Body: Council Type: Agenda Meeting: Regular Date: May 16, 2018 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: Frontenac County

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/frontenac-county/Published Agendas/Regular Council/2018/Regular Council - 16 May 2018 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

Frontenac County Council Meeting Wednesday, May 16, 2018 – 9:30 a.m. The Kingston Frontenac Rotary Auditorium 2069 Battersea Road, Glenburnie, ON

AGENDA Page Call to Order Closed Session Approval of Addendum Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof

12 - 25

Adoption of Minutes a) Minutes of Meeting held April 18, 2018 Resolved That the minutes of the regular Council meeting held April 18, 2018 be adopted. Deputations and/or Presentations

26 - 48

a)

Ms. Juliane Porritt, Napanee OPP Community Safety Officer will address County Council regarding the First Responders for PTSD Golf Tournament being held June 8, including her own personal journey with PTSD. Ms. Elizabeth Bailey of Kingston 4 Paws Service Dogs will also form part of this deputation. Frontenac Paramedic Services is helping to organize this event.

b)

Lisa Severson, Communications and Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN and Stéphane P Parisien, Co-Lead, EORN and Chief Administrative Officer, United Counties of Prescott-Russell will address County Council with respect to mobile broadband. [See Recommend Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer clauses k) and l)]

Proclamations a) Seniors’ Month - June 1 to June 30, 2018 [See Communications p)]

Page Whereas Seniors’ Month is an annual province-wide celebration; and, Whereas seniors have contributed and continue to contribute immensely to the life and vibrancy of this community; and, Whereas seniors continue to serve as leaders, mentors, volunteers and important and active members of this community; and, Whereas their contributions past and present warrant appreciation and recognition and their stories deserve to be told; and, Whereas the health and well-being of seniors is in the interest of all and further adds to the health and well-being of the community; and, Whereas the knowledge and experience seniors pass on to us continues to benefit all: Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac does hereby proclaim June 1 to June 30, 2018 as Seniors’ Month in Frontenac County and encourages all citizens to recognize and celebrate the accomplishments of our seniors. b)

Local Food Week - June 3-9, 2018. Whereas Ontario’s diverse and extensive agri-food sector supports more than 781,000 jobs – approximately one in every nine jobs across the province and contributes more than $35 billion annually to Ontario’s GDP; and, Whereas the County of Frontenac is rich in agricultural resources that contribute to the community and the economy; and, Whereas the County of Frontenac supports the multipronged local food strategy developed by the Province of Ontario, with a clear vision, mission and goals focused on increasing the consumption of local food by bringing more local food to the places where Ontarians shop and eat; and, Whereas the Economic Development Charter for the Frontenacs includes Local Food and Beverage as one of the three focus areas for strengthening the Frontenac economy; and, Whereas Local Food Week is an opportunity to highlight the Provinces local food strategy and demonstrate how it aims to cultivate a prosperous food system in the County of Frontenac;

Page 2 of 420

Page

Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac hereby proclaims June 3rd to June 9th, 2018 as Local Food Week in the County of Frontenac and encourages all residents to enjoy local food more often and in more places. Move into Committee of the Whole a) That Council adjourn and meet as Committee of the Whole Council, with the Deputy Warden in the Chair.

49 - 65

Briefings a) Mr. Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer, will provide Council with his monthly CAO briefing. Unfinished Business

66 - 128

Recommend Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer a) Staff Briefing: Mr. Jon Allison, of Jon Allison Design, will provide County Council with a presentation of Fairmount Homes brand identity.

129 - 193

b)

2018-062 Fairmount Home Brand Identity Recommendation Whereas the County of Frontenac brand identity was approved in 2016 and Fairmount Home requires a branding strategy to establish its own unique identity; Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Fairmount Home branding strategy and positioning as well as the brand identity and design; And Further That Council direct staff to implement the Fairmount Home brand identity and design in the operations of the long-term care home.

194 - 201

c)

Staff Briefing: Mr. Kevin Farrell, Manager of Continuous Improvement/GIS, will provide County Council with a briefing on the County’s Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) in relation to the Report 2018-063, Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy and Related Projects. [See Recommend Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer, clause d)]

202 - 212

d)

2018-063

Page 3 of 420

Page Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy and Related Projects Recommendation: ResolvedThat the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Report – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy and Related projects report for information; And FurtherThat the Council of the County of Frontenac approves as follows:

1. That staff immediately commence the Request for Proposals (RFP) for a facilitator to commence the 2018 public consultation process for the 2019-2022 County strategic plan as outlined in the report;
2. That staff be directed to include in the 2019 County budget for consideration a line item to complete the 2019-2022 County strategic plan process;
3. That staff be directed to include in the 2019 County budget for consideration a line item to complete the Operational Review and Master Plan – Frontenac Paramedic Services 213 - 215

e)

2018-066 Emergency and Transportation Services Psychological Health and Safety in the Paramedic Service Organization Recommendation: Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Emergency and Transportation Services – Psychological Health and Safety in the Paramedic Service Organization Standard report for information, And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac adopt the Psychological Health and Safety in the Paramedic Service Organization Standard as best practice and research, as well as key guidance and concepts in the continued development of Frontenac Paramedic Services Mental Wellness Program for its paramedics.

216 - 218

f)

2018-061 Planning and Economic Development Request by Tourism Kingston to support the Kingston 2020 Brier Bid Recommendation:

Page 4 of 420

Page

Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Planning and Economic Development – Request by Tourism Kingston to support the Kingston 2020 Brier Bid report for information; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac support the bid by Tourism Kingston to host the 2020 Brier; And Further That Council authorizes staff to purchase a Community Supporter Package, noted in the Corporate Ticket Packages in the amount of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) to be expensed from the existing Economic Development operating budget. 219 - 363

g)

2018-067 Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Request by the Township of North Frontenac to Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing Recommendation: Resolved That the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer – Request by the Township of North Frontenac to Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing report be placed on the floor for discussion.

364 - 366

h)

2018-068 Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Joint Council Compensation Survey; Joint Management/Non-Union Market Compensation Survey Recommendation: Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Office of Chief Administrative Officer – Joint Council Compensation Survey; Joint Management/Non-Union Market Compensation Survey report for information; And FurtherThatCouncil authorize the use of consultant Krecklo & Associates Inc. to complete the Joint Council Compensation Survey; Joint Management/Non-Union Market Compensation Survey in conjunction with the compensation surveys for North Frontenac Township, Central Frontenac Township and the Township of Frontenac Islands.

367 - 368

i)

2018-069 Planning and Economic Development Use of Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund with K&P Trail Recommendation:

Page 5 of 420

Page

Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Planning and Economic Development – Use of Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund with K&P Trail report for information; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac Authorize staff to enter into an agreement with the Township of Central Frontenac to transfer its 2018 Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund allocation in the amount of $50,000 for the purposes of completing infrastructure improvements on Hampton and Tryon Roads. 369 - 370

j)

2018-075 Office of the Chief Administrative Officer EORN Broadband Project - Request for Funding Recommendation: Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN) Broadband Project report; Further That Council support the funding request in the 2018 County budget in the amount of $40,000, with funds to be taken from the Stabilization Reserve.

371 - 374

k)

2018-076 Office of the Chief Administrative Officer EORN Cell Gap Capacity Expansion Project - Request for Funding Recommendation: Whereas at the April 19-20, 2018 meeting of the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC) a motion was passed recommending a funding for the distribution of costs related to the Eastern Ontario Regional Network’s cell gap project; Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN) Cell Gap Capacity Expansion Project report; Further That Council support the funding request in the 2019 County budget in the amount of $400,000, with final funding to be determined as part of the 2019 budget process; Further That Council express their sincere appreciation to EORN and the EOWC for their efforts to improve cellular coverage and capacity in Frontenac County and Eastern Ontario.

Page 6 of 420

Page

375 - 400

Information Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer a) 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation Services 2017 Year in Review

401 - 405

b)

2018-065 Emergency and Transportation Services Medical Tiered Response Program Agreement - Criteria

406 - 408

c)

2018-077 Fairmount Home Quarterly Update Activity Report

Reports from Council Liaison Appointees a) Emergency and Transportation Services - Councillor Nossal b)

Long Term Care (Fairmount Home) - Councillor Inglis

c)

Corporate Services - Councillor Dewey

d)

Planning and Economic Development - Councillor McDougall

Reports from External Boards and Committees a) Kingston Frontenac Library Board Update - Councillor Nossal

409 - 414

b)

KFL&A Public Health Board Update - Deputy Warden Doyle

c)

RULAC, LSR and other Updates

d)

Algonquin Land Claim Update - Councillor Inglis

e)

Housing and Homelessness Committee Update - Councillor McDougall

f)

Food Policy Council of Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox and Addington Deputy Warden Doyle

Reports from Advisory Committees of County Council a) Report of the Community Development Advisory Committee All items listed on the Community Development Advisory Committee Report shall be the subject of one motion. Any member of County Council may ask for any item(s) included in the Community Development Advisory Committee Report to be separated from that motion and considered separately, whereupon the Community Development Advisory Committee Report without the separated item(s) shall be put to the vote and the separated item(s) shall be considered immediately thereafter. That the Report received from the Community Development Advisory Committee be received and adopted.

Page 7 of 420

Page Report of the Community Development Advisory Committee The Community Development Advisory Committee reports and recommends as follows: 1.

2018-073 Community Development Advisory Committee Motorized Vehicles on K&P Trail Be It Resolved That motorized off-road vehicles not be permitted access to the K&P Trail from Bellrock Road to Craig Road as per current policy; And Further That ATV detour signage be established from the Trailhead location through the village of Verona along Road 38 to the K&P Trail intersection at Craig Road; And Further That the County of Frontenac remain open to options for future access from the Verona Street portion of the K&P Trail to Road 38.

Return to Council a) That Council revert from Committee of the Whole Council, to Council.

Adoption of the Report of the Committee of the Whole Council a) That the report of the Committee of the Whole Council be adopted and that the necessary actions or by-laws be enacted. Motions, Notice of Which has Been Given Giving Notice of Motion Communications That Council consent to the following communications of interest to Council listed below be received and filed: a) From the Corporation of the Town of Amherstburg at a Regular meeting on April 9, 2018 Council has passed the following Resolution #20180409-107 [Distributed to Members of County Council April 20, 2018] b)

From the Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs are accepting

Page 8 of 420

Page Applications for 2018 [Distributed to Members of County Council April 20, 2018] c)

From the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration, encourage to submit a nomination for the Champion of Diversity Award 2018 [Distributed to Members of County Council April 20, 2018]

d)

From AMO regarding the 2018 – 2020 board of Directors Call for Nominations [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

e)

From Ross Sutherland Councillor of South Frontenac, Loughborough District regarding Johnston’s Point [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

f)

From Meela Melnik-Proud, Matt Rennie and Evonne Potts regarding Johnston’s Point [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

g)

From the KFL&A Board of Health General providing its Meeting Minutes for March 28, 2018 [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

h)

From the Municipality of East Ferris regarding its Council resolution addressing the wolf population. [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

i)

From the Township of Uxbridge regarding Council resolution addressing Bill 16, Respecting Municipal Authority over landfilling sites, File A-00G [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

j)

From the Kingston Frontenac Public Library providing the County of Frontenac with an Annual report regarding the success from the past year. [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

k)

Memorandum to County Council from the Director of Planning and Economic Development regarding Johnston Point [Distributed to Members of County Council April 27, 2018]

l)

From the City of Kingston providing the County of Frontenac with a Housing and Homelessness Report May 1, 2018. [Distributed to Members of County Council May 4, 2018]

m)

From the Town of Lakeshore regarding Renovation and Demolition of buildings with Hazardous Materials [Distributed to Members of County Council May 4, 2018]

n)

From Morrison Hershfield LTD a Notice of Study Commencement regarding Wolfe Island Ferry Dock [Distributed to Members of County Council May 4, 2018]

o)

From the Kingston and Frontenac Housing Corporation with an Agenda 04-2018

Page 9 of 420

Page [Distributed to Members of County Council May 4, 2018] p)

From the Minister of Seniors Affairs regarding that June is Ontario’s 34th annual Seniors Month [Distributed to Members of County Council May 11, 2018]

q)

From the County of Renfrew regarding Notice of the Adoption of an Official Plan Amendment [Distributed to Members of County Council May 11, 2018]

r)

From CYSPC an Invitation and the Agenda for the Annual Community Dialogue [Distributed to Members of County Council May 11, 2018]

s)

From East Ferris Municipality regarding Regular Council Meeting, May 8, 2018 [Distributed to Members of County Council May 11, 2018]

t)

From Environmental Commissioner of Ontario regarding Environment, Energy and Climate Resources for Municipalities [Distributed to Members of County Council May 11, 2018]

u)

From EEDI and TREC Solarshare regarding an Notice of a Proposal to engage in a Solar Facilities LT 10 in Central Frontenac Township. [Distributed to Members of County Council May 11, 2018]

v)

From EEDI and TREC Solarshare regarding an Notice of a Proposal to engage in a Solar Facilities LT 11 in Central Frontenac Township [Distributed to Members to County Council May 11,2018]

w)

From the EOLC providing its Communications Update April-May 2018 [Distributed to Members of County Council May 11, 2018]

Other Business Public Question Period By-Laws – General By-laws and Confirmatory By-law a) First and Second Reading Resolved That leave be given the mover to introduce by-laws a) through c) that have been circulated to all Members of County Council and that by-laws a) through c) be read a first and second time. b)

Third Reading Resolved That by-laws a) through c) be read a third time, signed, sealed and finally passed. By-Laws

Page 10 of 420

Page 415 - 417

a)

To approve the expropriation of lands [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0020]

418

b)

To Authorize the Execution of an Agreement with the Township of Central Frontenac to transfer the 2018 Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund allocation in the amount of $50,000 for the purposes of completing infrastructure improvements on Hampton and Tryon Roads. [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0021]

419 - 420

c)

Confirmation of Proceedings

Adjournment

Page 11 of 420

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Council April 18, 2018 A regular meeting of the Council of the County of Frontenac was held in the Kingston Frontenac Rotary Auditorium of the County Administrative Office, 2069 Battersea Road, Glenburnie on Wednesday, April 18, 2018 and was called to order at 9:00 a.m. Regular business commenced at 9:30 a.m. There was a “Closed Meeting” of the Committee of the Whole from 9:00 a.m. to 9:17 a.m. Present:

Warden Ron Higgins, Deputy Warden Denis Doyle, Councillors Ron Vandewal, Fran Smith, Natalie Nossal, Tom Dewey, John Inglis and John McDougall

Also Present:

County: Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer Paul Charbonneau, Chief/Director of Emergency and Transportation Services Gale Chevalier, Deputy Chief of Operations Joe Gallivan, Director of Planning and Economic Development Susan Brant, Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer Jannette Amini, Manager of Legislative Services/Clerk Richard Allen, Manager of Economic Development Marco Smits, Communications Officer

Closed Session Motion #: 58-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor McDougall Councillor Inglis

Resolved That Council resolve itself into Committee of the Whole closed session as authorized under Section 239 of The Municipal Act, to consider:

1. Adoption of Closed Minutes of Meetings held March 21, 2018;
2. Advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose - as it relates to tiered response agreements and the collection use and disclosure of personal health information;
3. A proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board - as it relates to the expropriation of lands for the K&P Trail. Carried

Page 1218, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Motion #: 59-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Vandewal Deputy Warden Doyle

Resolved That Council rise from Committee of the Whole closed session without reporting Carried Approval of Addendum Motion #: 60-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor McDougall Councillor Smith

Resolved That Procedural By-law 2013-0020, section 17.7 be waived to permit the deputation of Ms. Meela Melnik-Proud and Ms. Sarah Harmer to address Council. Carried (a 2/3 vote was received) Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof There were none. Adoption of Minutes a)

Minutes of Meeting held March 21, 2018

Motion #: 61-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Smith Councillor Nossal

Resolved That the minutes of the regular Council meeting held March 21, 2018 be adopted. Carried Deputations and/or Presentations a)

Mr. Murray Matheson, Chair of the Tourism Kingston Board addressed County Council regarding the Kingston 2020 Brier Bid.

b)

Dr Moore, Medical Officer of Health, and Alida Moffatt, Manager of Finance, KFL&A Public Health, provided County Council with a presentation on how the County of Frontenac’s financial contribution to KFL&A Public Health is used.

c)

Ms. Meela Melnik-Proud and Ms. Sarah Harmer, on behalf of the Lake Residents addressed County Council with respect to significant site

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 1318, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 2 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

alterations and clearing that have been observed on Johnson Point along with a legal opinion from Donnelly Law regarding the Ontario Municipal Board Rule 106 of Procedure for investigation of a possible violation of the Conditions of Approval. A 2/3 vote was received at the approval of the addendum to permit this deputation to address County Council. Proclamations a)

Paramedic Services Week Paramedics: Health-Community-You May 27th to June 2nd, 2018

Motion #: 62-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Nossal Councillor Dewey

Whereas each year the paramedics of Frontenac Paramedic Services will respond to approximately 22,000 calls for assistance from the public; And Whereas the paramedics are ready to provide lifesaving care to those in need 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year; And Whereas access to quality emergency medical care dramatically improves the survival and recovery rate of those who experience sudden illness or injury; And Whereas the members of paramedic services teams, engage in thousands of hours of specialized training and continuing education to enhance their life saving skills; And Whereas the members of paramedic services teams often find themselves in dangerous and traumatic situations requiring spontaneous decision-making; And Whereas the members of paramedic services teams provide a vital pre-hospital service to the residents of the geographic area of the County of Frontenac and the City of Kingston; Therefore Be It Resolved That the week of May 27 to June 2, 2018 be proclaimed Paramedic Services Week in the County of Frontenac with the theme of “Paramedics: Health-Community-You “. Carried b)

Emergency Preparedness Week May 6 to May 12, 2018

Motion #: 63-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Nossal Councillor McDougall

Whereas the Council of the County of Frontenac recognizes the importance of everybody being prepared for emergencies;

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 1418, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 3 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

And Whereas the goal of Emergency Preparedness Week is to raise community awareness and the need to prepare for the possibility of an emergency; And Whereas the safety of our community is the responsibility of each and every one of us, we must prepare now and learn how to secure a strong and healthy tomorrow; Now Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac hereby proclaim the week of May 6 to May 12, 2018, to be Emergency Preparedness Week throughout the County of Frontenac with the theme of “Emergency preparedness starts with you, #Prepare Your Selfie!”; And Further That all citizens are encouraged to make a plan, build a kit, stay informed and to participate in educational activities on emergency preparedness. Carried c)

National Access Awareness Week May 27 to June 2, 2018

Motion #: 64-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Dewey Councillor McDougall

Whereas Ontario became the first jurisdiction in Canada to legislate a framework and timeline for making Ontario accessible; And Whereas the goal of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) is to make Ontario fully accessible by 2025; And Whereas National Access Awareness Week was established in 1987 following Rick Hanson’s 40,000 km Man in Motion World Tour; And Whereas “As part of the legacy of the Man in Motion World Tour, the Rick Hansen Foundation provided strategic leadership to create and implement National Access Awareness Week (NAAW) in partnership with federal and provincial governments across the country. The purpose of the program was to promote better community access for people with disabilities.” And Whereas it is important to realize that accessibility for our province (and the entire world) does not just benefit one single person. Therefore Be It Resolved that the Council of the County of Frontenac does hereby proclaim the week of May 27 to June 2, 2018 as ‘National Access Awareness Week’ in the County of Frontenac and encourages all of its citizens to support and embrace raising awareness about disability and accessibility during this special week. Carried

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 1518, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 4 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Move into Committee of the Whole Motion #: 65-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Vandewal Councillor Smith

That Council adjourn and meet as Committee of the Whole Council, with the Deputy Warden in the Chair. Carried Council recessed at 10:30 a.m. Council reconvened at 10:37 a.m. Briefings a)

Mr. Howard Allan, Allan Chartered Accountant, provided County Council with a briefing regarding the 2017 County Audit.

b)

Mr. Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer, provided Council with his monthly CAO briefing. Unfinished Business  Recommend Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer

a)

2018-054 Planning and Economic Development Request by the Township of South Frontenac for the County of Frontenac to investigate a possible violation of conditions of approval of the Johnston’s Point Condominium development, County File 10CD2014-002

Motion #: 66-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Dewey Councillor Nossal

Be It Resolved That the Council of the County Council receive the Planning and Economic Development – Request by the Township of South Frontenac for the County of Frontenac to investigate a possible violation of conditions of approval of the Johnston’s Point Condominium development, County File 10CD-2014-002 report for information; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the legal opinion from its solicitor for Planning services in its correspondence dated April 9, 2018 that the County does not have the authority to change the conditions of draft approval nor can it compel a subdivider/owner to change or amend a draft condition of an OMB Order; Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 1618, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 5 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

