strategic thrust is to develop and build the museum’s

8 The City pays only the utilities costs.

43 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 351 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report audience in order to further justify a longer-term expansion of the museum’s operation. Increased visitor numbers are necessary and desirable for a number of reasons: they expose more people to the stories and artifacts at the museum and thus educate them more fully about their history and context; increasing actual visitor numbers are a signal or proxy for higher levels of awareness in the community of the museum’s existence (again, a good thing); and finally, increasing visitor numbers tell the community, stakeholders, potential partners, and politicians that there is growing interest and participation and there is desire in the community to support the museum operation. At present the museum attracts only about 6,000 visitors annually. As a result of the short-term initiatives proposed here, target levels of attendance should be 10,000+ - double the current levels within five years. This success will provide greater impetus and aid the momentum for a larger and more functional facility.

1. Update the Collections Plan:

There is a clear signal from the community that while the signature collection of Seagram artifacts (which currently comprise an estimated 85% of the roughly 10,000 artifacts in the collection) tell an important part of the history of the City of Waterloo, people would like to see the collections broadened to incorporate more of the other histories and stories of the community. There is a general feeling that the museum should represent stories and collections that are unique or particular to the city. Common suggestions reflected both specific and unique aspects of the history of the city, as well as broader narratives or ‘themes’ that might run through several of the specific types of stories. These stories and larger narratives included:

Suggested broader narratives and themes Waterloo specific stories

• stories of geology, geography, early settlers e.g. • early settlement Mennonite, First Nations • technology • the story of innovation and invention • insurance industry • migration to the area and the creation of community • early industry • Waterloo as an ‘intelligent ‘community • universities • the development and evolution of the City (many • musical talents and organizations would like to see a permanent exhibition to this • local sports effect) • agriculture • multicultural diversity

A collecting plan gap analysis needs to be developed to reflect and support these stories and themes.

2. Undertake an audit of the collections database

The collections database of the museum needs attention. There is a backlog of data entry and some records need to be cleaned up. This initiative would benefit from the City making an application to obtain grant funding for 1-2 additional temporary positions dedicated to addressing the backlog.

3. Transfer responsibility for the fine art collection to the museum

44 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 352 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

At present, responsibility for the city’s collection of fine art rests with the Arts and Culture unit, not in the Museums and Collections unit. However, as this collection is part of the artifact holdings and relevant to the city’s history, it more appropriately belongs under the museum’s guidance. This transfer should be made and the collection incorporated into the museum collection. The storage and exhibition requirements of the fine art collection should be taken into account in all of the deliberations relating to the needs of the larger collection. Finally, when the city is considering acquisitions of art in the future, museum staff should be consulted regarding the historical significance of the potential acquisition.

4. Identify appropriate offsite storage options for current collection overflow

Some of the larger items in the collection are stored at a local moving company. A key short- term initiative would be to review the status of these artifacts, determine if any could be de- accessioned, and identify more appropriate storage facilities for those to be retained so that they are safe and well preserved over the long term. Also, part of this initiative could involve developing a plan for consolidation and reorganization in order to make items more accessible. This may include construction of additional storage space as part of an upcoming facility development.

5. Develop a plan for exhibition content at the former Seagram Museum (now CIGI)

There is a need to develop a plan for items currently exhibited at the old Seagram Museum [currently owned by CIGI and up for lease]. If the building were to be sold or leased for another purpose, the items in the collection currently on display there would need to be relocated to secure circumstances, possibly at short notice and significant expense. This possibility necessitates the development of a contingency plan for available suitable storage space in the short term for storage of these artifacts as well. In the longer term, the desirability of having purpose-built off-site storage (from wherever the ‘main’ museum facility is located) should be considered (along with the possibility of including such storage space as part of a potential expanded museum facility). (A possibility for larger items on the site that are historic artifacts is that they might be interpreted in situ with the agreement of the new owners, rather than the City undertaking a likely expensive and onerous relocation process.)

6. Improved way finding signage

In the short-term while the museum stays in Conestoga Mall location, there is a critical need for improved internal signage in order to: a) increase awareness for users that there is in fact the City’s Museum in the mall; and b) provide clear and easy directions as to where the museum is located. There are also opportunities for improved external signage within the mall property. The museum should work with mall management to identify means of effecting improvement in this regard.

7. Expand hours of operation

One of the most common opportunities raised through the public survey was to adjust or expand the hours of operation to make the museum operation more conveniently available to

45 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 353 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

mall users and members of the public. (At present the museum is open Tuesday through Friday, from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., as well as weekends in July and August.) Three possibilities were raised: later in the afternoon (until 5 or 6); one or more weekday evenings; and weekends in non-summer periods. Since the initiation of this study, the museum has taken steps to align hours more in line with demand, and is testing more weekend and evening hours on a pilot basis.

8. Explore greater orientation to in-mall markets

There is some opportunity to boost attendance numbers by providing specific programming to ‘in mall’ markets - i.e. the types of people who are in the mall at specific times of day: for example, seniors [who may be there for an early morning walk around the mall], families, children and (possibly) teens. This would need to be coupled with adjusted hours of operation (as per the previous recommendation) to ensure that this kind of programming might be available at times when these particular markets are available in the mall. Opportunities to provide this kind of programming, and using volunteers to assist, should be explored. Possibilities include ‘pop-up’ exhibits, banners, portable display cases within the mall corridors, etc.

9. Continue development of required Provincial policy standards

The Province requires minimum requirements for the operation of a good community museum. Regardless of a museum’s size or scope, there are certain function, responsibilities and activities common to the preservation and presentation of material culture and are required to be in place before provincial museum funding can be accessed (through what is known as CMOG [Community Museum Operating Grant] funding). Attention and resources should be focused on completing the policies as soon as possible to enable access to additional grant funding, which would support a portion of the implementation of this strategy.

10. Continue to build new strategic partnerships

Strategic partnerships with other organizations in the community can greatly benefit the museum. Forms of partnerships could include: sponsorship agreements with the private sector, content partnerships with community organizations where the partners would assist in the development of the narrative and content of exhibits and events; and marketing partnerships, where the potential partner would help to promote the museum and its events to their membership, employee, base, etc. Such initiatives have several benefits:

a) they give the museum credibility; b) they can help leverage the museum’s resources enabling it to do more; and c) they help market and promote the museum to new audiences that are associated with the strategic partner.

11. Resolve branding confusion

46 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 354 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

A present there is tremendous confusion between the City of Waterloo Museum, ‘THEMUSEUM’ in downtown Kitchener, and the Waterloo Region Museum. It is recommended that the City re-brand to get away from the word ‘museum’ (in a sense this term has been pre-empted by others, and leads only to confusion and misunderstanding). Suggestions for an alternative identity arose through the interview process included: “City of Waterloo Heritage Centre”; “Waterloo Discovery Place”; “City of Waterloo Trajectory”; “Waterloo History Exploration Centre”; and “Waterloo’s Story”. These examples are only intended to give a flavor of the kind of identity envisaged. A fulsome branding exercise should occur to develop the appropriate brand identity to support success of the museum.

4.2.3 Medium-Term Recommendations (3 – 5 Year Timeframe)

Medium-term recommendations are planned for the period 2017 to 2019, roughly corresponding to years 3, 4 and 5 of the strategic plan. They build on the accomplishments and milestones of the short-term planning period. In reality, some short-term items are on-going and will carry on throughout the medium term and even into the longer term. Equally, museum staff may decide that some medium-term recommendations can be implemented sooner rather than later, and initiate them in the short-term. The timeframe of short, medium and longer-term is simply meant to be a general guide to the sequencing and phasing of activities, but much of the specific decisions as to when and how to implement will be made by staff, at what they judge to be the appropriate time.

12. Develop a marketing strategy

The interviews and to some extent the community survey showed very low levels of awareness of the museum operation. There was widespread agreement that the museum operation needs to be better promoted and marketed to city residents. It should undertake a more concerted marketing strategy in order to ensure wider awareness of the facility and its programs. This should embrace traditional as well as ‘social’ media.

13. Develop dedicated web site and related social media materials

Many community museums have dedicated stand-alone web sites that are more than merely web pages appended to the municipal web site. This approach demonstrates the significance of the museum as well as being more convenient and direct for users. It also enables more content, such as more detailed information related to specific exhibits, on-line access to the collections, and ticketing, etc. to be conveniently provided. This will also enable increased awareness and interest to be generated. Of course a link to the museum web site should always be present as well on the municipal web site.

There is also a need for more museum-focused social media. Current city social media channels must portion out coverage to the full range of municipal issues, which means the museum is only featured from time to time. Additionally, potential subscribers may be lost as individuals who are interested in the museum may not be interested in content on other city issues. Stand-alone social media for the museum would allow a more in-depth, ongoing dialogue with the community. There may also be opportunity for a collaborative approach to

47 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 355 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

social media for the museum with the Arts and Culture and Built Heritage staff as audiences are more likely to be similar across municipal cultural assets.

14. Consider expansion of museum mandate to encompass city archives

Many other city and community museums, including several of those examined in the benchmarking assessment, combine a municipal archives function with the city museum. There is some logic to this as the strategic intent of ‘museums’ and ‘archives’ is essentially the same (collecting relevant materials for present and future generations); the types of expertise required are similar; and both seek to enable public access to the materials in the collection, at least to some extent.