And Further That a copy of this resolution and report be forwarded to the Township of South Frontenac. Carried b)

2018-051 Corporate Services 2017 County of Frontenac Audited Financial Statements

Motion #: 67-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Inglis Warden Higgins

Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac receive the Corporate Services 2017 Audited Financial Statements report; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac approve the 2017 Audited Financial Statements of the Corporation of the County of Frontenac. Carried c)

2018-050 Planning and Economic Development Frontenac Islands Waterfront Trail Agreements

Motion #: 68-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Nossal Councillor Smith

Whereas the Economic Development Charter for the Frontenacs highlights opportunities associated with trail development and a recreational lifestyle that highlights the natural assets of the Frontenac Region; And Whereas a connection to the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail will encourage additional exposure and promotion of the Frontenac region; Therefore Be It Resolved That the County of Frontenac advise the Waterfront Regeneration Trust that it wishes to participate in the extension of the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail through the Frontenac Islands and that it is willing to participate in the partnership program and contribute $500 to the Trust annually; And Further That Frontenac County advise the Waterfront Regeneration Trust that it will work in partnership with RTO 9 and the Township of the Frontenac Islands to install the required Great Lakes Waterfront Trail signage on roads which are under the Municipality’s jurisdiction and cover the one-time costs associated with digital and paper mapping; And Further That up to $10,000 be allocated from the Community Development Reserve to be used to match partnership funding from Regional Tourism Organization 9 (RTO 9) for the expansion of the Waterfront Trail to the Frontenac Islands,

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 1718, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 6 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

And Further That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to complete the necessary paperwork associated with the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail and RTO 9 partnership funding for the expansion of the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail. Carried (7:1) (See Recorded Vote) A recorded vote was requested by Warden Higgins Yeas:

Councillor Dewey, Deputy Warden Doyle, Councillor Inglis, Councillor McDougall, Councillor Nossal, Councillor Smith, Councillor Vandewal (7)

Nays:

Warden Higgins (1)

Absent:

(0)

d)

2018-055 Planning and Economic Development Ferry by Foot: Big Sandy Bay Weekend Shuttle Service (Pilot Program)

Motion #: 69-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor McDougall Councillor Dewey

Whereas County Staff are implementing a “Ferry by Foot” program to encourage visitors to Wolfe Island to experience the island through active transportation; And Whereas this program has been developed as part of the “Advancing Economic Development in the Frontenacs through Collaboration” Rural Economic Development funding program (RED); And Whereas RED does not fund transportation initiatives; Be It Resolved That up to $6,000 be allocated from Strategic Reserves to be used to match partnership funding from Regional Tourism Organization 9 (RTO 9) for a weekend shuttle service from Marysville to Big Sandy Bay in July and August of 2018; And Further That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to complete necessary paperwork associated with RTO 9 funding. Carried (6:2) (See Recorded Vote) A recorded vote was requested by Councillor Vandewal. Yeas:

Councillor Dewey, Deputy Warden Doyle, Councillor Inglis, Councillor McDougall, Councillor Nossal, Councillor Smith (6)

Nays:

Warden Higgins, Councillor Vandewal (2)

Absent:

(0)

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 1818, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 7 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

e)

2018-056 Planning and Economic Development Proposed Regional Gateway Sign Design and Locations

Motion #: 70-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Inglis Councillor Nossal

Whereas the RED funding agreement has been amended to include Gateway Signage as part of the Brand Recognition Campaign; Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac approve the concept design and proposed locations for regional gateway signage; And Further That staff be directed to seek approval from townships to install regional gateway signs in the road allowances as identified Appendix A of this report. Carried f)

2018-053 Emergency and Transportation Services Community Paramedicine – Overdose Prevention Site (OPS) at Street Health Centre

Motion #: 71-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Vandewal Councillor Smith

Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Emergency and Transportation Services – Overdose Prevention Site (OPS) at Street Health Centre report; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac authorize the Warden and Clerk to execute an agreement with the Kingston Community Health Centre for funding in the amount of $87,000, if the pilot OPS is approved for funding by the Government of Ontario. Carried Information Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer a)

b)

c)

2018-049 Corporate Services Finance 2018 Reserve and Reserve Funds 2018-052 Corporate Services 2017 County of Frontenac Investment Report 2018-057 Fairmount Home Public Posting of Home Performance Levels

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 1918, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 8 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Reports from Council Liaison Appointees a)

Emergency and Transportation Services - Councillor Nossal

No report was provided due to lack of time. b)

Long Term Care (Fairmount Home) - Councillor Inglis

No report was provided due to lack of time. c)

Corporate Services - Councillor Dewey

No report was provided due to lack of time. d)

Planning and Economic Development - Councillor McDougall

No report was provided due to lack of time. Reports from External Boards and Committees a)

Kingston Frontenac Library Board Update - Councillor Nossal

Councillor Nossal provided an overview of the Kingston, Frontenac Library Board activities since the last Council meeting. b)

KFL&A Public Health Board Update - Deputy Warden Doyle

Updates were provided during the KFL&A Public Health deputation. c)

RULAC, LSR and other Updates

No Report. d)

Algonquin Land Claim Update - Councillor Inglis

No Report. e)

Housing and Homelessness Committee Update - Councillor McDougall

Councillor McDougall provided an overview of the Housing and Homelessness Committee activities since the last Council meeting.

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 2018, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 9 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

f)

Food Policy Council of Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox and Addington Deputy Warden Doyle

No Report. Deputy Warden Doyle stepped down from the Chair and exited the meeting. Warden Higgins took the Chair. Reports from Advisory Committees of County Council a)

Report of the Planning Advisory Committee All items listed on the Planning Advisory Committee Report shall be the subject of one motion. Any member of County Council may ask for any item(s) included in the Planning Advisory Committee Report to be separated from that motion and considered separately, whereupon the Planning Advisory Committee Report without the separated item(s) shall be put to the vote and the separated item(s) shall be considered immediately thereafter.

Motion #: 72-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Smith Warden Higgins

That the Report received from the Planning Advisory Committee be received and adopted. Report of the Planning Advisory Committee The Planning Advisory Committee reports and recommends as follows: 1.

2018-046 Planning Advisory Committee Amendment Number 5 to the Township of Frontenac Islands Official Plan to re-designate lands legally described as Part Lot 16, South Range known municipally as 1729-1739 Howe Island Drive, Howe Island from Agriculture to Rural (St. Philomena Roman Catholic Church) – Frontenac Islands ByLaw No. 05-2018 Whereas the Council of the County of Frontenac considered all written and oral submissions received on this application, the effect of which helped Council to make an informed decision; Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac approve Frontenac Islands Official Plan Amendment No. 5 to the Township of Frontenac Islands Official Plan, as contained in By-Law No. 05-2018 attached to this report as Appendix A. Carried

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 2118, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 10 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Return to Council Motion #: 73-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Nossal Councillor Dewey

That Council revert from Committee of the Whole Council, to Council. Carried Adoption of the Report of the Committee of the Whole Council Motion #: 74-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Vandewal Councillor McDougall

That the report of the Committee of the Whole Council be adopted and that the necessary actions or by-laws be enacted. Carried Deputy Warden Doyle re-entered the meeting. Motions, Notice of Which has Been Given a)

Reopening of the Collins Bay and Joyceville Prison Farms Motion of Support to include Dairy Cows

Motion #: 75-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Deputy Warden Doyle Councillor Nossal

Whereas the County of Frontenac shares a common border with the City of Kingston and is primarily a rural municipality with agriculture as its heritage; and, Whereas a number of Frontenac County residents have been involved in the efforts not to close the Kingston prison farms and lobbied diligently to have them reopened, including the return of dairy cattle to the Collins Bay site; and, Whereasskilled workers are needed for all forms of dairy production and processing, and corrections staff and inmates at the Collins Bay Facility already have experience working with the dairy cows from the Prison farm herd; Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the Corporation of the County of Frontenac supports the reopening of the Kingston Prison Farms; And Further That the County of Frontenac respectfully request that dairy cattle be included in the initial phase of this project; And Further That the a copy of this resolution be sent to the Honourable Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Mark Gerretsen, M.P. Kingston and the Islands, Scott Reid, M.P. Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston, and the County of Frontenac’s member municipalities. Carried Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 2218, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 11 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Giving Notice of Motion a)

Motion to Support the Rural Mayors’ Forum of Eastern Ontario Equalization of Business Education Tax Rates

Deputy Warden Doyle provided a Notice of Motion for the May Council meeting to support the Rural Mayors Forum of Eastern Ontario quest for the equalization of business education tax rates. Communications That Council consent to the following communications of interest to Council listed below be received and filed: a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

f)

g)

h)

i)

j)

k)

From Abundant Solar Energy Inc. regarding ground mount solar array contract for 1322 Farm Lake Lane, North Frontenac. [Distributed to Members of County Council March 23, 2018] From Warden Higgins providing a copy of Rural Mayor’s Forum of Eastern Ontario (RMFEO) letter to Ontario’s Political Party Leaders. [Distributed to Members of County Council March 23, 2018] From the Ontario Honors and Awards Secretariat calling for Nominations for 2018 Senior of the year award. [Distributed to Members of County Council March 30, 2018] From the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) regarding reports from microFIT participants experiencing issues with third party service providers. [Distributed to Members of County Council March 30, 2018] From the Rideau Canal National Historic Site regarding Bobs Lake Dam Community Update. [Distributed to Members of County Council March 30, 2018] From Meredith Staveley-Watson providing a research report supporting Housing for Low Income Older Adults in Hastings County with Report Chart. [Distributed to Members of County Council March 30, 2018] From the Kingston & Frontenac Housing Corporation providing the Agenda Meeting 03-2018. [Distributed to Members of County Council March 30, 2018] From Kingston Frontenac Public Library providing the Minutes of Regular Meeting #2018-02. [Distributed to Members of County Council April 6, 2018] From the Township of South Frontenac requesting the County Investigate a possible Violation of Conditions of Approval for Johnston Point. [Distributed to Members of County Council April 6, 2018] Invitation to the Ontario Small Urban Municipalities 2018 Conference and Trade Show. [Distributed to Members of County Council April 6, 2018] From Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox and Addington (KFL&A) Board of Health providing its Minutes of Meeting held February 28 2018

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 2318, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 12 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

l)

m)

n)

[Distributed to Members of County Council April 6, 2018] From the Township of North Frontenac to Appoint an Alternate Member of County Council By Law #12-18 [Distributed to Members of County Council April 13, 2018] From Municipalities call on Province for “Right to Approve” Landfill Developments [Distributed to Members of County Council April 13, 2018] From the Corporation of the Township of Baldwin regarding Bill C-71, a request from Canadian Shooting Sports Association regarding a PAL for proof of Firearms [Distributed to Members of County Council April 13, 2018] Other Business

There was none. Public Question Period a)

Ms. Meela Melnik-Proud sought clarification regarding the County’s legal opinion with respect to the request by the Township of South Frontenac for the County of Frontenac to investigate a possible violation of conditions of approval of the Johnston’s Point Condominium development, County File 10CD-2014-002 and if the County would be taking any action. By-Laws – General By-laws and Confirmatory By-law

a)

First and Second Reading

Motion #: 76-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Vandewal Councillor Inglis

Resolved That leave be given the mover to introduce by-laws a) through d) that have been circulated to all Members of County Council and that by-laws a) through d) be read a first and second time. Carried b)

Third Reading

Motion #: 77-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor Vandewal Councillor Inglis

Resolved That by-laws a) through d) be read a third time, signed, sealed and finally passed. Carried

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 2418, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Page 13 of 14

AGENDA ITEM #a)

By-Laws a)

To Authorize the Warden and Clerk to Execute an Agreement with the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail and the Regional Tourism Organization 9 (RTO 9) for partnership funding for the expansion of the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0016]

b)

To authorize the Warden and Clerk to execute an agreement with the Kingston Community Health Centre for funding in the amount of $87,000. [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0017]

c)

To Authorize the Warden and Clerk to Execute an Agreement with the Regional Tourism Organization 9 (RTO 9) for partnership funding for the Ferry by Foot Program. [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0018]

d)

Confirmation of Proceedings [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0019] Adjournment

Motion #: 78-18

Moved By: Seconded By:

Councillor McDougall Deputy Warden Doyle

That the meeting hereby adjourn at 12:12 p.m. Carried

Ron Higgins, Warden

Regular Meeting of Council Minutes April 18, 2018

Page 2518, of2018 420 Minutes of Meeting held April

Jannette Amini, Clerk

Page 14 of 14

Presentation to Frontenac County May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 26 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Growing Eastern Ontario & Improving Public Safety Through Mobile Broadband

• EORN Project #1 - Update

• Improving Mobile Broadband/Cell Project • Addressing CRTC 50/10

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 27 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Agenda

 5,500 km+ of new GigE fiber core  160 enhanced Optical Ethernet POPs scalable to 100 Gigs per POP 

Last mile FW, ADSL, Satellite

 423,000 homes/business with access up to 10Mbps  63 fibered business parks  $175 million build ($260 value)  Connected 4 of 6 First Nations  Spurring $100m+ new investments

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 28 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

EORN Project #1

 50,000 sq km coverage area

Investment

Coverage

•

County Contribution =

•

Project Investments = $8,302,068*

•

Business Parks =

$501,577

•

ROI

15.4 to 1

•

*includes business parks

$539,589

•

Total HHs in County = 17,876

•

14,549 households covered @ up to 10Mbps

•

Represents 81.4% coverage @up to 10 Mbps

•

Also satellite coverage @ up to 10 Mbps

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 29 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Frontenac County

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 30 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Improving Mobile Broadband Coverage

Our #1 Priority!

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 31 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

EOWC/EORN Cell Project

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 32 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Phase 1: $213M PPP that will: • Grow the region’s economy and create jobs (+3,000) • Improve public safety • Improve health care delivery

• Support Ontario’s push to 5G & the new digital economy • Provide an additional option to connect to the Internet HOW? • Extend mobile broadband services to E. Ontario by improving existing cellular networks (closing coverage & capacity gaps)

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 33 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

What Is Being Proposed?

Current Combined Coverage

18% have no coverage 16% have inadequate coverage (one provider only)

Post Cell Gap Build Combined Coverage

Coverage gap reduced to <1%

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 34 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Coverage

2015 Combined Capacity

2018 Combined Capacity

*Capacity shortage will continue to grow beyond 2018 if nothing is done

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 35 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Capacity

Builds or Additional Radios

New Builds

75

Existing PS Colo

181

Existing Cell Colo 61 Small Cells

50

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 36 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Conceptual Design

• Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus

• Eastern Ontario Mayors’ Caucus • Canada • Ontario

• Mobile Carriers

12

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 37 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Who Are The Partners?

$10M ✓ $71M $71M ✓ $61M (rfp) $213M EOWC Canada Ontario Mobile Carriers Total

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 38 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Funding the Project

• Awaiting further direction from National PSBN discussions including: – Governance model; – Deployment methodologies; – Funding partners – Operating principles – Fees & charges

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 39 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Public Safety – Phase 2

• Formula based calculation: – Area charge = 20% weighted - based on square kms of members – Population = 40% weighted - based on member’s population* – Weighted Assessment = 40%*

$385,277 – $509,014*

• Payment Options – One time payment which earns 5% interest on a declining balance over a three year period from the above noted contribution amounts – Annual payment over a 4 year period - $96,319.25 – $127,253.50* •

• (if all EOMC members do not contribute)

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 40 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Frontenac County Contribution

Municipality Haliburton Hastings Kawartha Lakes Northumberland PEC Lennox & Addington Frontenac Leeds & Grenville Lanark SD&G Prescott & Russell Renfrew Peterborough

Min Expected Cost $ 437,034 504,395 705,021 658,053 232,716 414,899 385,277 625,532 573,561 567,218 672,061 895,237 671,477

Max Expected Cost $ 566,621 650,390 998,750 955,109 328,996 567,517 509,014 871,563 802,119 790,436 975,930 1,194,798 929,946

Min – assumes all 23 EOWC & EOMC members participate Max – assumes no separated municipalities participate 16

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 41 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

EOWC Member Contributions

Municipality Peterborough City Quinte West Belleville Kingston Gananoque Prescott Brockville Cornwall Pembroke Smiths Falls

Min Expected Cost $ 553,311 288,274 363,101 954,783 34,949 26,232 150,057 296,464 76,971 54,565

Max Expected Cost $ 758,192 407,043 511,058 1,222,264 52,452 39,548 220,435 424,724 114,500 81,826

Min – assumes all 23 EOWC & EOMC members participate Max – assumes all EOWC members participate and only your separated municipality participates

17

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 42 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

EOMC Contributions

Demand for bandwidth & speeds is growing at 50%+ year over year • 2010 - Federal target was 1.5Mpbs • 2015 - EORN delivers up to 10 : 1 to 89% of Eastern Ontario • 2016 - CRTC sets service level target of 50:10 for 90% of Canadians by 2021

18

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 43 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

The Evolution of the Broadband Landscape

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 44 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Addressing the CRTC Targets

• EOWC authorizes EORN to undertake detailed technical and financial analysis this year – Updated cell gap analysis – 5G readiness assessment – Fixed and wireless assessment to meet the 50/10+Mbps target – Done on a county by county basis (data available to County, local municipalities and EORN) – Est. cost $520,000

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 45 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

CRTC Targets

Approval for $40,000 as Frontenac County’s share of the 50 /10 Mbps+ study. Requesting funds by June 2018 AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 46 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

The Ask

• Provincial approval • Federal approval

Spring Summer

2018✓ 2018

• Negotiation of Contribution Agreement

Fall

2018

• Preparation of Build RFPs

Winter

2019

• Issuance of RFPs

Summer

2019

• Awards & Construction (begins)

Spring

2020 22

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 47 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Timelines

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Page 48 of and 420Stakeholder Relations Officer, EORN a… Lisa Severson , Communications

Questions????

May 16, 2018 Report 2018 -078

Page 49 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

Administrative Report

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 50 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

CAO Schedule

• Accessibility Advisory Committee (FAAC), July 10

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

• EOWC Meeting with MPP’s, Parliament Hill, April 30 th
• Planning Advisory Committee Public Meeting May 9, South Frontenac Township, Sydenham
• Community Development Advisory Committee, May 10
• Foster Parent Recruitment Meeting, May 11, Kingston
• EOWC CAO Meeting, May 24, Napanee
• EOLC Meeting, May 25, Kingston
• FCM, May 29 to June 5, Halifax
• Planning Advisory Committee, June 11
• Superior Court, Osgoode Hall, Sorensen et al and the County of Frontenac, June 21

Page 51 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

EOLC receives funding to advance Regional Economic Development Strategy Belleville, April 24, 2018 – The Eastern Ontario Leadership Council (EOLC), a multi-organization partnership tasked with advancing regional economic development opportunities, welcomes the announcement from the Province of Ontario on the $135,000 funding grant to refresh and plan for implementation of the Eastern Ontario Economic Development Strategy.

•

Minister Jeff Leal, of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA), joined numerous elected officials and economic development partners from across Eastern Ontario during the announcement held Monday in the County of Hastings’ Council Chambers. With Eastern Ontario being the first region in Ontario to undertake this endeavour as part of the Province’s regional economic development planning process, the Ministry of Economic Development and Growth (MEDG) is providing the funding and any required project support.

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

•

Page 52 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

EOLC receives funding to advance Regional Economic Development Strategy The EOLC consists of five major partners that together represent the various sectors across the region: the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus, the Eastern Ontario Mayors’ Caucus, the Eastern Ontario Regional Network, the Ontario East Economic Development Commission, and Community Futures Ontario East. The partnership was launched in 2015 following the release of the initial regional Strategy, designed to tackle issues regarding the economic performance of the region and pursue opportunities to maintain and enhance its economic prosperity.

•

This funding will advance the EOLC’s ongoing work, which began in 2016 with the creation of three working groups. These groups are responsible for implementation planning and priority setting, while engaging a broad cross-section of public and private sector stakeholders. They represent the three pillars of the Strategy, being: Workforce Development and Deployment; Technology Integration and Innovation; and Integrated, Intelligent Transportation Systems.

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

•

Page 53 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

EOLC receives funding to advance Regional Economic Development Strategy The EOLC is a unique organization in Ontario, founded on the principle of promoting regional economic development in collaboration with the many municipalities and stakeholders across Eastern Ontario, which represents about 1.2 million residents,” stated EOLC Co-Chair Leslie O’Shaughnessy, Mayor of the City of Cornwall. “We thank the Province and Minister Leal for recognizing the EOLC’s work and providing funds to move forward in such a positive manner.” “

•

The refresh of the 10-year Eastern Ontario Economic Development Strategy will reflect recent economic considerations and incorporate the EOLC’s existing regional work, while translating broad action steps into specific, prioritized projects to fulfill the 10-year vision. One major outcome is the creation of a comprehensive implementation plan, which will guide the EOLC’s work through 2024 and provide project development funding to the three working groups.

•

“As with any project of this magnitude, it is essential that the EOLC undertake a review and refresh of the existing Strategy, including the collection and inclusion of relevant data, reports, and studies that have emerged since the release of the first version in 2014,” added Co-Chair John Fenik, Warden of the County of Lanark. “Once the Strategy is implemented, our region’s inclusive and collaborative economic development model will become a model for others.”

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

•

Page 54 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

EOLC receives funding to advance Regional Economic Development Strategy

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

From left to right are: Peterborough County Warden Joe Taylor, Frontenac County Warden Ron Higgins, OMAFRA Minister Jeff Leal, Lanark County Warden and EOLC Co-Chair John Fenik, EORN Chair J. Murray Jones, EOWC Chair and Leeds and Grenville Counties’ Warden Robin

Page 55 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

AMCTO Releases Report on Council Compensation • • • •

• • •

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

•

Most municipalities in Ontario classify their councils as part -time, but are more likely to have full-time heads of council than members of council All councillors and heads of council are compensated, either through a salary, honorarium, or stipend Larger municipalities are more likely to pay their councils a salary, smaller municipalities an honorarium or stipend The majority of councillors and heads of council in Ontario are paid less than $40,000 per year Heads of council are paid at a higher rate than members of council The level of compensation that a municipality offers is closely correlated to its size Larger municipalities are more likely than smaller municipalities to provide optional benefits like cellphone reimbursement, newsletter printing or pension contribution Municipalities use a range of factors to help set their compensation levels

Page 56 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

AMCTO Legislative Update – Bills & Lawmaking Bill 3, the Pay Transparency Act, pass third reading and is awaiting Royal Assent. Bill 3 would require certain employers to track and publish information about compensation in their organizations, with the goal of improving pay equity . AGENDA ITEM #a)

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

Page 57 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

AMCTO Policy Updates: Province and Federal Government Reach Bilateral Agreement for National Housing Strategy: The province and the federal government announced a bilateral agreement to implement the National Housing Strategy in Ontario.

•

Cannabis Implementation Guides: The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) have both released implementation guides for cannabis legalization.

•

Applications for Municipal GHG Challenge Fund Now Open: The government of Ontario is now accepting applications for grants under the Municipal GHG Challenge Fund.

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

•

Page 58 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

AMCTO Policy Updates: •

FCM Launches New Staff Salary Granting Program: The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), in partnership with the Government of Canada, has launched a new funding program that will provide grants for municipalities to hire staff working on climate change.

•

Applications Open for Community Environment Fund: Applications are now open for funding under the Ontario Community Environment Fund (OECP).

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

Page 59 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

AMCTO Regulatory Proposals •

Government Consulting on New Regulation for Excess Soil Management: The province is seeking feedback on a proposed new regulation that would govern the management and reuse of excess soil.

•

Final OMB/LPAT Regulations Posted: The government has posted the final regulations for the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT), the body that will replace the Ontario Municipal Board.

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

Page 60 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

AMO Update – Provincial Matters Applications are open for the National Housing Co-Investment Fund, a new initiative under the National Housing Strategy designed to help repair, regenerate and build affordable housing. Capital contributions and low-cost loans are available.

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

For more information on the program and the application process see the CMHC website

Page 61 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

Economic Development Ferry By Foot Program Keep your eyes peeled for the roll out of the Ferry by Foot program, on social media and in local tourism information centres. Online content will be available at: www.visitwolfeisland.ca (coming soon) Event Incentive Now Available Event organizers can now apply for incentive funds to help attract visitors to Frontenac. Applications and information at: www.infrontenac.ca/event-incentive Frontenac Ambassador Engagement 134 Total Ambassadors 67.2% Average newsletter opens 27.9% Average newsletter clicks

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, April 18, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

• • •

Page 62 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

Economic Development Frontenac Five Every month 5 must do activities #infrontenac are promoted online in partnership with Frontenac News www.infrontenac.ca/frontenacfive

IGNITE! Tourism Product Development Training

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Attended by Alison, Richard, Corey Klatt (North Frontenac), Anne Pritchard (Frontenac CFDC), Tim Laprade (Frontenac Arena) and several Frontenac businesses to learn about creating memorable, meaningful tourism “experiences.”

Page 63 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

Twitter Update

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

Page 64 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

Twitter Update

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

Page 65 of 420 Officer, will provide Council wi… Mr. Kelly Pender , Chief Administrative

In memory of Gord Brown, MP Leeds-Grenville -Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Administrative Report, Frontenac County Council, May 16, 2018

Page 66 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

FAIRMOUNT HOME

Brand Identity Presentation May 16, 2018

Jon Allison Design Avenue Strategy

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 67 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Strategy

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 68 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Objectives The Fairmount rebrand must establish and reflect its unique identity including the Gentlecare® philosophy. The brand must: • Demonstrate commitment to quality improvement and the community • Instill a sense of pride in all those associated with Fairmount including staff, volunteers, students, residents and their families • Be memorable and appealing to all audiences • Avoid elements that would be associated with corporate attributes • Be complementary to County regional branding A key goal is to facilitate recognition, recall and trust among the public and community partners.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 69 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Discovery Phase Methodology In conjunction with the Strategic Planning process conducted by J Consulting Group, Avenue Strategy attended: • Four focus groups comprising: »»Residents of Fairmount (10 individuals) »»Volunteers (5 individuals) »»Staff ( 7 individuals) »»Project Team (6 individuals) • One interview with a member of Family Council (conducted by Avenue Strategy) • One paired interview with members of County Council Avenue Strategy and Jon Allison Design attended the Strategic Planning session conducted by J Consulting Group on December 18 and attended by staff, residents, Family Council, County Council and volunteers.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 70 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Summary Fairmount Home has a strong reputation which positions it well for brand building efforts. • Fairmount has succeeded in creating a warm and caring environment for their residents, both in terms of infrastructure and services. • The Gentlecare philosophy has been foundational in creating the positive and distinguishing characteristics associated with Fairmount: ®

Resident-focused care which empowers residents to make as many choices as possible

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 71 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Summary Gentlecare® is critical to continued brand building yet it is at risk with fewer people having the desire, either through lack of understanding of the philosophy or job constraints, to apply it. • Gentlecare should become the rallying cry to re-engage the Fairmount community. ®

• Provide a clear and concise definition of Gentlecare that evokes both functional and emotional responses. ®

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 72 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Brand Idea • A statement that articulates the underlying idea for the brand • Inspires everyone who engages with your brand • Provides focus and is foundational for all brand experiences • Serves as a positioning not a tagline or ad

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 73 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Fairmount Home Gentlecare®. It is at the core of all that we do. Gentlecare® means remembering that each of our residents brings their own life experiences and care should be shaped to reflect the individual and their wishes. It means looking beyond the tasks we must do to see the grandmother, grandfather, wife, husband, sister or brother. To listen to the stories, to share a laugh and even a tear. It is about embracing the moments and cherishing those we care for as well as each other. Gentlecare®. We live it and breathe it. Together. Because it takes a community to care as deeply as we do each and every day.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 74 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Core Purpose To care deeply by embracing the Gentlecare® philosophy.

Message Fairmount is home.

Tone Warm. Genuine. Caring.

Compassionate Genuine Mindful Nurturing Respectful Community Pride

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Brand Attributes

Page 75 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Themes Home: Fairmount is home, not a facility. Choice: Care is shaped to reflect the individual and their wishes. Community: We are in this together because it takes a community to care as deeply as we do each and every day. Support: Providing for the needs of residents who are not capable of caring for themselves. Honour: People know they are at the end of their life. We want to allow them to live out their life with honour.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 76 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

What Do We Want Them to Think? Employees I really do love this place. I love how everyone truly cares about the residents. It makes some of those tough days a little easier when I know we are all in this together for the sake of our residents and each other.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 77 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

What Do We Want Them to Think? Volunteers There is no other long-term care home that cares as deeply for their residents as Fairmount. It is evident in the way the place looks and feels and in the way all the staff treats the residents, their families, each other and us.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 78 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

What Do We Want Them to Think? Residents This is my home. In my home I have wonderful people who really do care about me.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 79 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Identity

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 80 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Objective To develop a new logo and identity system that breathes new life into our strategic plan and our brand.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 81 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 82 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

What’s Our Story?

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 83 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Caring. A devotion to nurture and care for others.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 84 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Individuals. Each resident is unique and brings their own life experience. They are empowered to make individual choices.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 85 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Community. Inclusion and collaboration. Together we are able to care as deeply as we do every day.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 86 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Gentlecare . ®

At the core of everything we do.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 87 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 88 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 89 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 90 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 91 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Our identity is shaped by individuals coming together. That is Gentlecare . ®

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 92 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Our identity is shaped by individuals coming together. That is Gentlecare . ®

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 93 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 94 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 95 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

Caring Inclusive Together Warm Gentle Safe Friendly

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 96 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 97 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

The Grid Golden Ratio

*not to scale

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 98 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 99 ofofJon 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 100 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 101 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 102 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

Marketplace Comparison

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 103 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

Application

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 104 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 105 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 106 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 107 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 108 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 109 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 110ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 111ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 112ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 113ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 114ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 115ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 116ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 117ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 118ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 119ofof 420 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, Jon Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 120 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 121 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 122 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 123 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 124 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 125 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 126 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 127 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 128 Staff Briefing : Mr. Jon Allison, of of Jon420 Allison Design, will provide Co…

AGENDA ITEM #a)

jonallison.com Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

AGENDA ITEM #b)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-062

Council Recommend Report To:

Warden and Council

From:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Lisa Hirvi, Administrator, Fairmount Home

Date of meeting:

May 18, 2018

Re:

Fairmount Brand Identity Identity Fairmount Home Home — – Brand

Recommendation Whereas the County of Frontenac brand identity was approved in 2016 and Fairmount Home requires a branding strategy to establish its own unique identity; Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Fairmount Home branding strategy and positioning as well as the brand identity and design; And Further That Council direct staff to implement the Fairmount Home brand identity and design in the operations of the long-term care home. Background The brand identity identity was The County County of of Frontenac’s Frontenac’s brand was established established in in 2016. It was determined (“Fairmount”) and Frontenac Paramedic Services (“FPS”) (“FPS”) both that Fairmount Home (“Fairmount”) require a rebranding strategy to establish their own unique identities in order to maximize recognition, recall and trust. (“RFP”) for brand identity was issued in August 2017. Jon A request for proposals (“RFP”) Allison Design and Avenue Strategy were the successful consultants for the rebranding of both Fairmount and FPS. Comment In January 2018 Avenue Strategy (Kathleen Vollebregt) presented the brand idea after consultation with key internal stakeholders, which was completed in concert with the strategic plan update focus groups and interviews in November 2017.

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 129 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

In March 2018, Jon Allison Design (Jon Allison) presented the brand development creative brief that detailed key information about Fairmount including who we are (core purpose, brand identity, message, brand essence and brand attributes) and who needs to know (key stakeholders, target audience). In April 2018, Jon Allison and Kathleen Vollebregt presented the logo design to Fairmount management and the senior leadership team. The brand identity and design were well received. Attached is is Fairmount’s Fairmount’s brand brand identity presentation. Attached Sustainability Implications Not applicable Financial Implications Not applicable Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Consulted • Consultants o Jon Allison Allison Design Design — – Jon Jon Allison Allison o Avenue Avenue Strategy Strategy — – Kathleen Kathleen Vollebregt Vollebregt • Internal stakeholders (during strategic planning interviews and focus groups): o Fairmount Home Home — – residents, residents,staff, staff, volunteers, volunteers, family family members, members, union o Frontenac Frontenac County County — – Council Council and and management management Affected • Fairmount Home

Recommend Report to Council Fairmount Home Brand Identity May 18, 2018

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 130 BrandofIdentity

Page 2 of 2

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 131 BrandofIdentity

FAIRMOUNT HOME

Brand Identity Presentation May 16, 2018

Jon Allison Design Avenue Strategy

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 132 BrandofIdentity

Strategy

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 133 BrandofIdentity

Objectives The Fairmount rebrand must establish and reflect its unique identity including the Gentlecare® philosophy. The brand must: • Demonstrate commitment to quality improvement and the community • Instill a sense of pride in all those associated with Fairmount including staff, volunteers, students, residents and their families • Be memorable and appealing to all audiences • Avoid elements that would be associated with corporate attributes • Be complementary to County regional branding A key goal is to facilitate recognition, recall and trust among the public and community partners.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 134 BrandofIdentity

Discovery Phase Methodology In conjunction with the Strategic Planning process conducted by J Consulting Group, Avenue Strategy attended: • Four focus groups comprising: »»Residents of Fairmount (10 individuals) »»Volunteers (5 individuals) »»Staff ( 7 individuals) »»Project Team (6 individuals) • One interview with a member of Family Council (conducted by Avenue Strategy) • One paired interview with members of County Council Avenue Strategy and Jon Allison Design attended the Strategic Planning session conducted by J Consulting Group on December 18 and attended by staff, residents, Family Council, County Council and volunteers.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 135 BrandofIdentity

Summary Fairmount Home has a strong reputation which positions it well for brand building efforts. • Fairmount has succeeded in creating a warm and caring environment for their residents, both in terms of infrastructure and services. • The Gentlecare philosophy has been foundational in creating the positive and distinguishing characteristics associated with Fairmount: ®

Resident-focused care which empowers residents to make as many choices as possible

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 136 BrandofIdentity

Summary Gentlecare® is critical to continued brand building yet it is at risk with fewer people having the desire, either through lack of understanding of the philosophy or job constraints, to apply it. • Gentlecare should become the rallying cry to re-engage the Fairmount community. ®

• Provide a clear and concise definition of Gentlecare that evokes both functional and emotional responses. ®

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 137 BrandofIdentity

Brand Idea • A statement that articulates the underlying idea for the brand • Inspires everyone who engages with your brand • Provides focus and is foundational for all brand experiences • Serves as a positioning not a tagline or ad

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 138 BrandofIdentity

Fairmount Home Gentlecare®. It is at the core of all that we do. Gentlecare® means remembering that each of our residents brings their own life experiences and care should be shaped to reflect the individual and their wishes. It means looking beyond the tasks we must do to see the grandmother, grandfather, wife, husband, sister or brother. To listen to the stories, to share a laugh and even a tear. It is about embracing the moments and cherishing those we care for as well as each other. Gentlecare®. We live it and breathe it. Together. Because it takes a community to care as deeply as we do each and every day.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 139 BrandofIdentity

Core Purpose To care deeply by embracing the Gentlecare® philosophy.

Message Fairmount is home.

Tone Warm. Genuine. Caring.

Compassionate Genuine Mindful Nurturing Respectful Community Pride

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Brand Attributes

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 140 BrandofIdentity

Themes Home: Fairmount is home, not a facility. Choice: Care is shaped to reflect the individual and their wishes. Community: We are in this together because it takes a community to care as deeply as we do each and every day. Support: Providing for the needs of residents who are not capable of caring for themselves. Honour: People know they are at the end of their life. We want to allow them to live out their life with honour.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 141 BrandofIdentity

What Do We Want Them to Think? Employees I really do love this place. I love how everyone truly cares about the residents. It makes some of those tough days a little easier when I know we are all in this together for the sake of our residents and each other.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 142 BrandofIdentity

What Do We Want Them to Think? Volunteers There is no other long-term care home that cares as deeply for their residents as Fairmount. It is evident in the way the place looks and feels and in the way all the staff treats the residents, their families, each other and us.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 143 BrandofIdentity

What Do We Want Them to Think? Residents This is my home. In my home I have wonderful people who really do care about me.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 144 BrandofIdentity

Identity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 145 BrandofIdentity

Objective To develop a new logo and identity system that breathes new life into our strategic plan and our brand.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 146 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 147 BrandofIdentity

What’s Our Story?

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 148 BrandofIdentity

Caring. A devotion to nurture and care for others.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 149 BrandofIdentity

Individuals. Each resident is unique and brings their own life experience. They are empowered to make individual choices.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 150 BrandofIdentity

Community. Inclusion and collaboration. Together we are able to care as deeply as we do every day.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 151 BrandofIdentity

Gentlecare . ®

At the core of everything we do.

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 152 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 153 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 154 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 155 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 156 BrandofIdentity

Our identity is shaped by individuals coming together. That is Gentlecare . ®

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 157 BrandofIdentity

Our identity is shaped by individuals coming together. That is Gentlecare . ®

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 158 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 159 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 160 BrandofIdentity

Caring Inclusive Together Warm Gentle Safe Friendly

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 161 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 162 BrandofIdentity

The Grid Golden Ratio

*not to scale

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 163 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 164 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 165 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 166 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 167 BrandofIdentity

Marketplace Comparison

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 168 BrandofIdentity

Application

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 169 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 170 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 171 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 172 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 173 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 174 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 175 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 176 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 177 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 178 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 179 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 180 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 181 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 182 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 183 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 184 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 185 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 186 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 187 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 188 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 189 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 190 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 191 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 192 BrandofIdentity

AGENDA ITEM #b)

420 2018-062 FairmountPage Home 193 BrandofIdentity

jonallison.com

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Brand identity by Jon Allison Design // Strategy by Avenue Strategy

Page 194 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

Briefing Status and Timing of Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018 Report 2018-063 K e l l y P e n d e r, C h i e f A d m i n i s t r a t i v e O ff i c e r Kevin Farrell, Manager of Continuous Improvement

AGENDA ITEM #c)

Page 195 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

Introduction The briefing and report cover the following issues:

1. A high level view of the current strategic framework (Kelly)
2. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) – reporting and managing our performance (Kevin)
3. Recommendation

AGENDA ITEM #c)

Page 196 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

Current Strategic Framework •

Current strategic plan is now 4 years old. The plan had three goals: • Seniors: – Meet the aging tsunami challenge for Frontenac seniors (Housing and Transportation)

• Waste Management: – Meet the emerging “post landfill” solid waste management challenge for Frontenac Residents

• Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development: – Respect for the taxpayer and focused economic development

•

Council has recommended that the 2019-22 Council complete a review of the strategic plan early in their term

AGENDA ITEM #c)

Page 197 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

Why should municipalities do strategic planning? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Set direction and priorities – help ensure the proper allocation of scarce resources Ensure that Council is on the same page – citizens will know the priorities over the course of the term of Council Simplify decision making – priorities have been established and any new issues can be evaluated against these priorities Drive alignment – Council and staff can all be on same page and ensure that business plans reflect Council priorities Communicate a message – citizens can be informed and kept up to date on success Establish transparency and accountability – the plan will measure success and establish key performance indicators

AGENDA ITEM #c)

• To be provided by Kevin Farrell

Page 198 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

Review of KPIs

AGENDA ITEM #c)

Page 199 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

FCM, AMO, ROMA, EOWC & EOLC

3 WIGS 5 Official Plans

Rural Transportation

Shared Services Agreements

Service Delivery & Org. Review

• CORE BUSINESS Council/Governance

• NON CORE BUSINESS -

Healthcare

Direction for Our Future

FPS Strategic Plan

FMT Strategic Plan

Corporate Services, Planning/Economic Development, Marine Services and Emergency Management (No Strategic Plan)

5 Yr. Business Plan

5 Yr. Business Plan

5 Yr. Business Plans (7)

Economic Development Charter

Strategic Planning Documents

Budget Policy/Long Range Financial Plan Tourism Capital Asset Plan

Energy Balanced Scorecard - KPIs

LEAN – Continuous Improvement Program

SERVICE DELIVERY PARTNERSHIPS & REGIONAL ISSUES Library, Public Health, Homelessness, Ontario Works, Housing, POA Court, Aboriginal Affairs, Doctor Recruitment, Schools

AGENDA ITEM #c)

Waste Mgt

Page 200 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

How do we leverage for greater impact?

Overall Guidance (Community Vision)

Why? What is adding value? Is it properly resourced?

Community Clinics? Health Hubs?

Is the current partnership arrangement working? More? Less? Focus?

Expires at end of 2018

Completed in 2011- Still Relevant? Update?

Currently Planning & I.S. More? Less?

Completed in 2014 – largely implemented Renew? Review?

Is the current governance model working? Do we want to tackle? Would be in effect for the term after next. Complete and approved. New facility? Operations Review?

Complete and approved. New beds?

Individual plans? A roll up? How does it fit with the FPS and FMT Strat Plans?

Need to be adapted to new strategic direction

Need to be adapted to new strategic direction

Need to be adapted to new strategic direction

Renew? Revisit? Tinker? Blow Up?