The city should consider the advantages and disadvantages of formally incorporating an archives function into the museum operations. While it would not be appropriate for the museum to take on responsibility for overall records management at the City, there may be opportunity for the museum to take an expanded role in collecting and archiving documents of particular historical value. This could involve investigating what municipal material rests at the Archives of Ontario with consideration being given to repatriating some key documents. Consideration should also be given to how an archive function would fit with the Waterloo Public Library’s local history collection and Regional archives. A focus on retaining municipal materials works in a cooperative method with other collecting institutions. Of course, an expanded role for the museum would impact storage capacity and staffing resources.

15. Develop greater orientation to programming and education

Once the specific ‘Waterloo stories’ have been identified and developed through the updated collecting plan referred to above, there is an opportunity to work with local schools and groups to encourage them to come to the museum and learn about the community. (This would likely be of interest only to local, and possibly regional, schools.) While this would certainly be an opportunity for the expanded longer-term museum vision, there may be some scope to test the market within the context of the museum’s existing location, recognizing that the current size of the exhibition space poses significant challenges. Consider integrating some new permanent displays in public spaces as a means of encouraging learning. As well, in the longer-term, there may be some opportunity for outreach: to take some of these stories into the classroom. This would likely require additional staff, and would need to be assessed further.

4.2.4 Longer-Term Recommendations (5+ Year Timeframe 2020 and beyond)

The same comments as were made above regarding the medium-term timeframe also hold for the longer term. Some of the initiatives described below may, in the judgment of staff, be better brought forward earlier than the definition of ‘longer-term’ time period would suggest.

16. Address need for more collections storage space

At present, the museum has approximately 3,500 square feet of storage space: 1,500 sq. ft. located at the Mall and 3,000 sq. ft. off-site. In the future, however, to accommodate the

48 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 356 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

needs of a more diversified and growing collection as indicated above, it is recommended that proper and dedicated storage facilities be identified or developed. Ideally, as part of the longer-term strategy, this would be a component of an expanded Museum facility. As a preliminary estimate of the amount of storage space required for a more comprehensive collections plan, 7,500 sq. ft. is suggested as a preliminary planning figure. Ideally, this space would be consolidated at one location.

17. Address need for more exhibitions space

At present, the museum has approximately 1,200 square feet of exhibition space, located at the Mall. As well, the museum does maintain some showcases and display facilities in public buildings through the City (e.g. Visitor & Heritage Information Centre, City Hall and the former Seagram Museum, now CIGI). Additional display space to profile the stories and themes reflected by the collection, as well as some sort of permanent exhibition devoted to the growth and evolution of the City (a strong theme emerging from the interviews), will be required. A preliminary planning figure suggests need for four times the existing display area, or 6,000 sq. ft. Of this amount, approximately one quarter (1,500 sq. ft.) would be dedicated to an orientation function; half (3,000 sq. ft.) would be devoted to permanent exhibitions; and the remainder (1,500 sq. ft.) given to temporary exhibits.

18. Address the need for dedicated programming space

The expanded collections focus and wider range of stories told at the City of Waterloo Museum would provide an opportunity to mount a greater range and variety of community and cultural programs. The space-related implications of offering public programming in or very near to the museum should be considered. A preliminary planning estimate of the amount of space required in this regard would be 1,300 sq. ft. Should the route of an expanded museum operation be investigated, synergies for space use as a result of possibly co-locating with other cultural facilities could be negotiated. This space would not need to be solely dedicated to a museum programming function. It could be a multi-use space serving other cultural and community functions.

49 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 357 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Note: the total space requirements for a new museum facility would be: Type of Space Space Required (sq. ft.) Exhibition Space* - orientation 1,500 - permanent 3,000 - temporary 1,500 Programming Space (community room, classroom) 1,300 Collections (storage, curatorial workrooms) 7,500 Public Support (lobby, washrooms) 1,200 Back-of-House Support 1,500 Administration** 2,000 Net Area 19,500 Gross-up Factor (30%) 5,900 Gross Floor Area 25,400 * Note: Exhibition space about 30% of the net floor area ** This amount of space would be sufficient to accommodate 6-8 staff persons (which may be required by the time of the move into larger premises)

19. Undertake feasibility study for a new facility Given the feedback for a long-term vision as outlined above, a key activity in the medium-term would be to undertake a feasibility study for the repositioning of the museum into a larger space in a culture centric area of Waterloo, where the needs for exhibition, programming, storage and conservation could be taken into account. As outlined in the situational analysis, ideally the museum operation could be co-located with other cultural facilities in the central area. Several possibilities have been suggested through the public consultation process (including the CIGI facility [old Seagram Museum] and the Carnegie Library building) and there may be other possibilities available when this feasibility study takes place. Such a feasibility study should consider the following:

- specification of the collection-related space needs of the facility (following the general guidelines outlined here, but also within the context of the Collections standard developed) - specification of the exhibits and programming-related space needs of the facility (following the general guidelines outlined here, but also within the context of the Exhibition standard developed) - identification of all other space needs - detailed review of potential site possibilities, with specific consideration of co-location possibilities with other cultural and related operations - preliminary capital cost estimation - projection of staffing and related needs - governance considerations - development of attendance and utilization projections - projections of operating costs and revenues - projections of economic impact of construction and operation upon the community - preliminary fundraising feasibility assessment

50 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 358 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

20. Consider the role for a ‘Friends of the Museum’ Group to provide support and guidance on the future of the museum

The City of Waterloo currently has an Advisory Committee of Culture, which advises Council and staff on cultural matters across the city. The scope of this committee covers arts, culture and heritage, which includes the museum operations. In future, however, when the museum pursues its longer-term vision and becomes a larger entity with a broader range of collections, exhibits, programs and events, it would likely warrant consideration to create a specific ‘Friends of the Museum’ group for the Museum. The mandate of this group could include general community advocacy, fundraising projects, an advisory role, and various other volunteer assistance projects within the museum. The terms of reference for and composition of this group should be considered carefully.

5. Strategy Implementation Plan This section of the report develops an implementation plan for the Museum and Collections Strategy. First, the overall framework for implementation is presented. Next, the detailed implementation plan itself is developed, using the implementation plan framework outlined. Finally, monitoring and evaluation considerations are discussed.

5.1 Implementation Framework The implementation plan framework considers, for each of the recommended actions in the strategy, the following dimensions:

- Roles and responsibilities of those in charge of implementing the activity: Here, the main consideration is to identify the organization(s) and agencies responsible for ensuring that a specific strategic action is implemented. Main actors that are the focus of this implementation plan will be museum staff, city council, other municipal staff, etc. Responsibility for seeing the actions through are seen to be primary (having the main responsibility for initiating and delivering the final product or result) or secondary (where the organization or agency named is not the primary one responsible for delivering on the action, but has some responsibility to help see it through). Finally, an advisory responsibility would be where the organization may simply be called upon for advice and options.

- Timing and Critical Path: This aspect of implementation addresses the time period in which the actions are thought to take place. Thinking that this strategy will set out a road map for the next 5 years and beyond, the following time periods are suggested:

• short-term (balance of 2016 and 2017) • medium-term (2018 to 2020) • longer-term (2021 and beyond)

Part of the consideration of the timeframe will involve the assessment of actions that may be on a ‘critical path’ – that is, they must be undertaken before other recommendations can be implemented.

51 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 359 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

- Financial implications: Another key aspect of implementation will be the financial resources required, which is the dollar cost outlay of implementation. Some recommendations can be implemented within existing resources, while others will require operating budget increased, or one time funding for specific projects.

A possible source of one-time, project funding to support implementation of this strategy is the Heritage Reserve. The Heritage Reserve was established with a one-time contribution made in 2002 when several pieces from the acquisition of the Seagram Collection could not be accommodated and were sold. The reserve enables staff to acquire artifacts and specimens of significance to the understanding of the history of the City of Waterloo, as they become available. The Heritage Reserve provides funding to projects that are cultural or heritage in nature. It also allows for any donations received to be used to upgrade the museum’s collection, or towards another specific objective as per the donor’s intent, rather than contributing to operating costs.

Revenue sources of the Heritage Reserve include cash donations made with or without a specified purpose, monies received from fundraising activities, budgeted contributions, grants or subsidies for the benefit of the collection, insurance payments received for historical property loss, damage, or theft, and proceeds from the sale of historical properties.

In 2009, this reserve balance was depleted to assist with the costs associated with the move to the museum space at Conestoga Mall, as approved in report R&L09-13. Contributions from year-end surplus were made in 2009 and 2010 to rebuild the reserve. In 2011, proceeds from the sale of the City of Waterloo Train Station, approximately $640,000 were allocated to this reserve (CORP2013-042). Funding from this reserve was used to develop this strategy and the built heritage strategy.