Communal servicing + private roads. What s next?

Needs revisiting to align with new strategic direction With LOTA gone – what s next? Will need re-visiting after strategic plan review. Is the borrowing plan still solid? Do we need to add more assets to the list? What is the future of trails? What is the future of FMT and FPS operatons? Green energy? Regional CIP? Cheerio Project Are KPIs reflecting/measuring the new strategic plan?

Renew commitment to continuous improvement and LEAN – How do we leverage/build upon current framework? Participation from the Townships?

Active or passive participation? Do we get out of non-core activities? What is the future of the relationship with the City of Kingston?

AGENDA ITEM #c)

Is there a role for the County?

Page 201 Manager of 420 of Continuous Improvement/GI… Staff Briefing : Mr. Kevin Farrell,

Recommendation Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac receive the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Report entitled Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy and Related projects;

And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac approves as follows: That staff immediately commence the Request for Proposals (RFP) for a facilitator to commence the 2018 public consultation process for the 2019-2022 County strategic plan as outlined in the report;

That staff be directed to include in the 2019 County budget for consideration a line item to complete the Operational Review and Master Plan – Frontenac Paramedic Services

AGENDA ITEM #c)

That staff be directed to include in the 2019 County budget for consideration a line item to complete the 2019 -2022 County strategic plan process;

AGENDA ITEM #d)

Report 2018-063 Council Recommend Report To:

Warden and Council of the County of Frontenac

From:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer Joe Gallivan, Director of Planning and Economic Development Kevin Farrell, Manager of Continuous Improvement/GIS

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Office of the Chief Administrative Officer – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy and Related Projects

Recommendation Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Report – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy and Related projects report for information; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac approves as follows:

1. That staff immediately commence the Request for Proposals (RFP) for a facilitator to commence the 2018 public consultation process for the 2019-2022 County strategic plan as outlined in the report;
2. That staff be directed to include in the 2019 County budget for consideration a line item to complete the 2019-2022 County strategic plan process;
3. That staff be directed to include in the 2019 County budget for consideration a line item to complete the Operational Review and Master Plan – Frontenac Paramedic Services Background The Council of the County of Frontenac approved their current strategic plan in June
4. The plan prepared by Performance Concepts included community consultation, meetings with stakeholders and individual meetings with sitting County Councillors. The approved plan included three Wildly Important Goals (WIGS) for the County and implementation strategies were subsequently developed and approved by Council.

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief202 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #d)

The three goals are: 

Seniors: o Meet the aging tsunami challenge for Frontenac seniors (Housing and Transportation)



Waste Management: o Meet the emerging “post landfill” solid waste management challenge for Frontenac Residents



Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development: o Respect for the taxpayer and focused economic development

Staff provide annual updates regarding progress on the goals and where appropriate the goals are included in the business plans for the departments. The last update was provided to Council at the January 17, 2018 meeting, Report #2018-007. A key aspect of strategic planning for public agencies is the ability to track and report on key performance indicators (KPI). Mr. Kevin Farrell, Manager of Continuous Improvement/GIS will provide an overview of the current KPIs and the review process that was undertaken with each department. The KPIs will be presented based upon a Balanced Score Card system, which includes measures relating to 4 key perspectives of the organization: 

Customer Focus: this perspective views organizations performance from the point of view of the customer(s) that the organization serves.



Financial Performance: this perspective views the organizations financial performance and the use of financial resources.



Process Improvement: this perspective views the organizational performance through the lenses of quality and efficiency related to services and key business processes.



Learning and Growth: also referred to as Organizational Capacity. This perspective views organizational performance through the lenses of human capital, infrastructure, technology, culture and other capacities that are key to breakthrough performance.

The balanced scorecard is used to connect the ‘big picture elements’ (e.g. mission, vision, core values and strategic focus) with the operational elements. It acts as a strategic planning and management system that can be used to: 

Communicate what the organization is trying to accomplish



Align the day-to-day work with strategy

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief203 Administrative

Page 2 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)



Prioritize projects, products and services



Measure and monitor progress towards strategic targets

With each iteration of the strategic plan, staff will update the KPIs to ensure reporting reflects council priorities. The direction provided to staff in May 2016 (See Report 2016-058 and Motion #87-16) was to review the strategic direction in 2019 with the new Council. In order to ensure that summer residents are consulted and the 2019 Council are in a position to establish a strategic plan early in their Council term it is suggested that the public consultation commence this summer and be brought to the new Council in January/February of 2019. As well, both Fairmount Home (FMT) and Frontenac Paramedic Services (FPS) have completed strategic plans in order to meet legislative (FMT) and accreditation requirements (FMT and FPS). The purpose of this report is to lay out a path for next steps related to corporate strategic planning and a review of operational plans. The County strategic plan should focus on existing service delivery and where service enhancement are recommended, the plan should ensure that resourcing (staff and budget) are in place. Comment Strategic planning is an important tool for municipalities in order to:

1. Set direction and priorities – help ensure the proper allocation of scarce resources
2. Ensure that Council is on the same page – citizens will know the priorities over the course of the term of Council
3. Simplify decision making – priorities have been established and any new issues can be evaluated against these priorities
4. Drive alignment – Council and staff can all be on same page and ensure that business plans reflect Council priorities
5. Communicate a message – citizens can be informed and kept up to date on success
6. Establish transparency and accountability – the plan will measure success and establish key performance indicators It should also look at broader service delivery issues such as establishing a time frame and philosophy for core services. These could include issues such as:   

Rationalization of paramedic stations with a view towards optimizing service delivery and physical foot print The future of long-term care o Expansion at current site o Services in the north of the County Future of the Economic Development Charter

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief204 Administrative

Page 3 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)

 

   

o Increasing tourism services o Trails management o Active transportation o Ambassador program – local business support Shared service enhancements Renewal of Service Delivery and Organizational Review (SDOR) o Staffing levels o Benchmarking o Effectiveness of continuous improvement efforts Rural transportation services Promotion of green energy Regional Community Improvement Plan(s) Rural healthcare

In order to ensure that the new Council will be able to address the County strategic plan early in their term, while also ensuring that public consultation can happen in the summer/ fall season, staff are recommending that this component begin in 2018. The new Council can then be provided the information, including a summary of community input and a SWOT analysis in order to launch the process with a view towards concluding the plan late spring/ early summer of 2019. By proceeding in this manner we will be able to reduce the turnaround time for the new plan by 3 to 4 months. In order to place the strategic planning process in context, the attached document, Schedule ‘A’ sets out the current framework of documents and plans. At a more operational level, two areas are recommended for review within the time horizon of the next term of council and could be incorporated into a strategic plan from a conceptual standpoint. As well, staff will incorporate these plans into departmental business plans. Master planning at this level will ensure that projects and your direction changes have the necessary rigour and community support required to obtain funding. The two recommended master plans are:

1. Operational Review and Master Plan – Frontenac Paramedic Services Timeframe: 2019 Estimated Budget: ~$50-75,000 depending upon scope Precedent Report: 2006 and 2008 IBI Study Situational Analysis: FPS provides care to over 20,000 citizens per year. The number of patients continues to rise between 3-5% annually as our population ages. As well, the scope of practice for paramedics continues to change/evolve resulting in increased training and liability. The pressure of these changes will be felt most intensely in the City of Kingston and the paramedic stations in Sydenham and Marysville.

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief205 Administrative

Page 4 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)

The ability to remain nimble and be able to respond to changing circumstances will be the key to responding to the changing landscape. It is also necessary to ensure that the cost of accommodations in the City of Kingston is the most flexible and economical (generally leased space or partnered space with the City), in order to ensure that expenses are minimized and grant dollars are maximized. Areas of Interest: 

Provide Council with a ten-year master plan for the delivery of paramedic services in the City of Kingston, including: o Maximizing the efficient deployment of staff in order to ensure the most timely response o Provide an estimate of timing for service enhancement related to growth in order to permit proper financial/space needs planning and consultation o Identify options for increasing the flexibility of staffing options, including workload, shift assignments and backfill options o Minimizing the physical “footprint” in the City with a view towards increasing flexibility/demand response and reducing costs o Address the deployment and location of logistics, paramedic administration and training o Addressing the changing dynamics in both the legislative and operational environment – including increased scope of practice/training requirements, community paramedicine, paramedic mental wellness and event/special occasion deployment



Ensure that best practice programs are in place in order to comply with legislation



Review and recommend key performance indicators to ensure that Council is confident that objectives are being achieved



Provide a timeline (and priorities) for implementation

Challenges: 

Planning time horizons require consultation with the City of Kingston, Province and the community



The aging demographic in our region and the pressure on healthcare to deliver lower cost options will intensify over the life span of the plan



The current Administrative Office Review will leave FPS with decisions to make regarding location of administration, logistics and training

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief206 Administrative

Page 5 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)



Master planning is necessary in order to ensure operational and capital changes are realistic and achievable, and help ensure that the requisite planning documents are in place to receive grants and provide advance notice of program changes to funding partners

Anticipated Result: 

Council and taxpayers will be provided a long-term road map for service delivery that will optimize service delivery in the most efficient manner



Staff will be provided with a direction for the future and will be able to develop business plans for implementation



Budget time horizons can be extended and costs can be planned for in an efficient manner.

Next Steps: 

Recommendation to provide a 2019 budget line item/project proposal for consideration by the next Council



Initiate preliminary discussions with the City of Kingston and Province of Ontario



Develop a terms of reference and request for proposal (to be released after budget consideration in 2019)

2. The Future of Long-Term Care Timeframe: 2020 Estimated Budget: ~$35-75,000 depending upon scope and track selected by Council Precedent Report: None Situational Analysis: The County of Frontenac currently provides long-term care to over 128 resident in Fairmount Home. As prescribed by the amalgamation order, the cost for Fairmount is shared with the City of Kingston. The aging population demographic of our region, plus the aging in place strategies continue to place stress on long-term care in Ontario. While the Province of Ontario has announced support for 30,000 new beds in the Province in the planning horizon up to 2025, it is expected that competition will be fierce for new bed allocations. We anticipate that only providers with comprehensive plans and a track record of providing quality care can expect to take advantage of bed allocations and funding support. At the same time, the Province has committed to increasing mandated staffing ratios in order to improve the standard of care for residents.

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief207 Administrative

Page 6 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)

Going hand in hand is the need to ensure that operational costs are balanced with quality of care for the existing facility. Areas of Interest: 

Provide Council with options and preferred direction for long term care for the County. It is suggested that, depending upon Council’s wishes the direction could have two tracks (individually or combined): o Track One: An Operational Audit and Benchmarking 

Ensure that best practice programs are in place to ensure compliance with legislation



Review and recommend key performance indicators to ensure that Council is confident that objectives are being achieved



Perform a detailed benchmarking exercise with other similar sized homes, including recommendations for areas of improvement



Provide a timeline (and priorities) for implementation

o Track Two: Community consultation and business plan for expansion 

This track is intended to address the following questions: 

What is the current need? Is expansion the best option?



What does the community desire? Including geographic location



Are there logical partners?



What would funding and operational costs look like?

Challenges: 

Planning time horizons require consultation with the City of Kingston, Province and the community



The aging demographic in our region and the pressure on healthcare to deliver lower cost options will intensify over the life span of the plan



The role of the LHIN and the sub LHINs



Strong competition in the Kingston market place for nursing, technical and support services staff



The City of Kingston is not obligated to pay for a share of costs if services are provided outside of Fairmount

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief208 Administrative

Page 7 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)

Anticipated Result: 

Council and taxpayers will be provided an overall road map for service delivery that will ensure optimal service delivery in the most efficient manner



Staff will be provided with a direction for the future and will be able to develop business plans for implementation



Budget time horizons can be extended and costs can be planned for in an efficient manner.

Next Steps: 

Recommendation to provide a 2020 budget line item/project proposal for consideration by the next Council



Initiate preliminary discussions with the City of Kingston, the LHIN and Province of Ontario

Develop a terms of reference and request for proposal (to be release after budget consideration in 2020) During the strategic planning cycle of the next term of Council, three current plans will be up for review:

1. The Directions For Our Future - Sustainable Actions 2009 (DFOF) will be twelve years old in 2021. The document has served to set the framework for sustainability projects, economic development, community engagement and the County Official Plan. While the Planning Department Business Plan has suggested a review date within the horizon of the next County Council, many of the principles in the plan are now incorporated into the County Official Plan and other regional planning initiatives such as Community Improvement Plans.
2. The Economic Development Charter (EDC) will be five years old in 2019. The three pillars of the plan remain valid and broad enough to accommodate minor direction changes. An internally led re-fresh in 2019 may be warranted.
3. The County Official Plan (O.P.) was approved in 2015 and will be due for a review in 2020. As this was the first County wide O.P. a review should include some public consultation as well as consultation with member municipalities. The changing policy framework implemented by the Province may also drive O.P. changes. While we aren’t in a position to make final recommendations on these three plans, they should be considered as part of the strategic planning process. With respect to the DFOF plan, it may be worth considering that this plan gets “retired” with the view that sustainability is now incorporated into all strategic planning. The EDC has served to help focus economic development efforts, drive grant applications and improve community engagement. The new Council will likely be Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief209 Administrative

Page 8 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)

charged with overseeing a renewal of the Charter and this should be taken into account as part of the County strategic planning exercise. Moving forward, staff are recommending a work plan that helps guide the strategic planning process and the business plan development for the next five years. The work plan below, except as noted, will not commit either budgets or staff resources. Each will be subject to annual budget review. Date

Item

Discussion

June 2018

RFP and engagement of facilitator



July - Oct 2018

Public Consultation re  County Strategic Plan 

Confirmed and in place by June 30, 2018

Engage a lead consultant Suggest four (4) public meeting – one in each municipality + a survey

Feb 2019

Consultation with individual Councillors



Interviews with individual Councillors

Mar-Apr 2019

Presentation to County Council



including community input, SWOT and recommendations

May 2019 Public Meeting/ release of draft plan



Opportunity for further input and comment

June 2019

Final review (approval) of plan by County Council



Opportunity for further input and comment

July Sept 2019

Incorporation of Strategic priorities into business plans, budgets and key performance indicators (KPIs)



Including phasing and cost estimates for implementation

Sustainability Implications Approving a strategic plan that is supported by a public consultation process will help ensure that community priorities are establish and that scarce resources are allocated to those priorities. Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief210 Administrative

Page 9 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)

Financial Implications In order to ensure a non-biased outcome of the consultation process, an outside facilitator is proposed to be engaged to conduct the four (4) consultation meetings, the “new” Council review process and the subsequent public meeting as well as the two additional meetings with Council. In order to reduce costs, staff will assist the facilitator by providing support services, including logistics and cost estimates. It is estimated that these cost will be 8-10 days of consulting in 2018 and an additional 8-10 days in 2019. At a daily per diem of $1,000 (plus expenses), we expect this exercise to cost $16-20K. The 2019 portion will be brought forward during the 2019 budget process. Should Council conclude that an entirely independent study be conducted without the support of staff, it is estimated that an additional $5-10K may be required. The 2018 portion is recommended to come from the Stabilization reserve. The 2017 year-end surplus of $325,184 was transferred to this reserve at the April 18, 2018 Council meeting. Costs related to the FPS and FMT projects will be included in the budgets for the 2019 and 2020 budgets/business plans as noted above. Final approval will rest with the new Council. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Warden Ron Higgins Senior Leadership Team Kevin Farrell, Manager of Continuous Improvement

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief211 Administrative

Page 10 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #d)

Schedule ‘A’ – Strategic Planning Framework

FCM, AMO, ROMA, EOWC & EOLC

3 WIGS

Direction for Our Future

5 Official Plans

Rural Transportation

Service Delivery & Org. Review

• CORE BUSINESS Council/Governance

• NON CORE BUSINESS -

Healthcare

Shared Services Agreements

FPS Strategic Plan

FMT Strategic Plan

Corporate Services, Planning/Economic Development, Marine Services and Emergency Management (No Strategic Plan)

5 Yr. Business Plan

5 Yr. Business Plan

5 Yr. Business Plans (7)

Economic Development Charter

Strategic Planning Documents

Budget Policy/Long Range Financial Plan Tourism Capital Asset Plan

Energy Balanced Scorecard - KPIs

Waste Mgt

LEAN – Continuous Improvement Program

SERVICE DELIVERY PARTNERSHIPS & REGIONAL ISSUES Library, Public Health, Homelessness, Ontario Works, Housing, POA Court, Aboriginal Affairs, Doctor Recruitment, Schools

Recommend Report to Council 2018-063 Office of the CAO – Status and Timing of County Corporate Strategy May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Status and Timing of… 2018-063 Office of the Chief212 Administrative

Page 11 of 11

AGENDA ITEM #e)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-066 Council Recommend Report To:

Warden and Members of County Council

From:

Kelly J. Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Paul J. Charbonneau, Chief Paramedic/Director

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Emergency and and Transportation Transportation Services Services— – Psychological Emergency Psychological Health and Safety in the Paramedic Service Organization Standard

Recommendation Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Emergency and Services — – Psychological Transportation Services Psychological Health Health and and Safety Safety in in the the Paramedic Service Organization Standard report for information, And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac adopt the Psychological Health and Safety in the Paramedic Service Organization Standard as best practice and research, as well as key guidance and concepts in the continued development of Frontenac Paramedic Services Mental Wellness Program for its paramedics. Background A first for Canada, a new psychological health and safety standard has been released to specific needs needs of of paramedic paramedic service serviceorganizations organizations— – a group of vital address the specific contributors to our health care system that experience some of the highest rates of mental illness in the country. The Honourable Kevin Daniel Flynn, Ontario Minister of Labour, announced the new standard April 26, 2018 at Halton Region Paramedic Headquarters. Workers in paramedic services face unique health and safety issues on a daily basis such as shift work and extended work days; periods of intense psychological stress or trauma; exposure to contagious or infectious diseases; and challenging work environments such as fire, explosions, and violent situations. All of these issues can impact their mental health and well-being. This made it all the more evident that a standard was needed.

Page 213 of 420 Services Psychological Health and … 2018-066 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #e)

Commissioned by the Paramedic Association of Canada and developed by CSA Group with funding Occupational Health, Health, Safety with funding from from Ontario’s Ontario’s Occupational Safety and and Prevention Prevention Innovation Innovation Program, the standard offers sector-specific guidance for developing and maintaining a psychologically healthy and safe workplace. It specifically helps paramedic workers and their employers to: • • •

Raise awareness of associated stigma, self-stigma and harassment; Systematically identify sources of stress and psychological hazards; and Examine changes and control measures that can be implemented to address those hazards.

Comment The standard is built on leading best practices and research, as well as key guidance and concepts from the 2013 National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace, which was championed by the Mental Health Commission of Québec and Canada and developed collaboratively by the Bureau de normalisation du Quebec CSA Group. This flexible, unique and targeted standard positions Ontario as a leader in the area of responder mental mental health health and and wellness wellness in inCanada Canada— – and first responder and around the world. Quick Facts • •

•

There are more than 40,000 paramedics in Canada. The diagnosis of mental disorders among public safety personnel is four times higher than the general population. Paramedics in particular are also more likely to experience all mental disorders, except Alcohol Use Disorder, than some other public safety personnel. Research from the Mental Health Commission of Canada revealed that: o o Mental illness is the leading cause of disability in Canada, accounting for nearly 30 percent of disability claims and 70 per cent of the total costs. o o Of the $51 billion economic cost east year attributed to mental illness in Canada, a staggering $20 billion stems from workplace losses. o o By improving the management of mental health in the workplace, productivity losses can be decreased by as much as 30 per cent.

Sustainability Implications The ongoing support of our front line paramedics with appropriate mental wellness programs and initiatives, as well as state of the art equipment, are investments and are paramount to a sustainable, healthy and balanced workforce that serves the public. Financial Implications There are no additional financial implications, not already approved approved in the 2018 County budget, associated with this report.

Recommend Report to Council Transportation Services Services — – Psychological Emergency and Transportation Psychological Health Health and and Safety Safety in in the the Paramedic Paramedic Service Organization Standard May 16, 2018 Page 2 of 3

Page 214 of 420 Services Psychological Health and … 2018-066 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #e)

Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Paramedic Chiefs of Canada Paramedic Association of Canada Canadian Standards Association

Recommend Report to Council Transportation Services Services — – Psychological Emergency and Transportation Psychological Health Health and and Safety Safety in in the the Paramedic Paramedic Service Organization Standard May 16, 2018 Page 3 of 3

Page 215 of 420 Services Psychological Health and … 2018-066 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #f)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-061 Recommend Report to Council To:

Warden and Members of County Council

From:

Kelly J. Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Richard Allen, Manager of Economic Development

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

and Economic Economic Development Development— – Request Planning and Request by Tourism Kingston to support the Kingston 2020 Brier Bid

Recommendation Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Planning and Development — – Request Economic Development Requestby byTourism Tourism Kingston Kingston to to support support the the Kingston Kingston 2020 Brier Bid report for information; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac support the bid by Tourism Kingston to host the 2020 Brier; And Further That Council authorizes staff to purchase a Community Supporter Package, noted in the Corporate Ticket Packages in the amount of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) to be expensed from the existing Economic Development operating budget. Background At the April 18, 2018, regular County Council meeting, Mr. Murray Matheson, Chair of the Tourism Kingston Board addressed County Council regarding Kingston’s Kingston’s bid bid for for the the 2020 Brier and sought support from the County of Frontenac both endorsement of the bid as well as financial support through a sponsorship ticket package. Comment As attraction, retention and expansion of tourism-related business is a core component of the 2015 Economic Development Charter and Implementation Plan, these efforts are aligned with goals established by County Council. As a partner in the Brier Bid, Frontenac County gains exposure as a regional partner in Tourism and the opportunity to attract new visitors as part of the Brier Cup Curling Tournament experience.

Page 216 ofDevelopment 420 2018-061 Planning and Economic Request by Tourism Kingston t…

AGENDA ITEM #f)

The 2020 Brier Cup is estimated to have up to $15,000,000.00 direct impact on the regional economy. Frontenac Ambassadors often comment on the need to strengthen the off-season tourism market to improve overall revenues revenues and and business business sustainability. sustainability. Large events such as the Brier Cup Tournament are likely to fill accommodations within one hour’s hour’s drive of Kingston for the entire 9 days of the tournament, as it did when Kingston hosted the 2013 Scotties Tournament of Hearts curling event. In addition, visitors to the region will be seeking to explore unique experiences in the region, many of which can be developed and advertised for the event in 2020. As the winning bid is announced in September of 2018, businesses located in the County of Frontenac will know well in advance of the event and can prepare packages, events and experiences to take advantage of this sport tourism market. Regional partnerships that result in successful bids for events like the Brier can lead to future opportunities for other sporting events that can involve partnerships between Kingston, Frontenac and neighbouring Staff from Tourism Kingston and County of neighbouring municipalities. municipalities. Staff Frontenac have begun preliminary research into submitting a joint bid for the International Plowing Match. Sustainability Implications The Frontenac County Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) identifies recreation and leisure as a focus area. This is also reflected in the County Economic Development Charter as a key priority and strength. Regions that celebrate their artistic communities and that encourage creativity have more vibrant, resilient economies. Financial Implications The Economic Development operating budget has funds available for this expense. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Tourism Kingston

Recommend Report to Council Development — – Request Planning and Economic Development Requestby by Tourism Tourism Kingston Kingston to to support support the the Kingston Kingston Bid for the 2020 Brier Cup Page 2 of 2 May 16, 2018

Page 217 ofDevelopment 420 2018-061 Planning and Economic Request by Tourism Kingston t…

AGENDA ITEM #f)

Page 218 ofDevelopment 420 2018-061 Planning and Economic Request by Tourism Kingston t…

AGENDA ITEM #g)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-067 Council Recommend Report To:

Warden and Council

From:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer Jannette Amini, Manager of Legislative Services/Clerk

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Office of the Chief Chief Administrative Administrative Officer Officer— – Request by the Township of North Frontenac to Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing

Recommendation the Chief Chief Administrative Administrative Officer Officer— – Request Resolved That the Office of the Request by the Township of North Frontenac to Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing report be placed on the floor for discussion. Background A total of $1,500,000 was reserved in 2014 for Seniors Issues in accordance with the County’s strategic strategic plan. plan. The The breakdown breakdown was County’s was discussed discussed as as being being $1,400,000 $1,400,000 for for Senior Senior Housing which was formalized by Council at its meeting held September 21, 2016 through report 2016-104. All All member member municipalities municipalities have commenced their planning as Township of of Frontenac Frontenac Islands Islands constructing constructing a 5 unit Seniors Housing complex follows: Township which officially opened on November 25, 2017; Township of South Frontenac having an approved business plan and its Council has committed to pursuing a Seniors Housing Project which includes a municipal investment and potential partnerships; Township of Central Frontenac has commenced the development of a Business Plan with public consultation involving a more detailed survey of residents with the results plus feedback from stakeholder interviews and the Town Hall sessions pointing towards adding rental stock for seniors. The Township of North Frontenac in 2017 was investigating how best to move seniors housing forward in that municipality and the County Seniors Housing Task Force met on January 9, 2018 with the consultants which resulting in the Warden, Mr. Hermer (Councillor of North Frontenac), and the Chief Administrative Officer of North Frontenac being asked to deliver a report to the Township of North Frontenac Council recommending that the County of Frontenac support the conducting of an affordable

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief219 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

As aa result, result, North North Frontenac Township seniors housing project needs assessment. assessment. As Council, at its meeting held January 26, 2018 passed the following resolution: Be It Resolved That Council receives Mayors Higgins, Councillor Hermer and the Administrative Report entitled “Seniors Housing” for Chief Administrative Officer’s Officers Administrative information purposes; And That Council have identified affordable Seniors Housing as a priority for 2018 and Council supports moving forward with the development of a Needs Assessment (study/analysis) to identify our local needs and affordability, prior to a Business Plan; And That Council request the County to fund the Needs Assessment for North Frontenac Township from the County funds funds earmarked earmarked for for senior’s seniors projects. The resulting Needs Assessment was subsequently carried out earlier this year and as a result, the Council of the Township of North Frontenac, at its meeting held Friday, April 27th, 2018 27th, 2018 passed passed the the following following resolution: Whereas Council passed Resolution #42-18 to move forward with the development of a Needs Assessment (study/analysis) to identify our local needs and affordability, prior to a Business Plan and Council requested the County to fund the Needs Assessment for North Frontenac Township from the County funds earmarked for senior’s projects; And Whereas as part of Frontenac County’s broader seniors housing initiative, the Township of North Frontenac has been pursuing a study of seniors housing needs to identify and determine how best to address the needs of local seniors. Work to date has shown a substantive demand by local seniors for services and supports that would help them stay in their current accommodations, thereby making this approach a strong element of the strategy to meet seniors housing needs. At the same time, there is continued recognition that affordability and the lack of housing options remain persistent, longer term issues for local seniors. To date, County funding made available to help support seniors housing initiatives across the Frontenacs has been targeted only to supporting the addition of seniors units. Based on the findings to date, the Township is interested in seeking County support to use allocated funds for a broader array of seniors housing solutions with an emphasis initially on supporting seniors in their current homes; Therefore Be It Resolved That Council receives the draft Needs Assessment Report and Survey/Questionnaire Results prepared by Ken Foulds, Re/fact Consulting, and Ed Starr, SHS Consulting, after consultation with North Frontenac Representatives; and in order to more effectively meet the needs of local seniors, the Township of North Frontenac requests that Frontenac County allow the funds that have been allocated to North Frontenac for seniors housing be utilized for:

1. Developing Developingaapilot pilotproject project to to help help stabilize stabilize seniors seniors in in need through the provision of supports that help them maintain independence in their current housing; Recommend Report to Council Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Officer — – Request Requestby by the the Township Township of of North North Frontenac Frontenac to to Broaden Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing Page 2 of 7 May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief220 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

2. Pursuing funding opportunities with the City of Kingston (as designated

Service Manager) to help support seniors in their homes via assistance with housing costs and home repairs; and 3. 3. Seeking longer term opportunities to add new, affordable housing options for seniors in the Township through funding programs and local partnerships. A copy of the Township resolution and Needs Assessment carried out by SHS Consulting is attached to this report as Appendix A. Comment Staff have provided two options for Council consideration: Option One: Should Council wish to broaden the stated objective of its Strategic Plan with respect to Seniors Housing, the following motion provides Council with the opportunity to amend the wording of their strategic objective to reflect the request from the Township. That, given that the Township of North Frontenac funding request is not contemplated by the 2014 Strategic Plan (i.e., Addressing the existing gap in Seniors Affordable Housing stock by leveraging and/or funding the construction project in in each each of of the the four Frontenac township”), of a project four Frontenac township”), that that Council Council amend amend their their strategic objective, as follow: •

•

•

That County staff be directed to negotiate a funding agreement with the Township with respect respect to to Option Option #1, #1, “developing “developing a to help help Township with a pilot pilot project project to stabilize seniors in need through the provision of supports that help them maintain independence independence in in their their own own home” home” to to a a maximum maximum of of $50,000 $50,000 at at a a maintain 50% funding rate. It being understood that the proposed agreement will reflect the following: o That the program development, administration, procurement and audit will be the responsibility of the Township o That the agreement will stipulate a term of four (4) years from the date of signing, or the depletion of the funding, whichever comes first o That the $50,000 allocation will reduce the funding available for Option #3 o At the discretion of the Township, the 50% local share can be achieved through local taxation, reserves, augmentation of an existing program or a grant o That the County will pay invoices for this project as submitted by the Township for services completed and paid Support in principle principle the the request request by by the the Township regarding Option Option #2, #2, “in “in Support in Township regarding pursuing funding opportunities with the City of Kingston (as designated Service Manager) to help support seniors in their homes via assistance with housing costs costs and and home home repairs” repairs” at housing at no no cost cost to to the the County County Approve the request by the Township to utilize funding for Option #3, “Seeking longer term opportunities to add new, affordable housing options for “Seeking funding programs programs and and local local partners” partners” based seniors in the Township through funding based

Recommend Report to Council Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Officer — – Request Requestby by the the Township Township of of North North Frontenac Frontenac to to Broaden Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing May 16, 2018 Page 3 of 7

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief221 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

upon the approved funding formula, less an funding expending in for Option #1 Option Two: Should Council not wish to consider to broaden the stated objective of its Strategic Plan with respect to Seniors Housing, the following motion would achieve this: That the Council of the County of Frontenac deny the request by the Township of North Frontenac to broaden the use of funds allocated by the County of Frontenac for Seniors Housing to develop a pilot project to help stabilize seniors in need through the provision of supports that help them maintain independence in their current housing; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac support the request by the Township of North Frontenac in pursuing funding opportunities with the City of Kingston (as designated Service Manager) to help support seniors in their homes via assistance with housing costs and home repairs; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac support the Township of North Frontenac on seeking longer term opportunities to add new, affordable housing options for seniors in the Township through funding programs and local partnerships. As noted in Councils Strategic Goal Implementation plan, in early January of 2014, Frontenac County Council began working with Performance Concepts to assist with the development of goals for the balance of the 2010-14 term and the 2015-18 term. The process involved a series of one on one interviews with Council and senior staff, plus meetings with our four member municipal Councils and culminated in a public meeting held on May 15, 2014. On June 18, 2014 County Council approved three goals, with Goal #1 being: Meeting the Aging Tsunami Challenge for Frontenac Seniors by: ➢ Addressing the existing gap in Seniors Transportation by ensuring 100% of  Seniors receive a timely, affordable ride to scheduled medical appointments received in in aa timely timely fashion) fashion) — – to (when requests received to be be accomplished accomplished by by the the end of the 2015-18 term of Council.  ➢ Addressing the existing gap in Seniors Affordable Housing stock by leveraging and/or funding the construction of a project in each of the four Frontenac – totobe townships — beaccomplished accomplishedby by the the end end of of the the 2015-18 2015-18 term of Council. It should be noted that the work done by the consultants regarding the Needs Assessment, including development of the questionnaire and follow up discussions has been done through the Townships seniors housing committee and not through the As such, such, staff staff comments comments are based on County Senior’s Senior’s Housing Task Force. Force. As interpretation of the Needs Assessment. With respect respect to to the the resolution passed by the Assessment. With Township of North Frontenac, staff provide the following observations:

Recommend Report to Council Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Officer — – Request Requestby by the the Township Township of of North North Frontenac Frontenac to to Broaden Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing Page 4 of 7 May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief222 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Developing a pilot project to help stabilize seniors in need through the provision of supports that help them maintain independence in their current housing;

From a review of survey questions, it can be assumed that provision of supports that help seniors maintain independence in their current housing would include:  ➢ Housekeeping  ➢ Cooking ➢ Cleaning   ➢ Yard and exterior work ➢ Transportation   ➢ Snow ploughing Staff appreciates that the focus of North Frontenac, as noted in its resolution, is to meet the needs of local seniors; however the request to broaden the use of funds allocated for seniors housing as noted above would not be consistent with the intent of the Strategic Goal of County Council to increase housing stock for seniors, nor does it address the issue of the need for additional does address an income shortage additional seniors seniors housing. housing. ItIt does faced by some seniors; however this is provided by the City of Kingston as the Municipal Service Manager for social services which is a Provincial responsibility that is not sustainable if taken on at the municipal level. In early January of 2014, Frontenac County Council began working with a consulting firm to assist with the development of a strategic plan for the balance of the 2010-14 term and the 2015-18 term. The process involved a series of one on one interviews with Council and senior staff, plus meetings with our four member municipal Councils and culminated in a public meeting held held on on May May 15, 15, 2014. 2014. As noted in the Strategic Goals Implementation Plan, attached to this report as Appendix D, the goals were intended to focus the efforts of Council and administration on projects and outcomes that would address service issues for County residents which were vetted by County Council, our member municipalities and by citizens during the public meeting process and builds upon existing partnerships, programs and services and principles expressed during the process. These These strategic strategic goals goals were were also also re-confirmed re-confirmed by the sitting Council at its regular meeting held May 18, 2016 via staff report 2016-058 in which the following resolution was passed: Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac receive the Chief Administrative Officer OfficerReport Report— – Strategic Strategic Priorities Priorities — – Status Administrative Status Report; And Further That Council endorse Option Number 2 and direct staff to implement the strategic priorities as outlined, [including; 1. 1.

Meet the Aging Tsunami challenge for Frontenac Seniors

Meet the emerging “post “post landfill” landfill” Solid Waste Management challenge for Frontenac residents.

Respect for the Taxpayer and Focused Economic Development]

Recommend Report to Council Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Officer — – Request Requestby by the the Township Township of of North North Frontenac Frontenac to to Broaden Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing May 16, 2018 Page 5 of 7

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief223 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

And Further That for planning purposes, Council approve a strategic plan review process that is commenced in year 2019 of a Council term. CARRIED AS AMENDED Option 2 noted in the report recommended to continue with the three goals, providing minor modifications to the goals and/or provide clarification or focus. The North Frontenac Needs Assessment carried out by SHS Consulting would indicate support for Councils Strategic Goal which notes, based on projections drawn from the CN Watson study for Frontenac County (2014) for 2016-2036, by 2036, seniors will account for 40% of the population in North Frontenac, an increase of 32% (225 more seniors in 2036 than there there were were in in 2016) 2016) during during the the period. period. The Needs Assessment also indicates that although the majority of respondents would prefer to stay in their home if given the choice, 72% of those surveyed would take advantage of renting a low maintenance unit if one were available as well as confirms that having more affordable rental options would ease the affordability issues of both owners and renters. Should Council wish to support the request by North Frontenac, it is recommended that the Township provide additional information as to how the funding would be allocated to existing home owners such as income limits, ability to pay or if the home owner would be required to contribute towards a portion of the cost as well as how this type of program would be sustained once County funding has been depleted. The wording in the Option One motion would lead to an agreement with the Township to address these matters. 2.

Pursuing funding opportunities with the City of Kingston (as designated Service Manager) to help support seniors in their homes via assistance with housing costs and home repairs

Supports such as rent supplements, housing allowances and home repairs are offered through the City of Kingston as the Municipal Service Manager which help to enhance housing affordability Assistance with home affordability and/or and/or help help seniors seniorsto tostay stayinintheir theirhomes. homes. Assistance repairs is currently available through through the the Kingston Kingston Frontenac Frontenac Renovates Renovatesprogram. program. The City of Kingston has confirmed that there will not be any changes to the guidelines this copy of of the the Kingston Kingston Frontenac Frontenac Renovates Renovates Program Guidelines and year. AAcopy Requirements is attached to this report as Appendix B. 3.

Seeking longer term opportunities to add new, affordable housing options for seniors in the Township through funding programs and local partnerships.

This option is the intent of the Strategic Goal of addressing the existing gap in Seniors Affordable Housing stock by leveraging and/or funding the construction of a project in Frontenac townships townships — – to each of the four Frontenac to be be accomplished accomplished by by the the end end of the 2015-18 review of of the the Needs Needs Assessment Assessment survey survey indicates that if the option term of Council. AA review were available, 72% of respondents would be interested in renting a low maintenance housing unit, with 36% willing to pay between $500 and $750 per month while 32% would pay between $1,000 and $1,250 per month. Recommend Report to Council Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Officer — – Request Requestby by the the Township Township of of North North Frontenac Frontenac to to Broaden Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing May 16, 2018 Page 6 of 7

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief224 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Although the Township of Frontenac Islands Business Plan was to develop a 5 unit pod solely funded by the Township with the absence of any external funding, the business plan housing project in South South Frontenac Frontenac has incorporated the potential to plan for for a a senior’s senior’s housing project in work with community partners starting starting at at aa 50/50 50/50 split split of of market market and and affordable affordablerents. rents. A Business Plan Plan for for Seniors Seniors Housing Housing — – South copy of the Business South Frontenac Frontenac Project Project is attached to The Needs Needs Assessment Assessment survey survey outlines the need for an this report as Appendix C. C. The increase in affordable seniors housing that would provide a long term solution. Sustainability Implications The development of a strategic plan tied to a long range financial plan is a key element in ensuring that Council, citizen and staff objectives are aligned. Financial Implications There are no financial implications directly associated with this report. The County has set aside $1.4M for this project divided evenly between the four municipalities and less funds expended on reports and business plans. Subject to a final accounting of the disbursement, it is anticipated that approximately $330K will be available to each Township. The funding formula approved by Council requires the County to pay the Township based upon the percentage of funds for the total project. For example, for Frontenac Islands, the County share was approximately 33% of the total project. Funds were transferred to the Township as invoices were paid. For Council consideration and as a starting point for discussions, the staff recommendation provides a suggested funding formula. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Joe Gallivan, Director of Planning and Economic Development Susan Brant, Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer Ken Foulds, Re/fact Consulting

Recommend Report to Council Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Officer — – Request Requestby by the the Township Township of of North North Frontenac Frontenac to to Broaden Broaden the Use of Funds Allocated for Seniors Housing Page 7 of 7 May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief225 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief226 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Draft Report April 19, 2018 Submitted by:

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief227 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

i

Table of Contents Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………………………….. i Housing Demand ………………………………………………………………………………..1 Housing Supply …………………………………………………………………………………..8 Affordability ……………………………………………………………………………………..17 Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………….20

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief228 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

1

Housing Demand Population Trends and Growth North Frontenac Township, along with the townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac and Central Frontenac, together comprise Frontenac County. Within the County, North Frontenac maintains a relatively small share of the overall population, accounting for just 7.1% in 2016 (or 1,898 individuals). The population of North Frontenac has increase very modestly in real terms over the last 15 year. From 2001 to 2011, the population increased by 2.3% and from 2011 to 2016 it increased by 3.0%. By comparison, Frontenac County’s population increased by 8.0% from 2001 to 2011 and by 1.1% from 2011 to 2016, trending notably low in the last 5 years. Table 1: Population Trends: North Frontenac, Frontenac County, and Ontario; 2001‐2016

North Frontenac Frontenac County Ontario

2001

2006

2011

2016

% Change (2001‐2011)

% Change (2011‐2016)

1,801 24,411

1,904 26,658

1,842 26,375

1,898 26,677

2.3% 8.0%

3.0% 1.1%

11,410,046

12,160,282

12,851,821

13,448,494

12.6%

4.6%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profile 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016

It is projected that from 2016 to 2036, North Frontenac’s population will grow by 22.7%1. In 2016, those in the age groups of 55 to 64 years old and seniors 65 years and over made up the largest share of the population. By 2036, seniors will account for 40% of the population, an increase of 32% during the period. In real terms, this means that there will 225 more seniors in 2036 than there were in 2016. However, the most growth in this timeframe proportionally will be among 25 to 34 year olds (100%), 35 to 44 year olds (96.3%), and 0 to 14 year olds (47.2%). During the same period, the share of adults aged 55 to 64 years old is projected to decrease by 34%.

1

Projections are drawn from the CN Watson study for Frontenac County (2014).