52 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 360 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report 5.2 Implementation Plan

The charts below and overleaf outline implementation considerations according to the framework outlined above. City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Detailed Implementation Plan Financial Recommendation Responsibility Timeframe Implications 1) Update the Collections Plan Museum staff (primary) Short-term Within existing resources 2) Undertake an audit of the collections Museum staff (primary) Short-term Within existing database resources 3) Transfer responsibility for the fine art Museum staff (primary) Short-term Within existing collection to the museum resources 4) Identify appropriate offsite storage Museum staff (primary) Short-term Possibly up to $10,000 / options for current collection overflow yr. in additional space rental costs in short / medium term 5) Develop a plan for exhibition content at Museum staff (primary); Short-term Financial implications the former Seagram Museum (now CIGI (secondary) will be identified once CIGI) plan has been developed 6) Improved way finding signage Museum staff (primary); Short-term On the order of $5,000 Conestoga Mall for expertise, and management (secondary) $5,000 for way-finding signs and placement (one time funding) 7) Expand hours of operation Museum staff (primary) Short-term Within existing resources 8) Explore greater orientation to in-mall Museum staff (primary); Short-term Within existing markets Conestoga Mall resources management (secondary) 9) Continue development of required Museum staff (primary); Short-term Within existing Provincial policy standards Policy and Performance resources Analyst (secondary) 10) Continue to build new strategic Museum staff (primary); Short-term, and on- Some small budget partnerships community organizations going implications: up to and enterprises $5,000 operational (secondary) increased 11) Resolve branding confusion Museum staff (primary); Short-term Possible retain branding community organizations consultants to assist and enterprises with brand / name (secondary) identification – allocate $20,000 - $30,000 (one time funding) 12) Develop a marketing strategy Museum staff (primary); Medium-term Possibly retain other municipal marketing consultants departments to assist with marketing – allocate $20,000 - $30,000 note: could be some economies of scale if undertaken with #19 (one time funding) 13) Develop dedicated web site and related Museum staff (primary); Medium-term External assistance social media materials other municipal required to develop departments; possibly website - $10,000 - external expertise $20,000 (one time funding, ongoing support to be provided by staff)

53 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 361 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Financial Recommendation Responsibility Timeframe Implications 14) Consider expansion of museum Museum staff; other Medium-term Financial implications mandate to encompass city archives municipal staff; Council would be identified (primary) based any recommended changes in role/scope 15) Develop greater orientation to Museum staff (primary); Medium-term Could involve re- programming and education Boards of Education alignment of existing (secondary) customer service position to programmer position: would involve approximately $15,000 additional cost annually 16) Address need for more collections Museum staff (primary) Longer-term Additional storage space planning/analysis required 17) Address need for more exhibitions Museum staff (primary) Longer-term Additional space planning/analysis required 18) Address the need for dedicated Museum staff (primary); Longer-term Additional programming space community organizations planning/analysis and enterprises required (secondary) 19) Undertake feasibility study for a new Museum staff (primary); Longer-term $50 - $75,000 budget facility other municipal for feasibility and departments planning study 20) Consider the role for a ‘Friends of the Museum staff; other Longer-term Additional Museum’ Group to provide support and municipal staff; community planning/analysis guidance on the future of the museum partners; Council required

5.3 Evaluation Considerations

5.3.1 Reporting Frequency

The City of Waterloo Museum should report annually to Council on the progress it is making on the implementation of this strategic plan. This would consist of a short presentation on major achievements and challenges. Also, some key metrics in terms of attendance, collections, etc., should figure in the presentation; these are discussed further in the section below. In addition to a council presentation, the museum may wish to put some of the information up on its website as a report back to the general public. It may also wish to encapsulate this information into an email for those on its email list, and possibly a short handout that could be distributed to visitors and the general public.

5.3.2 Evaluation Metrics

There are several metrics that will be significant and important as the strategy moves forward. These will be the key dimensions through which the success of the strategy will be measured, and include:

• Attendance: The number of people from the community who are exposed to the museum will be an important dimension showing interest and relevance. Right now, attendance levels are hovering at about 6,000, which is very low for a community museum, according to the benchmark work undertaken as part of this project (and especially considering the high

54 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 362 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

volumes of traffic generated by the Conestoga Mall). A reasonable target for the end of the 5- year period should be at least double this number. In the longer term, if the museum is relocated into new, larger facilities, attendance projections and targets would presumably be considerably higher even than this.

• Target market segments: Another metric to consider would be to track the audience to demonstrate usage by specific target sectors: for example, school groups, new residents to Waterloo, multicultural organizations, etc. Here audience percentage targets would be most appropriate.

• Collections: The number of relevant items in the collection is often another measurable dimension of importance to museum operations. It is reasonable to expect that as the City of Waterloo Museum begins to expand its ‘repertoire’ of stories told, the artifacts in the collection that will support those stories will grow also. However, rather than have a specific target number for the size of the collection, which would be unrealistic and arbitrary, the report back to Council and the public should show simply that the collection is growing in size and is becoming increasingly diverse.

• Web site hits: At present, the museum’s web site is fairly basic, but as awareness of the museum and the stories it tells grows, so too should hits on the web site. It is probably most appropriate to show increasing growth year after year, as opposed to having any sort of specific target in place.

• Cataloguing: As discussed in the report, there is a backlog of items in the collection that have not yet been adequately catalogued. A reasonable target would be to ensure that the entire backlog was removed by the end of the 5 year period. This, of course, means that not only artifacts currently existing in the collection would need to be cataloged, but also any new items acquired over the next five years be catalogued. At the end of this period, only the most recently-acquired items should need proper cataloging, and there should be no significant backlog extant. Moreover, there should be an expected and reasonable turnaround time for cataloguing, to ensure that a backup does not accumulate in future.

• On-line access: As earlier outlined, one of the recommendations had to do with making some portion of the collection available on-line. Again, it is probably not appropriate to set a specific target, but rather to show on-going progress on this dimension each year, in terms of the total numbers of items available electronically.

• Partners: The development of community partners is another strategic direction espoused in the plan. Here again, rather than have a specific target number, it is most appropriate to show increasing involvement of the community in the museum operations through partnership development.

55 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 363 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

Appendix A. Benchmark Comparisons 2014 Budget Year

City of Waterloo Guelph Civic Wellington City of St. Dufferin Grey Roots Bruce Chatham Average Waterloo Region Museum County Niagara Falls Catharines County Museum County Kent Excluding Museum Museum Museum & Museum Museum & Museum and Archives Museum & Museum City of Archives Welland and Cultural Waterloo Canal Centre Archives Centre Population 99,000 563,000 122,000 87,000 83,000 131,000 57,000 93,000 66,000 104,000 145,000 County or City $172 m $1,300 m $206 m $85 m $101 m $112 m $61 m $52 m $78 m $300 m $255 m Budget Museum Setting Suburban Suburban Downtown Rural Downtown Suburban Rural Rural Downtown Downtown na Mall Commercial Museum $244 k $2.0 m $785 k $2.1 m $980 k $691 k * $1.0 m $1.8 m * $1.3 m $351 k * $1,180 k Operating Budget (2014) *(includes * shared * Museum construction facility only – see debt charges not Notes payment) included Municipal 95% 72% 92% 92% 90% 88% 66% 85% 71% 86% 82% Contribution Per Capita Museum $2.46 $2.55 $5:93 $22.30 $10.62 $4.31 $11.58 $16.45 $14.66 $2.90 $15.21 Net Cost Total Size 4,000 SF 94,000 SF 30,000 SF 31,000 SF 20,000 SF 25,000* 20,000 SF 37,000 SF 40,000 4,000 SF 33,500 SF Front 1,500 SF 67,000 SF 18,000 SF 7,500 SF 10,000 SF 18,000 15,000 SF 32,000 SF 25,000 2,500 SF Back 2,500 SF 27,000 SF 12,000 SF (Archives) 10,000 SF 7100 5,000 SF 5,000 SF 15,000 1,500 SF

5 Year Average 6,000 56,000 - 25,000 - 23,000 12,000 35.000 - 15,000 - 39,000 - 30,000 - 6,000 - 8,000 29,600 Visitors 80,000 30,000 (Lots of local 38,000 20,000 46,000 35,000 (museum competition) (Museum only) only) Staffing FT 1.0 24 6 15* 7 15 7 13 14* (1 3 12 FT PT 2 1 10 0 1 4 3 3 vacant) 3 3 PT Seasonal 0 20 10 0 5 5-7 6 (1 3 (contract) * Archives 3 contract) * Archives 3 Collection Size 10,000 na 32,000 19,000 24,000 150,000 na na na 100,000 na Off-site Storage Yes No No No No No No No Yes No na Notes Annual mall Pioneer Seasonal Operates 3 * Shared site On site On site Museum plus Shared site traffic is 6 village & McCrae museum sites with Welland seasonal seasonal archives, with gallery, million - curatorial - House – 2 seasonal Canal Centre pioneer pioneer theatre and theatre plus trend ↓ storage - 66k to 70 k village village community 2 heritage centre site annual centre roles homes 35,000 SF on site visitors – (seasonal) site free Note: Data in this table was provided by senior staff at each of the museums. The table is intended to provide a snapshot of the context and operation of select community museums in Ontario. The data should be considered estimates and may not be directly comparable.

56 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 364 of 409 August 10, 2015 City of Waterloo Museum and Collections Strategy – Draft Final Report

57 TCI Management Consultants • Reich + Petch Design International • Maltby & Associates Inc. Council Meeting Page 365 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Transportation Services

Title: Leaf Collection Program Review Report Number: IPPW2015-067 Author: Roslyn Lusk Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: [File] Attachments: Figure 1, Figure 2 Ward No.: City-Wide

Recommendation:

1. That Council receives IPPW2015-067 as information.

2. That Council direct staff to engage the Region of Waterloo to discuss the impact of each option to their yard waste collection program.

3. That Council direct staff to return to Council on September 21, 2015 with a recommendation based on the options set forth herein.

A. Executive Summary

In addition to the Region’s yard waste collection program, the City of Waterloo offers a loose leaf collection program to residents through which residents can rake leaves to the curb for pick up by city crews. This program typically begins in late October and each leaf collection zone is visited a minimum of one time until the majority of leaves are collected and/or snow falls begin to accumulate.

There are many factors that create challenges for the leaf collection program including: • Multiple tree varieties on the same street resulting in different timing of leaf drop • Inconsistent leaf dropping rate across the city during the collection period • Fluctuations in the weather making it difficult to time leaf collection operations while being ready to conduct winter control operations immediately upon a winter weather event

Council Meeting Page 366 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Precipitation slowing leaf collection operations (more labour intensive when leaves are wet) • Lack of ability to coordinate timing of homeowner yard cleanup with the city’s leaf collection program • Limitations of staff and equipment resources to properly address changing weather conditions and emergencies delaying leaf collection.

These challenges often result in significant staff overtime hours and costs exceeding budget. In an attempt to minimize overspending the budget due to the above noted challenges, staff wishes to identify three options for the 2015 leaf collection season:

Option 1: Maintain Current Level of Services Under the current leaf collection program, loose leaves are collected from every street across the city at least once, dependent on weather. Figure 1 shows the 19 collection zones that comprise the current program.

The challenges with the provision of this service as identified in Section A, will remain and it is expected 2015 program costs will exceed the budget. If Council wishes to maintain the current service level in 2015 and beyond, additional funds will be requested through the 2016-2018 budget process to bring the budget in line with actual expenditures.

Option 2: Provide Leaf Collection in Mature Treed Areas Only For the purposes of identifying mature treed areas, city Forestry and Environment Services staff have provided three definitions to use to classify trees.

i. Mature Trees – Large crowns resulting in a large amount of leaf litter. ii. Semi-mature Trees – Moderate amount of leaf litter. iii. Newly Planted Areas or Young Trees – Little amount of leaf litter.

Limiting loose leaf collection to mature treed areas would mean collecting only from the areas with mature tree classification. The mature treed areas earmarked for leaf collection per Option 2 are shown in Figure 2.

The leaf collection budget is currently funded by the stormwater utility as the leaf pick-up program provides benefits to the overall stormwater management system. Continuing to provide leaf collection services in mature treed areas would continue to keep the majority of leaves out of the storm water system.

Changing the program to include leaf collection in areas with only mature trees would allow city crews to localize efforts and realize operational

Council Meeting Page 367 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

efficiencies. It is anticipated this change will bring actual costs in line with the budget. Some of the existing budget would be required to educate residents of the change.

Residents living in areas outside the collection zones identified in Figure 2 would be required to collect and dispose of leaves from their property and the boulevard. The Region of Waterloo provides a curbside yard waste collection program from March to November that residents can utilize.

Consultation with the Region of Waterloo will be conducted to determine the impact of this option to their curbside yard waste collection program. Staff will report back on this consultation in the September 21, 2015 report to Council.

Option 3: Discontinue the Leaf Collection Program Residents would be required to collect, dispose and/or compost leaves from their property and the boulevard and would not be permitted to rake their leaves to the curbside. The Region of Waterloo provides a curbside yard waste collection program from March to November that residents can utilize.

If leaf collection was discontinued staff resources previously dedicated to leaf collection would be reallocated. Instead of leaf collection, transportation crews would continue with landscaping and asphalt road repair works that had not been completed in summer months. They would also redirect efforts to installing snow fence and calibrating snow removal equipment in preparation for winter control. Water Services staff previously dedicated to leaf collection would redirect their time to bridge maintenance, oil/grit separator cleaning and creek and roadside ditching inspections and maintenance.

Some of the leaf collection budget would be required to complete and rollout a comprehensive plan to communicate the change to residents. Operational savings would be realized and reallocated by the stormwater management utility.

B. Financial Implications The table below shows the city’s leaf collection costs from 2010-2014 and the budget for 2015.

Council Meeting Page 368 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Year Actual Cost Budget Budget vs Actual 2010 $191,681 $144,232 -$47,449 2011 $187,169 $145,563 -$41,606 2012 $241,574 $147,146 -$94,428 2013 $231,037 $149,206 -$81,831 2014 $263,234 $151,132 -$112,102 2015 $154,396

The average overage for the existing leaf collection program from 2010 to 2014 is $75,483. The options in this report are being considered in an attempt to mitigate these cost overages.

C. Technology Implications There are no technology implications with this report.

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic CAO-08-11.1

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Director: Roslyn Lusk Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance: Keshwer Patel

CAO

Council Meeting Page 369 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

IPPW2015-067

Figure 1

Current Leaf Collection Zones

Council Meeting Page 370 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Figure 2

Option 2 Leaf Collection Zones – Mature Treed Areas Only

Council Meeting Page 371 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Planning Approvals

Title: Parking and Traffic Prohibition on Emergency Accesses Report Number: IPPW2015-080 Author: Joel Cotter Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: - Attachments: Appendix A – Draft By-law Ward No.: City Wide

Recommendations:

1. That IPPW2015-080 be approved.

2. That Council support the enactment of a by-law to prohibit parking and traffic on emergency accesses in the City of Waterloo, subject to approval by the Director of Legal Services.

A. Report

Emergency accesses exist throughout the City of Waterloo. They provide increased travel (routing) options for emergency responders: fire, ambulance, and police services. In some cases, they also function as walkways to enhance neighbourhood connectivity. Recently, the City received complaints regarding the unauthorized use of emergency accesses in Vista Hills. In order to deter unauthorized use of emergency accesses and facilitate enforcement, a by-law is required to prohibit parking and traffic on emergency accesses (see attached).

The approach to enforcement of the by-law will be determined by the Municipal Enforcement Division, based on complaints received and available staff resources.

B. Financial Implications

None.

C. Technology Implications

None.

Council Meeting Page 372 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

D. Legal Considerations

Legal Services support the enactment of an emergency access by-law.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Corporate Excellence – equip employees with the tools and knowledge to excel in all that they do.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

None.

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Joel Cotter August 4, 2015 Director: Joel Cotter August 4, 2015 (Acting) Commissioner: Scott Nevin August 4, 2015

Finance: N/A N/A N/A

CAO

Council Meeting Page 373 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Parking and Traffic Prohibition on Emergency Accesses IPPW2015-080

APPENDIX ‘A’

DRAFT BY-LAW

Council Meeting Page 374 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO

BY-LAW NO. 2015 -

BY-LAW TO PROHIBIT PARKING AND TRAFFIC ON EMERGENCY ACCESSES IN THE CITY OF WATERLOO

WHEREAS certain municipal lands within the City of Waterloo are used for emergency access purposes, and such lands are deemed to be a transportation system other than a highway under Section 11(3)2 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended.

AND WHEREAS Section 11(3)2 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended, states that a local municipality may pass by-laws related to transportation systems other than highways.

AND WHEREAS Section 11(3)8 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended, states that a local municipality may pass by-laws related to parking, except on highways.

AND WHEREAS Section 101(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended, states that if a municipality passes a by-law regulating or prohibiting the parking or leaving of a motor vehicle on land, it may provide for the removal and impounding or restraining and immobilizing of any vehicle, at the vehicle owner’s expense, parked or left in contravention of the by-law.

AND WHEREAS Section 101(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended, states that, if signs are erected on lands specifying conditions on which a motor vehicle may be parked or left on the land or regulating or prohibiting the parking or leaving of a motor vehicle on the land, a motor vehicle parked or left on the land contrary to the conditions or prohibitions shall be deemed to have been parked or left without consent.

AND WHEREAS Section 428 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended states that a by-law may provide that, where a vehicle has been left, parked, stopped or standing in contravention of a by-law passed under the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended, the owner of the vehicle is guilty of an offence, even though the owner was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the contravention of the by-law, and is liable to the applicable fines, unless at the time of the offence the vehicle was in the possession of another person without the owner’s consent.