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief229 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

2

Figure 1: Age of Population and Population Projections: North Frontenac; 2016‐2036

Household Trends and Growth Between 2001 and 2011, the number of households in North Frontenac grew by 11.7%, while Frontenac County experienced a growth of 18.6%. In the period from 2011 to 2016, household growth in North Frontenac increased by only 1.65%, which brought the total number of households to 920. However, Frontenac County experienced a decrease of 1.1% and consisted of 10,775 households in 2016. Table 2: Household Trends: North Frontenac, Frontenac County, and Ontario; 2001‐2016

North Frontenac Frontenac County Ontario

2001

2006

2011

2016

% Change (2001‐2011)

% Change (2011‐2016)

810 9,190

870 10,265

905 10,900

920 10,775

11.7% 18.6%

1.65% ‐1.1%

4,219,410

4,555,025

4,887,510

5,169,170

15.8%

5.8%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profile 2001, 2006, 2011, and 2016

Based on the CN Watson study done for the County in 2014, it is projected that from 2016 to 2036, the total number of households in North Frontenac will grow from 920 to 1,145. This would translate to a 23.8%% increase (255 households) over this period. Frontenac County will grow from 10,775 to 13,805 households during the same timeframe and experience a growth rate of 28.1%. This is an increase of 3,030 households from 2016 to 2036.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief230 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

3

Figure 2: Household Projections: North Frontenac and Frontenac County; 2016‐2036

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profile 2016; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., Population, Housing, and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs, June 2014.

Household Characteristics Household sizes are changing in the municipality. In 2011, one and two‐person households made up 81.2% of all households. From 2011 to 2016, one‐person households decreased slightly by 1.75%, while two‐ person households grew by 7.7%. In 2016, one and two‐person households made up 83.2% of all households in North Frontenac. This points to the need for housing in North Frontenac that is suited to smaller households. Table 3: Trends in Households Size: North Frontenac and Frontenac County; 2011 and 2016

North Frontenac

% Change (2011‐2016)

Frontenac County

% Change (2011‐2016)

2011

2016

2011

2016

1 Person 2 Persons 3 Persons 4 Persons 5 or more persons

285 450 90 55 35

280 485 65 60 30

‐1.75% 7.7% ‐27.7% 9% ‐14.3%

18,435 23,305 9,350 7,965 3,735

19,325 24,205 9,340 7,670 3,755

4.8% 3.9% ‐0.11% ‐3.7% 0.5%

Total

905

920

1.65%

62,795

64,295

2.4%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profiles 2011 and 2016

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief231 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

4

Comparing one‐person households in Frontenac County to North Frontenac shows that there has been a decrease in this type of household from 2011 to 2016. As witnessed in North Frontenac, the number of 3‐ person households decreased in Frontenac County as well, while the number of two person households increased strongly in both areas. In 2011, the most common households by type in North Frontenac were couples without children (45.8%), non‐family one‐person households (31.5%), and couples with children (14.9%). In 2016, there has been an increase of 7.2% in the number of couples without children ‐ this group remains the most common type of household in North Frontenac. The largest change has been seen in non‐family two or more person households with an increase of 66.6% since 2011. Multiple and other households decreased by 60% between 2011 and 2016. There has also been a large increase (22.2%) in couples with children. Table 4: Number and Proportion of Households by Household Type: North Frontenac; 2011 and 2016

Couples without Children Couples with Children Lone Parents Multiple and Other Households Non‐Family (1 Person) Non‐Families (2 or more Persons)

415 135 40

45.8% 14.9% 4.4%

445 165 40

48.3% 17.9% 4.3%

% Change (2011‐2016) 7.2% 22.2% 0.0%

25 285

2.7% 31.5%

10 280

1.1% 30.4%

‐60% ‐1.75%

15

1.6%

25

2.7%

Total

905

66.6% 1.65%

2011

2016

920

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profile 2011 and 2016

The vast majority of the households in North Frontenac are led by seniors; in 2016, seniors aged 65 years and over (405 seniors) made up 43.8% of the total number of primary household maintainers in the Township. People aged 55 to 64 years old were the second largest age group of primary household maintainers that year.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief232 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

5

Figure 3: Age of Primary Household Maintainer: North Frontenac; 2016

Age of Primary Household Maintainer, North Frontenac (2016) 300 250 Seniors 43.8%

200 150 100 50 ‐ 25 to 34 years

35 to 44 years

45 to 54 years

55 to 64 years

65 to 74 years

75 to 84 years

85 years and over

Source: Census Profile (2016)

In 2011, seniors that were not a part of a census family made up 30.5% of all seniors2. The rest of the seniors in the municipality (69.5%) made up those who were a part of a census family. Of the non‐census family seniors group, almost all lived alone, with only a few who lived with non‐relatives only or lived with relatives. This suggests that seniors in North Frontenac tend to prefer living alone in the community or face limited housing options. Table 5: Number and Proportion of Seniors by Living Arrangement: North Frontenac; 2011

2011 Number of persons not in census families aged 65 years and over Living with relatives Living with non‐relatives only Living alone Number of census family persons aged 65 years and over

180 5 10 170 410

Total

590

30.5% 0.8% 1.7% 28.8% 69.5%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profile 2011

2

2011 is the most recent year of Census data currently available for this profile.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief233 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

6

Average and Median Incomes Unfortunately, due to data suppression in the National Household Survey (2011) there are no income values available for North Frontenac. Instead 2010 incomes have been calculated using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) growth rates and data from the 2006 census. Based on these calculations, the average household income in 2010 was estimated at $49,890 while the median household income was $40.2343. In 2015, Census figures were available and reported the average household income was $64,737 while the median household income was $51,942. From 2010 to 2015, this translates to a 29.8% increase in the average household income and a 41.0% increase from 2005 to 2015. These trends are not surprising since from 2000 to 2005, incomes grew by 24.4% and 31.6% respectively for households and individuals. Figure 4: Household Income: Frontenac County; 2015

In a similar factoring‐up fashion, the average and median individual incomes in 2010 were calculated at $26,256 and $21,452, respectively. For 2015, Census reported figures indicated average and median individual incomes at $36,631 and $27,755. From 2010 to 2015, this translates to a 39.5% increase in average individual income and a 51.6% increase from 2005 to 2015. Figure 4 above shows that North Frontenac has the lowest average and median household incomes in Frontenac County.

3

As calculated figures, these non‐Census estimates should be used with caution.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief234 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

7

Table 6: Average and Median Household and Individual Income: North Frontenac; 2000‐2015

2000

2005

2010*

2015

% Change (2000‐2005)

% Change (2005‐2015)

% Change (2010‐2015)

Average Household Income

$36,689

$45,924

$49,890

$64,737

25.2%

41.0%

29.8%

Median Household Income

$29,773

$37,035

$40,234

$51,942

24.4%

40.2%

29.1%

Average Individual Income

$19,795

$24,169

$26,256

$36,631

22.1%

51.6%

39.5%

Median Individual Income

$15,001

$19,747

$21,452

$27,755

31.6%

40.5%

29.4%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profiles 2001, 2006, and 2016; SHS Consulting estimates based on the growth rate of the CPI for Ontario for 2005‐2010 (8.6%). *Note: Due to data suppression in the National Household Survey (2011) there are no income values available for North Frontenac. Instead 2010 incomes were calculated using the CPI growth rates from the 2006 census

Figure 5: Average and Median Household and Individual Income: North Frontenac; 2000‐2015

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief235 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

8

Housing Supply Dwellings by Type The vast majority of dwellings in North Frontenac are single‐detached houses. As of 2016, single‐detached houses made up 98.4% of all dwellings (910 units). From 2001 to 2011, there was a 14.8% increase in this type of dwelling and another 2.8% increase from 2011 to 2016. Other dwellings made up only 1.1% of all dwelling types in 2011 and less than 1% in 2016. Semi‐detached dwellings showed no change from 2011 to 2016. Apartments with less than five‐storeys have not shown an increase in dwellings between 2011 and 2016. Given that this latter type of dwelling is often highly suitable for seniors, this finding points to the lack of housing options for seniors in North Frontenac. Figure 6: Trends in Dwellings by Type: North Frontenac; 2001‐2016

As of 2016, there were 855 owned dwellings and 70 rented dwellings in North Frontenac. This means that in terms of market share, rental dwellings currently comprise about 7.6% of all occupied permanent dwellings with the balance being ownership (92.4%). The number of rental dwelling has remained fairly modest over the last 15 years with the number of rented dwellings increased by 45 dwellings from 2001 to 2006 and then decreased by 15 dwellings from 2006 to 2016. By contrast, owned dwellings have increased by 11% over the last 15 years.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief236 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

9

Figure 7: Housing Tenure in North Frontenac, 2001 to 2016

By comparison, data for all of the County of Frontenac4 shows that the number of rented dwellings is increasing. In 2016, there were 22,550 rented dwellings, up 3,110 dwellings from 2006. There is a similar increase in owned dwellings across the County. In 2016, 41,745 dwellings were owned, which is an increase of 1,995 owned dwellings since 2006. As of 2016, 35.1% of dwellings in all of Frontenac County were rented, compared to only 7.6% in North Frontenac. This is another indicator of the lack of housing options for seniors in North Frontenac, since many seniors often seek rental accommodation due to income constraints.

4

For this data set only, all of County of Frontenac data is deemed to include the City of Kingston due to data aggregation within available Census data tables.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief237 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

10

Figure 8: Housing Tenure: Frontenac County; 2001‐2016

In 2016, seniors (65 years of age and over) made up the largest share of household maintainers in North Frontenac at just over 44%. In the case of owner households, seniors accounted for almost 43% while the seniors share or renter households was about 50%. Among senior households, 91.1% were owners and 8.9% were renters, a proportion that was similar to the tenure split among all households. Figure 9: Tenure by Age of Household Maintainer: North Frontenac; 2016

Tenure by Age of Household Maintainer, North Frontenac (2016) 250

of households

200 150 100 50 0 15 to 24 years

25 to 34 years

35 to 44 years

45 to 54 years Owner

55 to 64 years

65 to 74 years

75 to 84 85 years years and over

Renter

Source: 2016 Census ‐ Statistics Canada, catalogue 98‐400‐X2016231

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief238 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

11

Condition of Dwellings and Periods of Construction Census data reveals relative stability in the reported condition of dwellings within North Frontenac. In 2016, dwellings requiring only regular maintenance or minor repairs accounted for 88.5% of all stock or 815 dwellings. Since 2001, the actual number of dwellings in this category has very gradually increased. The proportion of dwellings in need of major repairs at 2016 was 11.9% and in terms of real numbers, the dwellings in this category have remained reasonably constant despite some shifts in 2006. Table 7: Trends in the Condition of Dwellings: North Frontenac; 2001‐2016

2001 Only regular maintenance or minor repairs needed Major repairs needed Total

715 100 810

2006

88.3% 12.3%

805 65 870

92.5% 7.5%

2016 815 110 920

88.5% 11.9%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profiles 2001, 2006 and 2016

Likewise, in all of Frontenac County5, the actual number of dwellings in need of major repairs has also remained fairly constant since 2001 but the proportion of these units (6.2%) is considerably lower than in North Frontenac (11.9%). The actual dwellings requiring only regular maintenance or minor repairs across the County has seen considerable growth since 2001, a reflection of the new dwellings being added to the stock over this period. Table 8: Trends in the Condition of Dwellings: Frontenac County; 2001‐2016

2001 Only regular maintenance or minor repairs needed Major repairs needed Total

51,725 4,065 55,785

92.7% 7.3%

2006 55,030 4,155 59,190

93.0% 7.0%

2016 60,280 4,010 64,295

93.8% 6.2%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profiles 2001, 2006 and 2016

Most of the dwellings in North Frontenac have been built in or before 1980 (53.2%), with over 25% of them being built in 1960 or before. This means that more than half of the stock is at least 40 years or older and that about one quarter of the stock is at least 60 year or older.

5

For this data set only, all of County of Frontenac data is deemed to include the City of Kingston due to data aggregation within available Census data tables.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief239 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

12

Figure 10: Period of Construction of Dwellings: North Frontenac

Dwellings in North Frontenac by Period of Contruction (excl. seasonal) 2011 to 2016 2006 to 2010 2001 to 2005 1991 to 2000

Over 50% of stock is 40 years in age or older

1981 to 1990 1961 to 1980 1960 or before 0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Source: Census Profile (2016)

Seasonal Dwellings As of 2016, it is estimated that there are more than 2,600 seasonal dwellings in North Frontenac. This represents almost three times the number of permanent dwellings in the Township, a ratio that is the highest within the County. It is projected that from 2016 to 2036, the number of seasonal dwellings in North Frontenac will grow from 2,630 to 2,815 dwellings, which would translate into a 7.0% increase (or roughly 10 new units per year). Frontenac County will grow from 8,190 to 8,465 seasonal dwellings during the same timeframe and experience a growth rate of 3.4%. The seasonal dwellings in North Frontenac currently make up 32% of all seasonal dwellings in Frontenac County. The continued growth in seasonal dwellings in North Frontenac is in stark contrast to the growing needs of seniors who are/will be seeking permanent housing options in the area. Table 9: Trends in Seasonal Dwellings: North Frontenac and Frontenac County; 2016‐2036

2016

2021

2026

2031

2036

% Change (2016‐2036)

North Frontenac

2,630

2,685

2,730

2,775

2,815

7.0%

Frontenac County

8,190

8,280

8,350

8,410

8,465

3.4%

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs, June 2014

Residential Development Potential Several policy documents and legislation, such as the Provincial Policy Statement and the Official Plans for the Townships within the County, all support new residential development in designated settlement areas. As of June 2014, Watson and Associates (2014) stated that 2,569 hectares of vacant land are

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief240 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

13

designated as areas of settlement across Frontenac County. As seen in Table 10, about 647 hectares of vacant designated land are available for development in North Frontenac, which comprises 25.2% of all the settlement land in the entire County. The main growth in the County has and will continue to be seen in South Frontenac where the largest share of settlement land is located (56%). Table 10: Residential Development Potential; The Frontenacs; 2014

Vacant Designated Land (Hectare)

% of Total Land within Settlement Areas

North Frontenac Central Frontenac South Frontenac Frontenac Islands

647 411 1,438 13

25.2% 16.0% 56.0% 0.5%

Frontenac County

2,569

100.0%

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs, June 2014

House Prices As shown in Table 11, it is apparent that the average house price in the Township is increasing. From 2005 to 2010, the average price went up by 64.5% from $176,648 to $290,633 according to Census figures6. Of particular significance is the observation that average house prices in North Frontenac have increased at a greater rate than prices in Frontenac County overall from 2005 to 2015 (64.5% vs. 48.4%). In fact, according to a sample of current local Multiple Listing Service (MLS) listings, the average cost of single‐ detached dwellings in North Frontenac on the market is in the order of $403,460. This serves to illustrate the difficulty facing seniors with limited incomes who are seeking affordable housing options in North Frontenac. Table 11: Average House Prices; North Frontenac and Frontenac County: 2000‐2015

2000

2005

2015

% Change (2010‐2015)

North Frontenac Frontenac County

$102,821 $155,557

$176,648 $239,826

$290,633 $356,013

64.5% 48.4%

Ontario

$199,884

$297,479

$506,409

70.2%

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profiles 2001, 2006, and 2016

6

While Census data is not a preferred indicator for house prices, there is very limited alternate data by which to gauge house price changes over time locally. As seen in current MLS listings figures, Census figures are considered under‐representative of current market pricing.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief241 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

14

Average Rents Given the relatively small supply of rental units in North Frontenac, there is no historical rent and vacancy indicator data available from typical sources. The closest market area for which information is available is the Kingston CMA. CMHC reports annually on rental activity in this market and within the Kingston CMA, Zone 4 covers a broad area on the edge of Kingston that includes parts of Central Frontenac. As this is the closest available market to North Frontenac, data for Zone 4 will be discussed in broad terms, recognizing that it provides only one point of reference for consideration and may not accurately portray actual rental conditions in the North Frontenac context. This information is augmented by an informal survey of local landlords in the Sharbot Lake area which was recently undertaken. In 2017, average CMHC market rents for Zone 4 were $603 for bachelor units, $1,035 for 1‐bedroom units, $1,345 for 2‐bedroom units, and $1,209 for 3‐bedroom units. From 2010 to 2017, the average rent for bachelor units has increased by 11.3%, 1‐bedrooms increased by 36.4%, 2‐bedrooms increased by 23.0%, and 3‐bedrooms have increased by 10.7%. Generally, as unit types grow in size, the cost of rent increases as well. When averaged on an annual basis from 2010 to 2017, overall rents increased annually by 4.4% within Zone 4. The largest increases have been for 1‐bedroom (5.2%) and 2‐bedroom apartments (4.1%) while increases were more modest for bachelor (1.6%) and 3+ bedroom apartments (1.5%). Sustained price increases tend to signal higher demand while flat or declining prices suggest softening in demand. Based on historical data, there continues to be a clear demand for 1 and 2 bedroom units in Zone 4. Figure 11: Trends in Average Market Rents; Zone 4 of Kingston CMA for 2010‐2017

Average Rents by Unit Size Kingston CMA‐Zone 4

$1,600 $1,400

MONTHLY RENT

$1,200 $1,000

$1,345 $1,092

$1,209 $1,035

$1,043

$800 $600

$759

$400

$542

$603

$200 2010

2011 2012 2013 Bachelor 1‐Bed

2014 2‐Beds

2015 2016 3+ Beds

2017

Source: CMHC Housing Market Portal and Rental Housing Market Report (2017)

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief242 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

15

As noted, data from a recent informal survey of some local landlords in the Sharbot Lake area was also sourced for comparison purposes. When comparing these rents (shown in Table 12) against Zone 4 CMHC averages, it’s obvious that local rents tend to be lower, especially for one bedroom units. Top end rents for local two and three bedroom units tend to be closer to Zone 4 averages, but units locally also tend to be larger than in Zone 4 and in some instances reflect detached homes. Based on limited local data, local rents do indicate lower average rents but it should be noted that household incomes are also lower locally which can lead to affordability issues. Table 12: Local Rents in Central Frontenac

Central Frontenac – Local Landlord Data (2017) Unit Size

1‐Bed

Rent Range $560 to $800

2‐Bed $625 to $1,150

3+ Bed $915 to $1,150

Source: Local landlord scanning by SHS

Vacancy Rates Like rental rates, vacancy rates are also reported in CMHC market data and are organized based on the same zones. Overall from 2010 to 2017, vacancy rates for rental units have been volatile for Zone 4 of the Kingston CMA. In 2010, the overall vacancy rate was 1.3%, rising to as high as 5.2% in 2016 and dropping again dramatically to 1.0% in 2017. Similar volatile vacancy trends have been seen across all unit types, with peaks most common in the 2014 to 2016 period, per Figure 12. Figure 12: Trends in Vacancy Rates; Zone 4 of Kingston CMA from 2010‐2017

Vacancy Rates by Unit Size Kingston CMA‐Zone 4

8.0

VACANCY RATE (%)

7.0 6.0 5.0 4.1

4.0 3.0 2.0

1.8

1.0

0.8

0.0 2010

2011 Bachelor

2012

2013 1‐Bed

2014 2‐Beds

2015

2016

2017

3+ Beds

Source: CMHC Housing Market Portal and Rental Housing Market Report (2017)

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief243 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

16

In general, a healthy vacancy rate is considered to be around 3.0%. The vacancy rate for Zone 4 in 2017 was 1.0%, which indicates a lack of supply of units. In terms of unit size, 2017 figures also show recent trending downward for 1‐bedroom (0.8%) and 2‐bedroom (0.9%) units as well as 3+ bedroom units (1.8%), which signals generally higher demand for these unit sizes. Bachelor units are trending upwards at 4.1%, signally lower demand.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief244 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

17

Affordability A standard approach to understand if there is an affordability problem in a municipality is to analyze how many residents pay more than 30% of their income to shelter costs. In 2016 in North Frontenac, seniors accounted for 42.9% of all owner households and almost 82% of these senior owners are mortgage free. Comparing North Frontenac to Frontenac County shows that average and median house values in 2016 were much higher in Frontenac County (see Table 13). The average monthly shelter costs for owned dwellings in North Frontenac was $838 compared to $1,272 in Frontenac County7. The percentage of owner households in North Frontenac spending 30% or more of its income on shelter costs was 22.6% in 2016 while the percentage of owner households spending 30% or more of its income on shelter costs for the County was 14.4%. This is a difference of 8.2% and shows that a higher percentage of owner households in North Frontenac are having difficulty paying for shelter costs than people in Frontenac County. Table 13: Statistics for Homeowner Households: North Frontenac; 2016

North Frontenac 2016

Frontenac County 2016

Total – owner households with a mortgage % of owner households with a mortgage % of owner households spending 30% or more of its income ratio on shelter costs

840 38.7%

41,370 57.1%

22.6%

14.4%

Median monthly shelter costs for owned dwellings ($)

$629

$1,158

Average monthly shelter costs for owned dwellings ($)

$838

$1,272

Median value of dwellings ($)

$200,437

$300,476

Average value of dwellings ($)

$290,633

$356,013

Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population

In terms of renters, in 2016 seniors in North Frontenac accounted for 50% of all renter households but only 8.9% of senior households were renters. As no social housing is located in North Frontenac, these senior renters do not have access to subsidized housing in the Township. The average monthly shelter costs for rented dwellings in North Frontenac was considerably lower at $664 compared to $1,059 in Frontenac County. The percentage of renter households in North Frontenac spending 30% or more of its income on shelter costs was 53.8% in 2016 while the percentage of renter households spending 30% or more of its income on shelter costs for the County was 48.4%. This is a difference of 5.4% and shows that only a slightly higher percentage of renter households in North Frontenac are having difficulty paying for shelter costs than people in Frontenac County despite the fact that shelter costs are considerably lower on average in North Frontenac (see Table 14).