THEREFORE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

Council Meeting Page 375 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Definitions

1. As used in this by-law, the following capitalized terms shall have the following meanings:

a.) “BY-LAW” means this by-law and any amendments thereto.

b.) “CITY” means The Corporation of the City of Waterloo.

c.) “EMERGENCY ACCESS” means the municipal lands identified in Schedule ‘A’ attached hereto.

d.) “EMERGENCY SERVICE VEHICLES” means any fire, police or ambulance vehicle or equipment.

e.) “MOTOR VEHICLE” means any motor vehicle including an automobile, tractor, construction equipment, motorcycle, bicycle, and any other vehicle propelled or driven by any kind of power other than muscular power.

f.) “MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER” means an individual employed and/or designated by the CITY who is responsible for enforcing the by-laws of the CITY.

g.) “OBJECTS” means any material thing, including but not limited to building materials, refuse, or any other item or substance.

h.) “PERSON” means an individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, unincorporated association, organization, corporation, owner, or driver of a motor vehicle.

i.) “POLICE OFFICER” means a chief of police or any other police officer of the Waterloo Regional Police Service, but not including a special constable or an auxiliary member of the police service.

j.) “PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER” means an individual appointed by resolution or by-law of the Council of the CITY to enforce the provisions of this BY-LAW.

Council Meeting Page 376 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

General Prohibitions

2. No PERSON shall park a MOTOR VEHICLE on an EMERGENCY ACCESS.

3. No PERSON shall stop a MOTOR VEHICLE on an EMERGENCY ACCESS.

4. No PERSON shall leave a MOTOR VEHICLE on an EMERGENCY ACCESS.

5. No PERSON shall use or cross an EMERGENCY ACCESS, unless otherwise permitted to do so in accordance with municipal signage.

6. No PERSON shall place an OBJECT on or across an EMERGENCY ACCESS.

7. No PERSON shall obstruct, in any manner whatsoever, an EMERGENCY ACCESS.

8. No PERSON shall: a.) prevent access to or from an EMERGENCY ACCESS; b.) obstruct access to or from an EMERGENCY ACCESS.

9. No PERSON shall damage or deface an EMERGENCY ACCESS, including infrastructure thereon such as but not limited to gates, bollards, signage, lighting, and fencing.

Signage 10. If signs are erected on an EMERGENCY ACCESS regulating or prohibiting the parking, stopping or leaving of a MOTOR VEHICLE, a MOTOR VEHICLE parked, stopped or left contrary to the conditions or prohibition shall be deemed to have been parked, stopped, or left without consent of the CITY.

11. If signs are erected on an EMERGENCY ACCESS regulating or prohibiting the use of an EMERGENCY ACCESS, any use contrary to the conditions or prohibition shall be deemed to be without consent of the CITY.

12. If signs are erected on an EMERGENCY ACCESS regulating or prohibiting obstructions and or the placement of OBJECTS on or across an EMERGENCY ACCESS, any obstruction and or the placement of OBJECTS on or across an EMERGENCY ACCESS contrary to the conditions or prohibition shall be deemed to be without consent of the CITY.

13. If signs are erected on an EMERGENCY ACCESS regulating or prohibiting the obstruction of access and or the prevention of access to or from an EMERGENCY ACCESS, any obstruction of access and or the prevention of access to or from an EMERGENCY ACCESS contrary to the conditions or prohibition shall be deemed to be without consent of the CITY.

Council Meeting Page 377 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Enforcement 14. This BY-LAW may be enforced by a: • MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER • POLICE OFFICER • PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, with the exception of Section 16 of this BY-LAW

15. Any POLICE OFFICER and or MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, upon discovery of any contravention to Sections 2 to 4 of this BY-LAW, may:

a.) cause the MOTOR VEHICLE to be removed, impounded, restrained, and or immobilized at the vehicle owner’s sole expense. All costs and charges for the removal, impounding, storage, care, restraining, and or immobilization of the vehicle, if any, are a lien upon the vehicle, which may be enforced in the manner provided by in the Repair and Storage Liens Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.R.25;

b.) issue a ticket in accordance with Sections 18 to 21 of this BY-LAW; and or,

c.) order the contravention to be remedied by the PERSON, at the PERSON’s expense.

16. Any POLICE OFFICER, MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER and or PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, upon discovery of any contravention to Sections 5 to 9 of this BY-LAW, may issue a ticket in accordance with Sections 18 to 21 of this BY-LAW and order the contravention to be remedied by the PERSON at the PERSON’s expense.

Penalties 17. Every PERSON who contravenes any of the provisions of this BY-LAW is guilty of an offence and pursuant to Section 429 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended, all contraventions of this BY-LAW are designated as continuing offences.

18. Every PERSON, excluding a corporation, who is convicted of an offence is liable to a minimum fine of Two Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($250) and a maximum fine of Twenty- Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) for the first offence, and a maximum fine of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) for a subsequent offence.

19. Every corporation which is convicted of an offence is liable to a minimum fine of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) and a maximum fine of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) for the first offence, and a maximum fine of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) for a subsequent offence.

20. In addition to Sections 18 and 19 of this BY-LAW, every PERSON who contravenes any of the provisions of this BY-LAW is guilty of an offense and, on conviction, is

Council Meeting Page 378 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Integrated Planning & Public Works

liable to a set fine as provided pursuant to the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.33, as amended.

Exemptions 21. This BY-LAW shall not apply to EMERGENCY SERVICE VEHICLES or CITY vehicles.

Severability 22. In the event that any provision of this BY-LAW is deemed or determined to be in violation of any law, or held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction, the violation and invalidity of any particular provision shall not affect any other provision of this BY-LAW. This BY-LAW shall afterwards be interpreted as though the offending provision is not contained in the BY-LAW.

Effective Date 23. This BY-LAW shall come into force and effect on the date of its final passing.

Enacted this 10th day of August, 2015.

Signature Dave Jaworsky, Mayor

Olga Smith, City Clerk

Approval Date Print Name Initials August 4, Joel Cotter, Director, IPPW 2015 Planning Approvals August 4, Steve Ross, Director, Legal 2015 Legal Services Joel Cotter, Director, Finance n/a Planning Approvals

Council Meeting Page 379 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Integrated Planning & Public Works

SCHEDULE ‘A’

This is Schedule ‘A’ to By-law No. 2015-____ passed this 10th day of August, 2015 A.D.

EMERGENCY ACCESSES

1. Part Lot 42, German Company Tract, designated as Parts 9 and 10 on Plan 58R-16806 (west of the intersection of Columbia Street West and Sundew Drive)

2. Part Lot 43, German Company Tract, designated as Block 112, Plan 58M-550 (west of the intersection of Rock Elm Street and Autumn Willow Drive)

3. Part Lot 66, German Company Tract, designated as Block 207, Plan 58M-204 (Angler Way to University Avenue East)

4. Part Lot 66, German Company Tract, designated as Block 218, Plan 58M-204 (Angler Way to New Hampshire Street)

5. Part Lots 29 and 44, German Company Tract, designated as Block 48, Plan 58M-341 (Forest Gate Crescent to Erbsville Road)

6. Part Lots 30 and 43, German Company Tract, designated as Blocks 28 and 29, Plan 58M- 360 (Woodlawn Place to Erbsville Road)

7. Part Lot 27, German Company Tract, designated as Block 205, Plan 58M-252 (Killbear Court to Block 178, 58M-57)

8. Part Lot 27, German Company Tract, designated as Block 178, Plan 58M-57 (Waterton Drive to Block 205, 58M-252)

Council Meeting Page 380 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT

Planning Approvals

Title: Zoning By-Law Amendment Z-15-10 - Removal of Holding Symbol - 1 Columbia St. W., 351 & 355 King St. N. Report Number: IPPW2015-066 Author: Sam Nabi Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: Z-15-10 Attachments: Appendix 1 – Proposed Site Plan Appendix 2 – Proposed Landscape Plan Appendix 3 – Proposed Development Perspectives Appendix 4 – Agency Comments Ward No.: Ward 6 – Central-Columbia Ward

Recommendations:

1. That IPPW2015-066 be approved.

A. Executive Summary

The owner has submitted Zoning By-Law Amendment Application Z-15-10 to remove the holding symbol from 1 Columbia St. W., 351 & 355 King St. N. The owner intends to convert amenity space in the existing apartment building to a medical clinic and pharmacy, and to demolish two single-detached dwellings to construct an associated 25-space parking lot.

Based on Planning Approvals’ review of the application, we recommend approval of Z- 15-10 as the owner has fulfilled the requirements to remove the holding symbol from the subject lands pursuant to the Northdale Mixed Use (NMU) zone, including:

• Verification of sufficient servicing capacity (water, sanitary and storm water) to fully service the lands;

Council Meeting Page 381 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Verification of sufficient transportation capacity and transportation infrastructure within the surrounding road network affected by the development and/or use of the lands; and,

• Verification through site plan control that the development will conform to:

a. the City’s Official Plan; b. the Region’s Official Plan; and c. the City’s Urban Design Manual, including the Northdale Urban Design Guidelines.

B. Financial Implications

Staff are not aware of any financial implications to the City with respect to the requested application. Should the application be appealed, potential costs related to an Ontario Municipal Board hearing may be incurred.

C. Technology Implications

There are no technology implications to the City with respect to this request.

D. Legal Considerations

The property at 1 Columbia St. W. is currently the subject of legal action against the City. This removal of holding, related applications, and communication between staff and the applicant are conducted without prejudice to the legal proceedings.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Pillars: Multi-modal transportation, Infrastructure renewal, Strong community, Environmental leadership, Corporate excellence, Economic development)

a) Zoning By-Law Amendment Application Z-15-10 aligns with the Strong Community strategic pillar by facilitating mixed-use development and assembling land to support future intensification.

b) The proposed development aligns with the Economic Development strategic pillar by: a. Providing employment related to new construction; b. Increasing the assessed value of the lands; and, c. Attracting new business to the Northdale neighbourhood.