7

Shelter costs are based on 2017 Census data and reflect information as reported by households to Statscan.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief245 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

18

Table 14: Selected Statistics for Renter Households: Central Frontenac and Frontenac County; 2016

Total – tenant households % of tenant households in subsidized housing % of tenant households spending 30% or more of its income ratio on shelter costs Median monthly shelter costs for rented dwellings ($) Average monthly shelter costs for rented dwellings ($)

North Frontenac 2016

Frontenac County 2016

65 0.0%

22,525 12.3%

53.8%

48.4%

$604

$999

$664

$1,059

Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population

As previously noted, there is no subsidized housing located within North Frontenac. Because this form of rental housing is inherently affordable, it provides a viable option for those households having affordability issues (i.e. spending 30% or more on shelter costs). There are however a number of assisted housing units nearby in proximity to the Highway 7 ‐ Highway 38 junction, near Sharbot Lake. These 18 units, operated by North Frontenac Non‐Profit Housing Corporation and Central Frontenac Non‐Profit Housing Corporation, include single and semi‐detached dwellings. Figure 13: Assisted Housing Stock in proximity to North Frontenac

Assisted Housing Stock in North Frontenac Units North Frontanac NP Housing Corp. single and semi‐detached dwellings 1,2, 3 and 4 bedroom units RGI rent scales Central Frontenac NP Housing Corp. attached row dwellings 1 bedroom units Low end of market rents Total

18

5 23

Source: SHS scanning

According to the North and Central Frontenac Non‐Profit Housing Corporation’s social housing wait list, the current wait list is 125 households. The greatest need is for one‐bedroom units (86 households) and seniors over the age of 60 account for 16 of these households (18.6%). This waiting list includes both North and Central Frontenac. There are also 25 social housing apartment units located just off Highway 41 north of Highway 7 in Northbrooke which are operated by Lennox and Addington County although waiting list information was not available.

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief246 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

19

In reflecting on local affordability, it’s clear that roughly 225 households are deemed to currently have affordability issues which constitutes one quarter of all households in the Township per Table 15. While this issue is most acute for renter households, the largest number of actual households affected are owners. Given the limited availability of local rental stock, it is probable that having more affordable rental options would ease the affordability issues of both owners and renters in this situation. Table 15: Shelter‐to‐Income Ratio Statistics by Tenure for North Frontenac (2016)

Owners

Renters

Total

840

70

910

190

35

225

22.6%

50%

24.7%

Total private households Households spending 30% or more of income on shelter costs % of households spending 30% or more of its income on shelter costs Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population

Based on known local market comparators, the level at which any potential rental options are offered would be an important determinant of household affordability. Per Table 16, average current market rents and corresponding minimum incomes illustrate the basic thresholds at which affordability would be achieved by unit size. Households that have insufficient incomes to meet these thresholds would require some form of assistance in order to maintain affordability, either through lower rents or some form of rental supplement. Table 16 – Minimum affordability requirements based on current market rents

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief247 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

20

Summary The following points summarize the North Frontenac needs assessment: Population  The population of North Frontenac has increased modestly from 2001 to 2016 (5.4%)  From 2016 to 2036, it is projected there will be a 23.8% increase in the population. Growth will be most notable in population groups such as the youth, working age adults, and seniors.  The number of seniors is expected to increase in real terms but will continue to account for about 40% of the overall population from 2016 to 2036. Households  The number of households in the Township increased from 2001 to 2016 (13.5%).  By 2036, there will be a projected total number of 1,145 households in North Frontenac. This represents a 23.8% increase from 2016.  Two‐person households are increasing and one‐person households are remaining static but three‐person and five or more person households are decreasing.  Household and individual incomes are gradually increasing. The average household income in 2015 was $64,737 (i.e. a 41.0% increase since 2005) but is still the lowest in Frontenac County  Couples without children and non‐family one‐person households make up the majority of households in North Frontenac.  Nearly 30% of seniors are not a part of a census family and most of these seniors are living alone  Single‐detached houses are the most common type of housing, making up almost all dwellings.  In real terms, dwellings in need of major repairs have increased slightly from 2001 to 2016 and are more prevalent than the County average.  This may be due to the housing stock age as over half of all dwellings were built before 1981.  The 2,600+ units of seasonal dwellings today will increase by 7% from 2016 to 2036.  About 647 hectares of vacant designated land (25.2% of the County total) are available for possible future residential development within settlement areas of North Frontenac. Affordability  Based on Census figures, average house values locally have continued to increase over the years. From 2000 to 2015, the average value increased by 64.5%, reaching $290,633.  Over the same period, the County saw increases of 48.4% but the average house value was considerably higher, reaching $356,013.  Average CMHC market rents have increased in areas surrounding the Kingston CMA (Zone 4) by 30.9% from 2010 to 2017 (average annual increase of 4.4%).  The overall vacancy rate in 2017 was 1.0% for all dwellings compared to 5.2% in 2016.  Almost one quarter of all owners and half of all renter households have an affordability problem in North Frontenac (i.e. spending 30% or more of income on shelter costs)

North Frontenac Needs Assessment Draft Report

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief248 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

North Frontenac Seniors Housing Questionnaire Summary of Survey Responses Seniors in North Frontenac were invited to complete a seniors’ housing questionnaire to help understand the housing and related needs of seniors in the area. Surveys were accepted in both on‐line and hardcopy formats, and all responses were integrated into Survey Monkey to facilitate tabulation of results. A total of 69 completed surveys were received and while most respondents answered all questions, some did not reply to certain questions. A brief summary of the survey results are provided below and are accompanied by a series of frequency tables for each question showing tabulated results.                

The majority of the respondents are permanent residents in North Frontenac (91.3%). 36.2% of respondents live in Ompah, 27.5% live outside of a hamlet and 21.7% live in Cloyne. The majority of the respondents are between the ages of 61 and 75 (66.2%). 89.7% of the respondents own while 5.9% rent. The average number of people living in respondents’ homes is 2 per unit (80.3%). 95.5% of the respondents have their own personal transportation. 31.8% of respondents have a total gross household income of $60,001 and over and 30.2% of respondents have a total gross household income of $20,000 to $40,000. 14.3% of respondents have a total gross household income of under $20,000. A majority of the respondents (95.5%) plan to stay in North Frontenac. Given the option, most residents would choose to stay in their home as‐is (31.7%) or stay in their existing home but access available services (i.e. housekeeping and maintenance services for a fee (44.4%); only 26.9% would move to a low‐maintenance housing unit in North Frontenac The majority of respondents (66% or more) do not find housekeeping, transportation, and paying for housing difficult. However, the majority of respondents do find home maintenance either moderately or very difficult (almost 60%). While 40% of respondents do not receive outside assistance with any services, those that do primarily get assistance for snow plowing (55.6%) or yard and exterior maintenance (28.5%). In the near future, only 20% of respondents felt they would NOT need help with services. The services that respondents felt they would most need help with included snow plowing (68.8%), yard and exterior house maintenance (64.1%), and cleaning (31.3%). 72.4% of respondents would use a central agency to get access to the services mentioned above If the option was available, 72.2% of respondents would be interested in renting a low‐ maintenance housing unit. 36% respondents would pay between $500 and $750 per month for senior’s housing while 32% would pay between $1,000 and $1,250 per month. One respondent noted they would pay up to $1,500 depending on inclusions. Cloyne (30.9%) and Ompah (27.2%) are the top two choices among respondents as the preferred location of the housing unit.

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief249 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q1 Are you a permanent or seasonal resident in North Frontenac? Answered: 69

Skipped: 0

Permanent

Seasonal

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Permanent

91.30%

63

Seasonal

8.70%

6

Total Respondents: 69

1 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief250 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q2 Where is your residence located?I currently reside in: Answered: 69

Skipped: 0

Cloyne

Fermleigh

Ardoch

Plevna

Ompah

Snow Road Outside of a Hamlet 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Cloyne

21.74%

15

Fermleigh

0.00%

0

Ardoch

1.45%

1

Plevna

8.70%

6

Ompah

36.23%

25

Snow Road

4.35%

3

Outside of a Hamlet

27.54%

19

Total Respondents: 69

2 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief251 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q3 What is your age range: Answered: 68

Skipped: 1

55-60

61-75

75+

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

55-60

17.65%

12

61-75

66.18%

45

75+

16.18%

11

Total Respondents: 68

3 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief252 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q4 In terms of accommodation, I currently: Answered: 68

Skipped: 1

Rent

Own

Other

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Rent

5.88%

4

Own

89.71%

61

Other

4.41%

3

Total Respondents: 68

4 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief253 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q5 What is the total number of people living in your household? Answered: 66

Skipped: 3

1

2

3 or more

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

1

16.67%

11

2

80.30%

53

3 or more

3.03%

2

Total Respondents: 66

5 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief254 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q6 How do you currently manage your transportation requirements? Answered: 67

Skipped: 2

I have my own personal…

I rely on others for…

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

I have my own personal transportation

95.52%

64

I rely on others for transportation

4.48%

3

Total Respondents: 67

6 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief255 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q7 Please indicate your total gross household income Answered: 63

Skipped: 6

Under $20,000

$20,000-$40,000

$40,001-$60,000

$60,001+

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Under $20,000

14.29%

9

$20,000-$40,000

30.16%

19

$40,001-$60,000

23.81%

15

$60,001+

31.75%

20

Total Respondents: 63

7 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief256 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q8 Are you currently planning to stay or move away from North Frontenac? Answered: 67

Skipped: 2

Stay

Move away (if so why):

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Stay

95.52%

64

Move away (if so why):

4.48%

3

Total Respondents: 67

MOVE AWAY (IF SO WHY):

DATE

1

Alot depends on Health and the services available to help me stay in my own home

3/26/2018 9:31 AM

2

would move if no services/accommodations available if they are would stay

3/19/2018 10:58 AM

3

closer to doctors and hospitals

3/12/2018 6:48 PM

A few respondents, while indicating they would stay, also included the following comments: • “would move if no service/accommodations” • “eventually move away closer to services and conveniences” • “stay if help is available (paying reasonable rates)” • “stay if help is available (paying reasonable rates)”

8 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief257 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q9 If housekeeping and maintenance services were readily available for a fee or you had the option to move to a new low-maintenance housing unit in North Frontenac, what form of accommodation would you most prefer? Answered: 63

Skipped: 6

Stay in Existing Hom…

Stay in Existing Hom…

Move to Low-Maintena…

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Stay in Existing Home as-is; OR

31.75%

20

Stay in Existing Home and access available services; OR

44.44%

28

Move to Low-Maintenance Housing Unit

26.98%

17

Total Respondents: 63

9 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief258 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q10 How difficult do you find the following activities? Answered: 63

Skipped: 6

Housekeeping

Level of Difficulty

0%

10%

20%

Extremely difficult

30%

40%

50%

Moderately difficult

60%

70%

Not difficult

10 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief259 Administrative

80%

90% 100%

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Home Maintenance

Level of Difficulty

0%

10%

20%

Extremely difficult

30%

40%

50%

Moderately difficult

60%

70%

Not difficult

11 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief260 Administrative

80%

90% 100%

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Transportation

Level of Difficulty

0%

10%

20%

Extremely difficult

30%

40%

50%

Moderately difficult

60%

70%

Not difficult

12 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief261 Administrative

80%

90% 100%

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Paying for housing

Level of Difficulty

0%

10%

20%

Extremely difficult

30%

40%

50%

Moderately difficult

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

Not difficult

Housekeeping EXTREMELY DIFFICULT Level of Difficulty

MODERATELY DIFFICULT 4.76% 3

NOT DIFFICULT 28.57% 18

TOTAL

66.67% 42

63

Home Maintenance EXTREMELY DIFFICULT Level of Difficulty

MODERATELY DIFFICULT 12.90% 8

NOT DIFFICULT 46.77% 29

TOTAL

40.32% 25

62

Transportation EXTREMELY DIFFICULT Level of Difficulty

MODERATELY DIFFICULT 3.33% 2

NOT DIFFICULT 16.67% 10

13 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief262 Administrative

80.00% 48

TOTAL 60

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Paying for housing EXTREMELY DIFFICULT Level of Difficulty

MODERATELY DIFFICULT 5.08% 3

NOT DIFFICULT 23.73% 14

14 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief263 Administrative

71.19% 42

TOTAL 59

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q11 Are you currently getting outside assistance with any of these services? (please select all applicable) Answered: 63

Skipped: 6

Cooking

Cleaning

Yard and exterior hou…

Transportation

Snow plowing

None

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Cooking

1.59%

1

Cleaning

12.70%

8

Yard and exterior house maintenance

28.57%

18

Transportation

3.17%

2

Snow plowing

55.56%

35

None

39.68%

25

Total Respondents: 63

15 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief264 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q12 Do you expect you will need help with any of the following services in the near future? (please select all applicable) Answered: 64

Skipped: 5

Cooking

Cleaning

Yard and exterior hou…

Transportation

Snow Plowing

None

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Cooking

4.69%

3

Cleaning

31.25%

20

Yard and exterior house maintenance

64.06%

41

Transportation

7.81%

5

Snow Plowing

68.75%

44

None

20.31%

13

Total Respondents: 64

16 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief265 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q13 If available, would you use a central agency to get access to these services? Answered: 58

Skipped: 11

Yes

No

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Yes

72.41%

42

No

27.59%

16

Total Respondents: 58

17 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief266 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q14 If the opportunity for a Low-Maintenance Housing Unit was available, would you be interested in renting or purchasing? Answered: 54

Skipped: 15

Rent

Purchase

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Rent

72.22%

39

Purchase

31.48%

17

Total Respondents: 54

18 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief267 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q15 How much would you be willing to pay monthly for senior’s housing? Answered: 50

Skipped: 19

$500 to $750 per month…

$751 to $1,000 per month…

$1,000 to $1,250 per…

Other amount (please…

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

$500 to $750 per month (household income of $20,000 to $30,000 per year)

36.00%

18

$751 to $1,000 per month (household income of $30,001 to $40,000 per year)

24.00%

12

$1,000 to $1,250 per month (household income of $40,001 to $50,000 per year)

32.00%

16

Other amount (please specify)

8.00%

4

Total Respondents: 50

OTHER AMOUNT (PLEASE SPECIFY)

DATE

1

up to $1500 but depends on inclusions

3/26/2018 10:16 AM

2

Ownership and pay

3/26/2018 9:32 AM

3

400 would like to have money to travel if Abu.

3/19/2018 1:18 PM

4

The price I would be will to pay would I

3/19/2018 10:59 AM

19 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief268 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Township of North Frontenac - Seniors Housing Questionnaire

SurveyMonkey

Q16 Which Hamlet would you prefer the location of the housing unit to be? Answered: 55

Skipped: 14

Cloyne

Fernleigh

Ardoch

Plevna

Ompah

Snow Road Outside of a Hamlet 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

ANSWER CHOICES

RESPONSES

Cloyne

30.91%

17

Fernleigh

0.00%

0

Ardoch

1.82%

1

Plevna

18.18%

10

Ompah

27.27%

15

Snow Road

10.91%

6

Outside of a Hamlet

12.73%

7

Total Respondents: 55

A few respondents added additional comments as follows: • “recommend building by Pine Meadow Nursing Home” • “near Pine Meadow best idea” • “none - put money into assistance for low income pensioners living in their own homes” Note: there are RGI and Nursing home facilities located in Northbrooke, near Cloyne

20 / 20

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief269 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

BUSINESS PLAN FOR SENIORS HOUSING Township of South Frontenac Draft for Discussion January 2015

re fact consulting

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

re fact consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief270 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

to be inserted in final report + acknowledgments

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief271 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. i INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Project background ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 Context for business plan …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 This report …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2 PROJECT NEED ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4 Local housing needs and market indicators …………………………………………………………………… 4 Summary of analysis ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 18 Community-based Indicators…………………………………………………………………………………………… 19 Housing Task Force Direction ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20 PROJECT CONCEPT ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 21 Form and scale……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 21 Unit mix and affordability ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 Amenities ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 22 Preferred project concept ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 23 DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 25 Potential development opportunities …………………………………………………………………………….. 25 Redevelopment and acquisition/rehabilitation opportunities ……………………………………………………. 25 New Development Opportunities ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 27 Preferred option and procurement ………………………………………………………………………………… 29 Servicing & technical considerations ……………………………………………………………………………… 30 Land use approvals ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 31 Sustainability ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 32 FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 34 Project assumptions/parameters ……………………………………………………………………………………. 34 Estimated capital budget …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 35 Soft Costs …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 36 Hard Costs ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 37

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief272 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Estimated operating budget ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 37 Operating Revenue ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 39 Operating Expenses ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 40 Funding/capital requirements …………………………………………………………………………………………. 41 Financial viability ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 42 GOVERNANCE ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 42 Project ownership/oversight ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 43 Planned approach to management ………………………………………………………………………………… 43 MOVING FORWARD ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44 Summary of preferred concept ………………………………………………………………………………………. 44 Process/critical path ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 45 Key elements & critical success factors …………………………………………………………………………. 46 APPENDIX ‘A’ – NEEDS PROFILE ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 48 County-wide Housing Needs and Market Indicators …………………………………………………… 48 Demographic Profile ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 48 Housing Profile ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 54 Profile of Seniors Indicators ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 58 APPENDIX B – PRO FORMA DETAILS ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 63

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief273 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

INTRODUCTION With an aging and diversifying population, seniors housing in Frontenac County has become a growing priority. Recent studies have examined this housing need within the context of the broader housing market and have identified potential options for meeting seniors needs throughout the County. As a result of this work, County Council has designated seniors housing as a priority and allocated funds to explore the feasibility of developing affordable housing projects to meet these needs and to prepare business plans for such projects. This report for the Township of South Frontenac represents the second such business plan prepared under this initiative, following completion of the business plan for the Township of Frontenac Islands. Bringing a housing project from initial concept to on‐the‐ground reality involves a number of sequential stages. Each stage involves a progressively more detailed assessment of the project to ensure that it continues to meet the community’s needs, is financially feasible and is operationally sustainable. Key resource commitments and go‐forward decisions are required for sponsor groups to proceed from one stage to the next. The scope of work for this study addresses the beginning of this process; preparing a business plan to determine ‘proof of concept’ for the project. Specifically, the purpose of this study is to:

1. Produce a business plan for the development of Seniors Housing in the Township of South Frontenac in accordance with the RFP specifications
2. Engage the Township Council and stakeholder groups in a discussion regarding local needs
3. Develop a business model that would result in a sustainable seniors housing project serving the needs of the community.

Project background In 2010‐11, the City of Kingston and County of Frontenac undertook development of a Municipal Housing Strategy (MHS). The strategy involved a comprehensive, multi‐phase process which examined housing needs, supply trends and priority gaps within the regional housing market. A detailed review of current policies, programs and local initiatives was also undertaken to determine the degree to which identified gaps were being addressed. As a result of this analysis, a formal stepwise strategy was developed as part of the MHS to address priority issues and housing gaps over the short, mid and long range. One of the emerging priorities identified for Frontenac County through the MHS was the growing seniors population and concerns about the ability to adequately meet their housing needs looking forward. As a result, the County undertook a more detailed review of the local seniors housing situation to better understand the range of needs and potential solutions that could be used to address these needs. As part of the “Seniors Community Housing Pilot Project Study” completed for the County in 2012, a review of priority issues and existing conditions was completed. An assessment of housing options was also undertaken to evaluate potential seniors housing models and opportunity nodes throughout the County.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief274 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation considerations, including generic model costing and a policy framework analysis were also documented to help frame options for moving forward with a potential pilot project. As a result of the study, it was recommended that a task force be created to pursue the establishment of a pilot seniors housing project. The County subsequently struck a Senior’s Housing Task Force to establish a scope for pursuing a pilot project. The Frontenac Senior’s Housing Task Force met in May of 2014 to review possible directions for the proposed project and determined that the most suitable course of action would be to evaluate potential project options and develop a business plan for the proposed project. In accordance with the seniors objectives of the County’s Strategic Plan, Council allocated $1.5M in financial resources that same year to pursue development of up to four small‐scale pilot projects throughout Frontenac County, one in each constituent Township.