Council Meeting Page 382 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

F. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Sam Nabi Director: Joel Cotter Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance: N/A N/A

CAO

Council Meeting Page 383 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Zoning By-Law Amendment Z-15-10 - Removal of Holding Symbol - 1 Columbia St. W., 351 & 355 King St. N. IPPW 2015-066

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS

SECTION 1 – SUBJECT LANDS

Location: 1 Columbia St. W., 351 & 355 King St. N.

Ward: 6 – Central-Columbia

Size: 0.42 ha

Owner: King & Columbia Inc.

Applicant: SRM Architects Inc.

Existing Land Use: One apartment building and two single detached dwellings

Public Input: Notice of the Meeting was advertised in the Waterloo Chronicle on July 29, 2015.

SECTION 2 – BACKGROUND

In June 2012, Waterloo City Council approved the Northdale Land Use and Community Improvement Plan Study, which resulted in an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By- Law Amendment to guide land-use changes and intensification in Northdale. In the second half of 2013, the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) approved the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment after considering appeals.

Consequently, the Northdale Mixed Use (NMU) zone was established through Zoning By-Law 2012-070. Section 37.4.1 of the By-Law applied a holding symbol to the subject lands, requiring:

Council Meeting Page 384 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Verification of sufficient servicing capacity (water, sanitary and storm water) to fully service the lands;

• Verification of sufficient transportation capacity and transportation infrastructure within the surrounding road network affected by the development and/or use of the lands; and,

• Verification through site plan control that the development will conform to: a. the City’s Official Plan; b. the Region’s Official Plan; and c. the City’s Urban Design Manual, including the Northdale Urban Design Guidelines.

SECTION 3 – APPLICATION REQUEST

The owner is requesting that the City of Waterloo remove the holding symbol applied to the subject lands, in order to convert amenity space within the existing apartment building at 1 Columbia St. W. to a medical clinic and pharmacy, and to construct associated parking (see Appendices 1 and 2).

SECTION 4 – PLANNING EVALUATION

Planning staff have no objections to the proposed lifting of the holding symbol. To fulfill the applicable requirements of Section 37.4.1 of the NMU zone and lift holding from the lands, the Applicant submitted the following information:

• Servicing Capacity Analysis - the Applicant has demonstrated that sufficient servicing capacity (storm water) is available to fully service the lands through the submission of the following:

a. Storm Water Management Report;

The Engineering Services Division has determined that a water distribution and sanitary loading analysis is not required for this application, as the proposed construction only includes a parking lot, which creates no additional water or sanitary servicing demand. The Engineering Services Division has reviewed the Storm Water Management Report and is satisfied with the analysis and conclusions.

• Transportation Capacity Analysis – Transportation Engineering staff from the City of Waterloo and the Region of Waterloo have determined that the additional traffic generated by a 25-space parking lot in this location does not warrant a Transportation Impact Study. The area around the subject lands is undergoing significant intensification, resulting in a higher density and a more walkable neighbourhood. The subject lands are well-served by GRT transit routes 7, 31, and 201 iXpress.

Council Meeting Page 385 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• Site Planning - the Applicant submitted a complete site plan application to the Planning Approvals Division. Through the site plan control process, the Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed development will conform to: a. the City’s Official Plan; b. the Region’s Official Plan; and c. the City’s Urban Design Manual, including the Northdale Urban Design Guidelines.

The Site Plan Review Committee has conditionally endorsed the site plan application.

Staff note that the proposed development will require the demolition of two single- detached dwellings on 351 and 355 King St. N. Prior to beginning site works, the applicant must receive demolition control approval, which will be considered by the Chief Building Officer after final Site Plan approval is granted.

SECTION 5 – CONCLUSION

Based on the information submitted by the Applicant, in the opinion of Integrated Planning and Public Works staff, the Applicant has satisfied the requirements for lifting the holding provision from the subject property. Planning Approvals supports the removal of the holding provision from the subject lands.

SECTION 6 – RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That IPPW2015-066 be approved.

2. That Council approve Zoning By-Law Amendment Application Z-15-10, submitted by King & Columbia Inc., to remove the holding symbol from the lands municipally known as 1 Columbia St. W., 351 & 355 King St. N., to allow for the conversion of amenity space in the existing apartment building at 1 Columbia St. W. to a medical clinic and pharmacy, and to construct an associated 25-space parking lot on 351 & 355 King St. N. for the medical clinic and pharmacy.

Prepared by:

Sam Nabi Development Planner, Planning Approvals Division Integrated Planning & Public Works [email protected]

Council Meeting Page 386 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX 1 – PROPOSED SITE PLAN

Council Meeting Page 387 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX 2 – PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN

Council Meeting Page 388 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX 3 – PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVES

NORTHEAST PERSPECTIVE

SOUTH PERSPECTIVE

Council Meeting Page 389 of 409 August 10, 2015 10 Integrated Planning & Public Works

APPENDIX 4 – AGENCY COMMENTS

Regional Municipality of Waterloo Based on Regional interests, staff's review of this application has been limited to servicing, specifically water distribution, and RSC requirements. Staff trust that the City will ensure the applicant has satisfied all other Holding provision criteria as required by By-law 2012-070.

Water and Wastewater Servicing

Water Services staff have no concerns and/or comments with the application.

Site Contamination

Staff has reviewed the Region's Threats Inventory Database (TID) which identifies known and potentially contaminated sites. Based on the TID and in accordance with the Region's Implementation Guideline For The Review Of Development Applications On Or Adjacent To Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites, a RSC is not required for these properties.

Transportation Planning

Transportation Planning staff note that a three metre road widening is required along the King Street frontage, and a Regional Access Permit is required for the access to/from King Street. These requirements will be addressed as part ofthe site plan application currently in process.

Summary

In summary, the Region has no objection to the removal of the Holding provision.

Development Engineering

Following review of the above submission, the submission appears to be acceptable and the engineering division has no concerns with the zone change application. We would like to ensure the following items are considered and addressed during the detailed design phase for site approval;

GENERAL

1. Should the developer wish to mobilize the site prior to engineering approval, a permit application for a Site Alteration Permit, By-Law No. 10-066, will be required to be completed and submitted to Engineering Services for review and approval along with the required payment and securities.

Council Meeting Page 390 of 409 August 10, 2015 11 Integrated Planning & Public Works

2. As per the City of Waterloo Sidewalk Policy PW2005-35, sidewalk along frontage of King Street, conforming to City of Waterloo standard, would be required and owner is responsible for payment. 3. Cost estimate of 100% of the underground and surface works, including landscaping with the calculated amounts for engineering fee (5% of cost), and performance deposit (50% of cost).

DRAINAGE PLAN

1. The proposed slopes along the west and south sides of the proposed parking lot are shown as 2:1. Emphasis should be placed on achieving a 3:1 slope and creating an enhanced landscape buffer.

STORM WATER MANAGEMENT

1. The existing property does not contain a storm outlet to King St. N. As King Street is a Regional Road, the Region of Waterloo must review and accept the proposed storm sewer connection and flows. 2. There is a small discrepancy in total area between the pre and post development plans within the Stormwater Management Report.

Council Meeting Page 391 of 409 August 10, 2015 NOTICE OF AN INFORMAL PUBLIC MEETING AND COMPLETE APPLICATION

Monday, August 10, 2015 Council Chambers, City Hall, Waterloo City Centre, 100 Regina Street South Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15-08 Wm. J. Gies Construction Ltd. 419-425 & 439-485 Avens Street, Ward 2 - Northwest

The applicant is proposing to amend the City’s Zoning By-Law No. 1418 to permit a minimum driveway width of 4.4 m, whereas a minimum of 5.07 m is required, for 28 semi-detached dwellings.

If you wish to make a presentation to Council, please call 519.747.8549 prior to 10:00am on Monday, August 10, 2015, so that the necessary arrangements can be made to place you on the agenda. For more information about the meeting, please contact Lissy Mackinnon at 519.747.8549 or email [email protected]

A written summary of the presentation should be filed with the City Clerk prior to the public meeting.

We encourage the public to provide input into this important Zoning By-law Amendment application. Individuals may submit written / electronic comments. The public is informed and notified that names, addresses and comments may be made public. Olga Smith, City Clerk, City of Waterloo.

For further information regarding the above matter, please contact the City of Waterloo Integrated Planning and Public Works, 2nd Floor, Waterloo City Centre, Waterloo, Ontario, by calling Sam Nabi at 519.747.8589 or email [email protected]

Council Meeting Page 392 of 409 August 10, 2015

Council Meeting Page 393 of 409 August 10, 2015 NOTICE OF AN INFORMAL PUBLIC MEETING AND COMPLETE APPLICATION Monday, August 10, 2015, no earlier than 6:30pm Council Chambers, City Hall, Waterloo City Centre, 100 Regina St S Zoning By-law Amendment application Z-15-12 The Block Inc. 275 Larch Street, Central Columbia - Ward 6

The Applicant is requesting an amendment to Zoning By-law 1108 to increase the permitted density from 250 bedrooms per hectare to 339 bedrooms per hectare. A number of community benefits are proposed by the applicant in exchange for the increase in density. Site specific zoning is also requested to include additional uses to be permitted within a unit in Building B identified for a not-for-profit use, with a requirement of two parking spaces to accommodate this use.

The purpose of the application is to modify the approved Site Plan (SP-13-29) to increase the height of five of the approved eight buildings from 4 storeys to 6 storeys and increase the number of bedrooms from 348 to 472 (from 324 to 440 units), providing a total density of 339 bedrooms per hectare. The site has frontage on Hickory Street West, Hemlock Street, Balsam Street and Larch Street. The development is intended to accommodate rental apartment units marketed to students.

If you wish to make a presentation to Council, please call 519.747.8549 prior to 10:00 am on Monday, August 10, 2015, so that the necessary arrangements can be made to place you on the agenda. For more information about the meeting, please contact Lissy MacKinnon at 519.747.8549 or by email at [email protected]

A written summary of the presentation should be filed with the City Clerk prior to the public meeting. We encourage the public to provide input into this important Zoning By-law Amendment application. Individuals may submit written / electronic comments. The public is informed and notified that names, addresses and comments may be made public. Olga Smith, City Clerk, City of Waterloo.

For further information regarding the above matter, please contact the City of Waterloo Integrated Planning and Public Works, 2nd Floor, Waterloo City Centre, Waterloo, Ontario, by calling Natalie Hardacre at 519.747.6108 or by email at [email protected]

Council Meeting Page 394 of 409 August 10, 2015

Council Meeting Page 395 of 409 August 10, 2015 NOTICE OF A FORMAL PUBLIC MEETING

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15-07 Activa Holdings Inc. Carriage Crossing Subdivision, Ward 4- Northeast

Take notice that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Waterloo will hold a Formal Public Meeting on Monday, August 10, 2015, at a time to be determined, in the Council Chambers, 3rd Floor, Waterloo City Centre, 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, to consider the above noted application to amend the Zoning By-law pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act.

The applicant is proposing to amend the City’s Zoning By-law No. 1418 to increase the maximum permitted coverage of all buildings on the lot to 40%, whereas the by-law currently permits a maximum coverage of 33% for the main building and 10% for accessory buildings on the lot.

This meeting shall constitute the formal public meeting required under Section 34 of The Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990, as amended. It is expected that Council will decide whether the application should be approved, denied or amended. A copy of the staff report will be available prior to the Public Meeting.

If Council approves the application, a by-law to amend the Zoning By-law will be passed.

For further information regarding the above matter, please contact the City of Waterloo Integrated Planning and Public Works, 2nd Floor, Waterloo City Centre, Waterloo, Ontario, by calling Natalie Stopar at 519.886.1551 ext. 2200 or email [email protected]

Any person may attend the Public Meeting and/or make a written or verbal representation either in support of, or in opposition to the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment. If you wish to make a presentation to Council or would like more information about the meeting, please contact Lissy Mackinnon at 519.747.8549 or by email at [email protected]

A written summary of the presentation should be filed with the City Clerk prior to the public meeting.

We encourage the public to provide input into this important Zoning By-law Amendment application. Individuals may submit written/electronic comments. The public is informed and notified that names, addresses and comments may be made public.

If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Corporation of the City of Waterloo before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of Council to the Ontario Municipal Board. In addition, if a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public

Council Meeting Page 396 of 409 August 10, 2015 meeting, or make written submissions to the Corporation of the City of Waterloo before the by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Olga Smith, City Clerk, City of Waterloo

Council Meeting Page 397 of 409 August 10, 2015 1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Planning Approvals

Title: Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15-07, Activa Holdings Inc., Part of the Carriage Crossing Subdivision (58M-506) Report Number: IPPW2015-068 Author: Natalie Stopar Meeting Type: Council Meeting Council/Committee Date: August 10, 2015 File: Z-15-07 Attachments: Appendix A –Agency Comments Map 1-Lands Subject to Zone Change Ward No.: 4-Northeast Ward

Recommendation:

1. That IPPW2015-068 be approved.

2. That Council approve Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15-07 for the lands identified on Map 1 of IPPW2015-68, being part of Registered Plan 58M-506 (“Activa - Carriage Crossing”), in accordance with Section 7 of IPPW2015-068.

A. Executive Summary The Applicant is requesting to amend Zoning By-law 1418 for multiple lots within the Carriage Crossing subdivision (see Map 1) to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage for all buildings on a lot to 40%, whereas the by-law currently permits a maximum coverage of 33% for the main building and 10% for accessory buildings. The application is being advanced in order to permit greater flexibility in home design, to allow for larger homes on select lots within the Carriage Crossing subdivision, and to create consistency in lot coverage permissions with adjacent properties.

Based on IPPWs’ review of the application, we support the approval of Z-15-07 in accordance with Section 7 of IPPW2015-068, for the following reasons: • the application is consistent with the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; • the application conforms to the Regional Official Plan (ROP); • the application conforms to the City of Waterloo (OP) and Rural East District Plan;

Council Meeting Page 398 of 409 August 10, 2015 2 Integrated Planning & Public Works

• the application combines existing lot coverage permissions (33% for main building plus 10% for accessory structures) into a single regulation for all buildings (40%); • the increase in lot coverage will allow for larger homes which are suitable in this subdivision context, relative to lot sizes; • the increase in lot coverage will allow for greater flexibility in house design, which can enhance the built form and character of the homes and neighbourhood; • there are no adverse impacts to grading and drainage; and • that applicant has not requested any relief from the yard setbacks of the by-law, which will ensure that amenity space for each lot is maintained.

B. Financial Implications Staff are not aware of any municipal financial implications with respect to the requested application. Should the application be appealed, potential costs related to an Ontario Municipal Board hearing may be incurred.

C. Technology Implications Staff is not aware of any technology implications.

D. Legal Considerations Staff did not seek legal advice.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15-07 supports the City’s Strategic Plan by contributing towards Economic Development and a Strong Community by: • increasing the assessed value of the lands if larger homes are constructed; and • increasing neighbourhood vibrancy.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic The following Zoning By-law Amendment applications have previously been approved to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage on select lots within the Carriage Crossing subdivision:

DS2011-07 Zoning By-law Amendment Z-11-11 to add a site specific provision to smaller lots zoned Single Residence One (SR1) to increase the maximum coverage on the lot for all buildings to 40%.

DS2011-031 Zoning By-law Amendment Z-11-07 to remove the provision related to lot coverage for lots zoned Multiple Residence Four/ Medium Density Three (MR4/MD3), provided that a minimum of 30% of the lot is maintained as landscaped open space.

Council Meeting Page 399 of 409 August 10, 2015 3 Integrated Planning & Public Works

G. Approvals Name Signature Date

Author: Natalie Stopar Director: Joel Cotter Commissioner: Cameron Rapp Finance:N/A

CAO

Council Meeting Page 400 of 409 August 10, 2015 4 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15-07, Activa Holdings Inc., Part of the Carriage Crossing Subdivision (58M-506) IPPW2015-068

SECTION 1 – SUBJECT LANDS

Location Part of the Carriage Crossing Subdivision (see inset map) Ward 4-Northeast Ward Lot Size Varies Land Owner Activa Holdings Inc. Applicant Activa Holdings Inc. Existing Land Use Vacant residential lots Proposed Land Use Single detached dwellings

Public Input The Informal Public Meeting was waived because the application is minor and holding of such a meeting is not warranted. Section 12.4.2(5)(a) of the City of Waterloo Official Plan allows for an Informal Public Meeting to be waived for these reasons. In lieu of an Informal Public Meeting, staff has provided more than 30 days’ notice of the Formal Public Meeting.

Public and agency comments received have been considered during the preparation of this report.

SECTION 2 – SUBJECT LANDS

The subject lands are located within the Carriage Crossing Plan of Subdivision 58M- 506, which is designed to include a mix of residential uses (single detached dwellings, townhouses, and apartment buildings), and complementary commercial and employment uses. Houses have been built on some of the lots within the subdivision, and many of the homes are occupied. The lands subject to this application are planned for single detached dwellings, and the majority of the lots are vacant at this time.

Council Meeting Page 401 of 409 August 10, 2015 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works

SECTION 3 – APPLICATION

To amend Zoning By-law 1418 on select lots within the Carriage Crossing Subdivision (58M-506) to permit a maximum lot coverage of 40% for all buildings on a lot, whereas the by-law currently permits a maximum lot coverage of 33% for the main building and 10% for accessory buildings.

SECTION 4 – POLICY EVALUATION

Regional & Provincial Policies In staffs’ opinion, the application conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Regional Official Plan (ROP), and is consistent with the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement.

Official Plan The application conforms to the Low Density Residential designation in the Official Plan.

Rural East District Plan The application conforms to the Low Density Residential designation in the District Plan.

There is a policy in the District Plan that requires adequate privacy conditions and outdoor amenity areas. The properties will contain single detached dwellings, and no reductions to the yard setbacks are requested to maintain privacy conditions and outdoor amenity areas.

SECTION 5 – PLANNING EVALUATION

Two previous Zoning By-law Amendment applications have been approved to increase the maximum lot coverage for certain lands within the Carriage Crossing subdivision:

a) The first application removed the lot coverage requirement for linear townhouse dwellings on lands zoned MR4/MD3, provided that a minimum landscaped open space area of 30% is maintained (Z-11-07).

b) The second application increased the maximum lot coverage to 40% for smaller lots zoned SR1 in the subdivision, to permit larger homes and to increase flexibility in home designs (Z-11-11).

The applicant is requesting an increase in the maximum lot coverage for the remaining SR1 zoned lots in the subdivision, which were not subject to the previous Zoning By-law Amendment application (Z-11-11). The request is to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage for all buildings on a lot to 40%, whereas the by-law currently permits a maximum coverage of 33% for the main building and 10% for accessory buildings.

Council Meeting Page 402 of 409 August 10, 2015 6 Integrated Planning & Public Works

This would permit the same lot coverage as the smaller lots in the subdivision zoned SR1. The applicant’s request is premised on increasing flexibility in building designs and to permit larger homes while still maintaining standard setbacks from the lot lines.

Lot coverage regulations are applied in most low density residential zones in conjunction with yard setbacks to ensure that a building does not overwhelm the lot and that an appropriate amount of outdoor amenity space is maintained. Adjusting the maximum lot coverage requirement for the subject properties from the ‘main building plus accessory structures’ to ‘all buildings’, while maintaining standard yard setbacks, allows for greater flexibility in home design, while ensuring that the lot is not overbuilt and adequate amenity space is preserved.

With respect to home designs, many of the single detached dwellings constructed in the neighbourhood include projecting architectural features that increase the building coverage on the lot, such as large entrance features and covered porches in the rear yard (see inset pictures). Such architectural features enhance the character of the neighbourhood, in staff’s opinion.

In terms of engineering, increasing the maximum lot coverage will not adversely affect stormwater management, drainage, or grading within the subdivision.

SECTION 6 – CONCLUSION

Based on staffs’ review of the application, we support Zoning By-law Amendment Z-15- 07 for reasons including: • the application is consistent with the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; • the application conforms to the Regional Official Plan (ROP); • the application conforms to the City of Waterloo (OP) and Rural East District Plan;

Council Meeting Page 403 of 409 August 10, 2015 7 Integrated Planning & Public Works

SECTION 7 – RECOMMENDATION

That Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-15-07, Activa Holdings Inc, for part of the Carriage Crossing Subdivision (Registered Plan 58M-506), be approved as follows:

1. That By-Law No. 1418 is hereby amended by adding the following site specific regulation to the existing Single Residence One (SR1) zoning applied to the lands shown on Map 1 attached hereto and illustrated as ‘Subject Properties’:

1.1 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary including Sections 29.7.6.1 and 29.7.6.2, the maximum lot coverage of all buildings shall not exceed forty percent (40%).

Prepared by:

Natalie Stopar BES, MPA Development Planner Planning Approvals Division [email protected]

Council Meeting Page 404 of 409 August 10, 2015 8 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Appendix A Agency Comments

No Comments or Concerns: • Waterloo Fire Rescue (City of Waterloo –Protective Services (Fire) • City of Kitchener Engineering Division • Township of Woolwich • Waterloo Region District School Board • City of Waterloo Engineering Services

Comment Summaries • Growth Management o No concerns provided that amenity space is maintained o Confirmation is needed that the proposed lot coverage increase will not conflict with the stormwater management strategy or reduce surface water and/or groundwater inputs to the adjacent provincially significant wetlands and woodlands. • GRCA o No concerns, provided that the stormwater is managed in accordance with previously approved plans for the subdivision.

Council Meeting Page 405 of 409 August 10, 2015 9 Integrated Planning & Public Works

Map 1

Lands Subject to Zone Change

Council Meeting Page 406 of 409 August 10, 2015 Council Info

From the June 3, 2015 Regional Council meeting:

Council Info is a summary of discussion and the major items presented at Council meetings. It is circulated immediately following each meeting. You are encouraged to quote from and copy this information. Please refer to the minutes for an official record of the meeting. Watch the Regional Council webcast

Region approves 2015 grants to 15 community organizations

Council has approved $230,881 in grants for community organizations to help enhance the social wellbeing of the region. Some of the largest grant requests came from: Leadership Waterloo Region; Volunteer Action Centre; Food Bank of Waterloo Region; Canadian Mental Health Association and Community Justice Initiatives. Other recipients include Woolwich Community Services, K-W Multicultural Centre, Wilmot Family Resources Centre and more.

Council approves one-time grant to Langs

Council approved a one-time capital grant of $25,000 to Langs, a health, wellness and community centre in Cambridge. Langs has been a long standing partner in a number of program areas. This grant would be consistent with grants given to other partner counselling agencies.

Council supports the development of a Community Energy Investment Strategy

The Region of Waterloo and local partners will initiate the development of a Community Energy Investment Strategy. This initiative will build on the successful local collaboration established in the community for climate action (i.e. greenhouse gas emission reduction targets). The strategy would achieve priorities such as economic development and community building in designated growth areas and will complement infrastructure master plans.

Council approves alignment of waste collection at some multi-residential properties

Regional Council approved a plan to address existing waste collection inconsistencies at some multi-residential complexes that currently receive curbside collection, as they do not comply with the approved multi-residential collection policy. The phase-out of collection service at these large complexes and businesses will be aligned with the end of the current waste collection contract (March 2017). A lengthy notice period will give landlords, condominium corporations and businesses sufficient time to make any necessary changes. About 180 properties and 250 commercial establishments will be affected by this change.

Council Meeting Page 407 of 409 August 10, 2015 Supportive housing standards

Council approved the Region's Community Homelessness Prevention Initiative (CHPI) supportive housing program standards. As the local service manager for housing and homelessness, the Region is required to develop and implement these standards, which outline new performance expectations and quality assurance processes for supportive housing. The standards were developed through community consultation and with insight from past Regional quality assurance initiatives. They will be implemented in April 2016.

Accommodation fees at Sunnyside Home

Council approved new preferred accommodation rates for the Region's long-term care facility, Sunnyside Home. For residents admitted into private accommodation after July 1, 2015, the daily charge will be $25 per day in addition to the basic accommodation rate. The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care regulates basic accommodation fees, which cover non-nursing related costs (food, laundry, housekeeping, etc.) These rates will increase by 2.5 per cent to $58.35 per day. Residents who cannot afford the basic accommodation rate will be charged a reduced fee based on income.

Tourist train agreement extended

The Southern Ontario Locomotive Restoration Society (SOLRS) has operated a tourist train service since 2007. Due to ION construction on the Waterloo Spur Line, SOLRS can no longer use the this line and has temporarily relocated its operations to run from Waterloo's Farmers Market to Elmira. Regional Council has approved an extension of the existing agreement for an additional 12 months to accommodate the ongoing tourist train operations.

Social Development Programs Grants approved

Council approved grants totalling $2,217,981 for the Region's Social Development Programs, which fund, monitor and facilitate programs that reduce the negative impacts of poverty on families with children. These programs include the Community Outreach Program, Counselling Collaborative, Emergency Food Hampers, Onsite Counselling, and Parenting Group Program. The Region has service agreements with 22 agencies that work together with support from staff to deliver services across Waterloo Region.

Portion of Waterloo Street in Kitchener to be permanently closed

In order to accommodate the construction of the King Street grade separation (part of the ION Light Rail Transit project), Regional Council approved the permanent closure of Waterloo Street from Victoria to Breithaupt Streets.

Council Meeting Page 408 of 409 August 10, 2015 Tenders/Contracts:

The following tenders/contracts were approved by Council:

- 14,329,257.67 to E. & E. Seegmiller Ltd. for Franklin Blvd. improvements. Including an increase of project costs of $1,303,702.45 for work undertaken on behalf of the City of Cambridge. - 1,414,377 to Dillon Consulting Ltd. for engineering services for the Region's Biosolids Master Plan. - $711,617.50 to Demers Ambulances Inc. for the purchase of five ambulances. - $696,135.37 to Delta Elevator Co. Ltd for elevator modernization at the 99 Regina St. building. - $496,595 to CIMA Canada Inc. to provide consulting engineering services for updating the Region's Wastewater Treatment Master Plan. - $438,440 to Vipond Inc. for a fire suppression system replacement at the Materials Recycling Centre. - $371,770 to Hardscape Concrete & Interlock for the GRT Ainslie Street Terminal Redesign. - $227,964.60 to G-Tel Engineering for performing locates for Region underground infrastructure in water, sanitary and storm water systems. - $204,962.93 to Hotz Environmental Services Inc. for transportation and processing of municipal hazardous or special waste.

Next Meeting...Wed., August 19, 2015 at 7 p.m.

For further information, contact:

Bryan Stortz, Director, Corporate Communications, 519-575-4408 Or the Regional Clerk's Office, 519-575-4420

Council Meeting Page 409 of 409 August 10, 2015