Context for business plan In the “Seniors Community Housing Pilot Project Study”, a range of potential housing options were examined and evaluated against opportunity nodes throughout the County. Given the broad geography, settlement patterns and local needs, a range of potential pilot project options were identified. One of the study conclusions was that a preferred option for a seniors rental housing project would be the development of a facility in the Sydenham community within the Township of South Frontenac, either through new construction or redevelopment. Other communities within South Frontenac were also considered, but the availability of municipal water and the presence of a wide range of community services suitable for seniors made Sydenham the most suitable location for a project of this nature. Following the completion of the first Figure 1 ‐ Situating Marysville within Frontenac County business plan for the Marysville Community within the Township of Frontenac Islands, the decision was made to proceed with preparation of the business plan for South Frontenac, utilizing a similar methodology. A Seniors Housing Task Force for South Frontenac Township was established to guide the process of preparing this plan.

This report This report is the culmination of a multi‐ staged study process. The steps that have led to the development of this business pan report include:

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief275 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Based on project assumptions, this report explores the feasibility of a small‐scale seniors pilot project in the Sydenham community. As a result, this business plan includes:      

An overview of need A defined project concept and discussion of options considered An overview of the development considerations that would influence the project A review of financial feasibility Options for project governance and management Considerations for moving forward with the project

The business plan provides an assessment of the suitability for moving the concept forward and provides recommendations in that regard.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief276 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

PROJECT NEED This section of the report provides a summary analysis of housing needs in the Township of South Frontenac that is based primarily on statistical data analysis. In addition to detailing demographic trends and housing characteristics, the summary also provides an assessment of the need for affordable seniors housing. This analysis is augmented with the results of community consultations, undertaken as part of this study to determine local perspectives on a potential seniors project. Collectively, this information provides a profile of current housing needs for seniors and provides the analytical foundation for the development of the business case.

Local housing needs and market indicators Below we provide an assessment of local housing needs and market indicators in the Township of South Frontenac to help determine the need for seniors housing within the area.

Population Trends In the 10 years tracked by the 2001, 2006 and 2011 Censuses, the population of South Frontenac increased by 10.4%, while Frontenac County as a whole increased by 8.0%. The province’s population increased by a faster rate at 12.6%. However, from 2006 to 2011 the population of South Frontenac decreased by 1%. It should be noted that South Frontenac comprised 68.7% of the County’s population in 2011.

Table 1: Population Trends Municipality

2001

2006

2011

% Change 2001‐2011

South Frontenac

16,415

18,220

18,125

10.4%

Frontenac County

24,411

26,658

26,375

8.0%

Ontario

11,410,046

12,160,282

12,851,821

12.6%

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2001 ‐ 2011

Population by Age The Township of South Frontenac is expected to experience further growth in the next 15 years. It is projected that South Frontenac will still comprise 68.7% of the County’s population until 2031. From 2011 to 2016, the Township’s population is expected to increase by 10%, with the growth of seniors projected at 46% ‐ more than four times the overall population growth rate. From 2016 to 2031, the overall

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief277 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

population is expected to grow by 16%, with seniors experiencing a 70% increase. These figures point to the significant need to provide housing options suitable for an aging population. Table 2: Population Projections by Age

2006

2011

% Change 2006‐2011

2016

% Change 2011‐2016

2021

% Change 2016‐2021

0 to 15 years

3,345

2,990

‐11%

2,789

‐7%

2,987

7%

15 to 24 years

2,185

2,175

0%

2,497

15%

2,223

‐11%

25 to 34 years

1,705

1,590

‐7%

3,145

98%

3,328

6%

35 to 44 years

2,945

2,415

‐18%

2,334

‐3%

2,640

13%

45 to 54 years

3,260

3,380

4%

2,739

‐19%

2,364

‐14%

55 to 64 years

2,635

3,040

15%

2,757

‐9%

2,978

8%

65 years and over

2,145

2,535

18%

3,694

46%

4,346

18%

Total

18,220

18,125

‐1%

19,955

10%

20,865

5%

Age

2026

% Change 2021‐2026

2031

% Change 2021‐2031

% Change 2016‐2031

3,157

6%

3,206

2%

15%

2,216

0%

2,443

10%

‐2%

3,018

‐9%

2,755

‐9%

‐12%

3,062

16%

3,036

‐1%

30%

2,362

0%

2,975

26%

9%

2,780

‐7%

2,419

‐13%

‐12%

5,106

17%

6,277

23%

70%

21,701

4%

23,110

6%

16%

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles, 2011; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs, June 2014

Households In terms of household trends, South Frontenac experienced a 14.4% increase in the number of households from 2001 to 2011. Similarly, Frontenac County experienced an 18.6% increase in households, while Ontario experienced a 15.8% increase.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief278 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 3: Household Trends Municipality

2001

2006

2011

% Change 2001‐2011

South Frontenac

5,945

6,765

6,800

14.4%

Frontenac County

9,190

10,265

10,900

18.6%

4,219,410

4,555,025

4,887,510

15.8%

Ontario

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2001 ‐ 2011

It is forecast that from 2016 to 2031, the number of households in the Township will grow by 18.5%, while the County will increase by 16.8%. In total, 8,715 households are expected to be located in South Frontenac. From 2011 to 2031, an additional 1,750 households are expected to be added in South Frontenac, each of whom will need a place to live. These forecasts point to the need for an expansion of housing supply within the Township during this period.

Table 4: Household Projections Municipality

2011

2016

2021

2026

2031

% Change 2016‐2031

South Frontenac

6,800

7,355

7,855

8,330

8,715

18.5%

Frontenac County

10,900

11,385

12,090

12,735

13,295

16.8%

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles, 2011; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs, June 2014

Tenure In South Frontenac, most individuals own their home. This relationship can be seen in Figure 1. Since 2001, the number of homeowners have increased to 6,315, which indicates a 19% change. However, renters have decreased from 620 in 2001 to 490 in 2011. This represents a 21% decrease over the 10‐ year span. These findings suggest that owning one’s home is the more favoured option, and rental units are becoming less common and diminishing in the Township. This trend may start to reverse if interest rates rise and seniors seek more affordable housing alternatives.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief279 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 1: Housing Tenure in South Frontenac

The Change in Household Tenure Over the Years 7,000

Households

6,000

6,315

6,190 5,325

5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 620

1,000

575

490

0 2001

2006

2011

Year Owned

Rented

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2001 ‐ 2011

Income Since 2000, household income has increased for the residents of South Frontenac. In 2000, the median household income was $55,319, which later increased to $81,664 in 2010 and $90,286 in 2016. Between 2000 and 2010, the median household income experienced a 47.6% increase, while by 2016 it experienced a 63.2% increase. From 2010 to 2016, there has been a 10.6% increase. Similarly, the average household income in 2000 ($61,469) grew by 49.1% in 2010 ($91,678) and 64.9% by 2016 ($101,357). In terms of individual income for the residents of the Township, strong growth has been experienced as well. In 2000, the median individual income was $25,525, which later increased to $38,216 in 2010 and $42,251 in 2016. Between 2000 and 2010, median individual incomes experienced a 49.7% increase, while in 2016 they experienced a 65.5% increase. From 2010 to 2016, there has been a further 10.6% increase. Similarly, individual average income in 2000 ($29,786) grew by 45.9% in 2010 ($43,453) and 61.3% in 2016 ($48,041).

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief280 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 5: Township of South Frontenac Household Income

Income

2000

2005

2010

2016

% Change 2000‐2010

% Change 2000‐2016

% Change 2010‐2016

Median

$55,319

$70,297

$81,664

$90,286

47.6%

63.2%

10.6%

Average

$61,469

$74,988

$91,678

$101,357

49.1%

64.9%

10.6%

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2001 ‐ 2011

Table 6: Township of South Frontenac Individual Income

Income

2000

2005

2010

2016

% Change 2000‐2010

% Change 2000‐2016

% Change 2010‐2016

Median

$25,525

$31,068

$38,216

$42,251

49.7%

65.5%

10.6%

Average

$29,786

$35,786

$43,453

$48,041

45.9%

61.3%

10.6%

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2001 ‐ 2011

Over the last 16 years, the average household income in South Frontenac has been growing at a faster rate than the County and the Province. Ever since 2000, households in the Township have steadily had a higher average household income than the County. From 2010 to 2016, the average household income in the Township surpassed both what has been experienced in the County and the Province. Thus, it is apparent that the average household income of South Frontenac, as well as the median household income, will continue to increase at a faster rate than its comparators in the coming years. This points to a need to ensure that the seniors housing project includes a strong component of units available at full market rent.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief281 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 2: The Growth of Average Household Income (2000‐2016)

Average Household Income Growth Over the Years $120,000

Average Household Income

$101,357 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000

$91,678

$66,836 $61,469 $56,786

$77,967 $74,988 $67,762

$85,772 $77,109

$94,828 $85,250

$40,000 $20,000 $0 2000

2005

2010

2016

Year South Frontenac

Frontenac County

Ontario

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2001 ‐ 2011

Dwellings Single‐detached dwellings comprise 95.2% (6,475) of all dwellings in South Frontenac. In 2011, there were only 50 (0.7%) semi‐detached dwellings and 15 (0.2%) row houses. As for apartments, there were 65 detached duplexes (1.0%) and 140 units in apartment buildings (2.1%) with less than 5 storeys. There were no apartment buildings that had 5 or more storeys. Additionally, there were 55 moveable dwellings (0.8%) and 5 other types of single‐detached houses (0.1%). These statistics show the lack of available housing options that are suitable for seniors in the Township. Similarly, the majority of dwellings in the County are single‐detached dwellings (95.3% or 9,895 dwellings). The remaining 490 dwellings consist of low‐rise apartment units (1.8%), movable dwellings (0.9%), detached duplex apartments (0.9%), semi‐detached dwellings (0.8%), and a few row and other single‐detached dwellings. These counts have not changed much since 2000, since 93.9% of all dwellings were single‐detached dwellings.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief282 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 3: Dwellings by Type

Dwellings by Type in South Frontenac, 2011 Single‐detached house (6,475 dwellings) Semi‐detached house (50 dwellings) Row House (15 dwellings) Apartment (detached duplex) (65 dwellings) Apartment building (5+ storeys) (0 dwellings) Apartment building (less than 5 storeys) (140 dwellings)

95.2%

Other single‐detached house (5 dwellings) Moveable dwelling (55 dwellings)

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2011

Seasonal Dwellings Traditionally, seasonal dwellings (a non‐permanent form of housing) have accounted for approximately 40% of Frontenac County’s total dwellings. From 2001 to 2011, due to conversion of seasonal dwellings to permanent ones, all of the Townships in the County have experienced a decrease in seasonal dwellings; i.e. a decrease of 42% in 2001 to 38% in 2011. In 2011, the 3,000 units found in South Frontenac accounted for 37.1% of all seasonal dwellings. However, by 2031 it is expected that fewer seasonal dwellings will be constructed, causing the proportion to slightly drop to 36.2%. In fact, from 2011 to 2031 seasonal dwellings are only expected to grow by 1.5% in the Township and increase by 4.0% in the County, suggesting a higher conversion rate to permanent dwellings within the Township.

Table 7: Seasonal Dwellings (Units) Municipality

2011

re fact

2016

2021

2026

2031

% Change 2016‐2031

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief283 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

South Frontenac

3,000

3,015

3,030

3,040

3,045

1.5%

Frontenac County

8,090

8,190

8,280

8,350

8,410

4.0%

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles, 2011; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs, June 2014

Age and Condition of Dwellings In terms of the condition of dwellings in the Township, very few of them require major repairs. In 2011, only 500 dwellings (7.24%) required major repairs, while 6,300 dwellings (92.6%) only required regular maintenance or minor repairs. This result suggests that the Township’s housing stock is in good shape, as reflected by 2001 statistics where regular maintenance or minor repairs made up 93% of the total share, while major repairs remained stable at 7%. In South Frontenac, the bulk of the housing stock was built from the pre‐1960s to the early 1990s. In fact, dwellings constructed between the pre‐1960s and 1980 make up 54% of the total housing stock seen today. Those constructed from 1981 to 1990 consist of 20.8% of the total share. After 1991, fewer dwellings were constructed in the Township and from 2006 to 2011 only 225 (3.3%) dwellings were added to the stock.

Figure 4: Dwellings by Period of Construction in South Frontenac

Dwellings by Period of Construction

Period of Construction

2006 to 2011

225

2001 to 2005

590

1991 to 2000

885

1981 to 1990

1415

1961 to 1980

1850

1960 or before

1835 0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Dwellings

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profiles 2011

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief284 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Residential Development Potential Several policy documents and legislation, such as the Provincial Policy Statement and the Official Plans for the Townships within the County, all support new residential development in designated settlement areas. As of June 2014, Watson and Associates (2014) stated that 2,569 hectares of vacant land are designated as areas of settlement. As seen in Table 8, about 1,498 hectares of vacant designated land is available for development in South Frontenac, which comprises 58.3% of all the available land in the entire County. This data tends to correlate with population and dwelling counts, suggesting that most growth in the County will occur in this area. The development of a new seniors facility in Sydenham would be consistent with these growth expectations.

Table 8: Overview of Vacant Lands Designated as Settlement Areas by Municipality Vacant Designated Land (Hectare)

% of Total Land within Settlement Areas

North Frontenac

647

25.2%

Central Frontenac

411

16.0%

South Frontenac

1,498

58.3%

Frontenac Islands

13

0.5%

Frontenac County

2,569

100.0%

Source: Watson & Associates (June 2014). Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs

Ownership Housing Market As previously stated, 92.8% (or 6,315) dwellings in South Frontenac were owned in 2011, which is an increase of 990 units from 2001. This finding confirms that homeownership is the most dominant form of tenure and that it is growing in demand, although, as noted earlier, this trend could change in future. The Census reported that house prices in South Frontenac increased as well from 2000 to 2010. The average dwelling value in 2010 was $336,568, while in 2000 it was $157,956. During this 10‐year span, house prices have increased by 113%, which may be attributable to the construction of larger homes, the conversion of seasonal dwellings to permanent ones and lower interest rates. Similarly, the County experienced a 95.7% increase in average house prices in the same time, from $155,557 in 2000 to $304,496 in 2010. These housing price trends continued to grow in 2016 as well. Due to the lack of current housing price data for South Frontenac and surrounding municipalities, it is projected that the average house price in the Township was approximately $372,244 in 2016, which is a 10.6% increase since 2010. In a similar

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief285 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

fashion, housing prices in Frontenac County are expected to grow by 10.6% as well, causing homes to cost $336,773 on average. Moreover, in 2011 the percentage of homeowners with a mortgage was 55.2%, meaning that a large share of South Frontenac households do not have a mortgage (i.e. 44.8%). These numbers are nearly identical to those found within Frontenac County. Given that many local homeowners are seniors, this figure demonstrates that a large number of them possess significant assets, which would help them to afford market rent units in any new seniors housing project. Rental Housing Market In Frontenac County, there were a total of 800 rental units (8.7% of dwellings) in 2011, which have decreased over the years. In comparison, in 2011 South Frontenac experienced a loss of 130 renter‐ occupied dwellings, which translates to a decrease of 21% since 2001. These findings suggest that there is a very limited supply of rental units within these areas, and that supply is decreasing. It also appears that rental units are not affordable for most renters. In 2011, while 5.1% of tenants in the Township are in subsidized housing, approximately 58.8% of renters spend more than 30% of their income on shelter costs. Furthermore, average monthly shelter costs have increased by 31% in the last 10 years, from $627 in 2000 and $821 in 2011. Although average market rent for Frontenac County and South Frontenac are not reported by CMHC due to data suppression, they are however tracked for the Kingston CMA and its surrounding municipalities, which are aggregated as zones. The data in Figure 5 derives from the entire Kingston CMA and Zone 4 of the CMA, where South Frontenac is located. In 2015, average market rents for the Zone 4 area (including South Frontenac) were $593 for bachelor units, $943 for 1‐bedroom units, $1,261 for 2‐bedroom units, and $1,218 for 3‐bedroom units. Overall, from $989 in 2011 to $1,141 in 2015, the average market rent for all unit types has increased by 15.4% for municipalities like South Frontenac. Typically, as unit types grow in size, so too does the cost of rent. In some instances, such as with 1‐bedroom and 2‐bedroom units, the rents found in South Frontenac and others within Zone 4 in 2015 tend to be higher than the CMA averages. For those seniors on fixed pensions and other low income sources, these rents are moving out of reach, demonstrating that there should be some below market rents in any new seniors housing project.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief286 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 5: Average Market Rents (2011 and 2015)

Average Market Rents for Zone 4 (South Frontenac) and the Kingston CMA $1,600 $1,406

Average Market Rent

$1,400

$1,261

$1,200

$1,091

$1,218 $1,104 $989

$943 $915

$1,000 $800 $600

$1,095

$553 $593

$679

$1,141 $1,033

$769

$400 $200 $0 Bachelor

1‐Bed

2‐Beds

3+ Beds

Total

Unit Type 2011

2015

CMA (2015)

Source: CMHC Market Rent Surveys, 2011 and 2015 Overall from 2011 to 2015, vacancy rates for rental units have increased for municipalities like South Frontenac in Zone 4 of the CMA. In 2011 the vacancy rate was at 0.8%, which later grew to 4.9% for all unit types in 2015. In the last four years, the most growth occurred for 1‐bedroom, 2‐bedroom, and 3‐ bedroom units. The vacancy rates for rental units in Zone 4 are higher than those in the rest of the CMA. The CMA vacancy averages are 0.9% for bachelors, 2.5% for 1‐bedrooms, 3.1% for 2‐bedrooms, and 2.9% for 3‐bedrooms. In general, the vacancy rate for all units are 2.8% in the Kingston CMA for 2015. A vacancy rate of 3.0% is considered by CMHC to be a rental market in balance between demand and supply.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief287 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 9: Vacancy Rates for South Frontenac and Surrounding Municipalities in Zone 4 Zone 4 of Kingston CMA* Year

Bachelor

1‐Bed

2‐Beds

3+ Beds

Total

2011

**

2.2

0.2

0

0.8

2012

0

2.1

2.3

0

2.1

2013

**

1.3

1.4

0.6

1.3

2014

3.8

3.2

1.9

4.6

2.5

2015

3.4

5

5.2

2.2

4.9

Source: CMHC Housing Market Portal and Rental Housing Market Report, October of every year *Zone 4 includes South Frontenac and other municipalities outside of Kingston **Data suppressed or not available

Affordability and Shelter on Housing Costs A useful approach to understand if there is an affordability problem in a municipality is to analyze how many residents pay more than 30% of their income on shelter costs. CMHC considers any households paying beyond 30% of household income on shelter costs to have an affordability problem. In South Frontenac, the number of homeowners that paid 30% or more on shelter decreased by 15.9% from 2001 to 2011. In 2001 there were 860 households (16.6%); that later decreased to 723 (11.9%) in 2011. Renters, on the other hand, have increased by 15.2% in the same time frame. For instance, in 2001 there were 250 rental households (41%) that later increased to 288 (58.8%) in 2011. These results mirror those that are experienced with Frontenac County as well. These findings suggest that many renters are struggling with housing costs in the South Frontenac due to increasing rents and diminishing supply. As shown in Table 10, rental housing is affordable for a select few households in South Frontenac. With average market rent in 2010 being $989 and increasing to $1,261 in 2016, those who are unable to afford these rents include many one‐person households, renter households, and renters in core housing need. Additionally, in order to afford these rents, most households would need to have incomes that are either $39,600 in 2010 or $50,450 in 2016. Hence, it appears that affordable rental housing may be a challenge for select household groups.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief288 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 10: Average Household Income to Average Market Rent (AMR) in South Frontenac 2010

2016*

Average Household Income of All Households

$91,678

$101,357

Affordable Rent

$2,292

$2,534

Median Household Income of All Households

$81,664

$90,286

Affordable Rent

$2,042

$2,257

Average Household Income of One‐Person Households

$42,988

$47,527

Affordable Rent

$1,075

$1,188

Average Household Income of Renters

$43,349

$47,926

Affordable Rent

$1,084

$1,198

Average Household Income of Renters in Core Need

$21,829

$24,143

Affordable Rent

$546

$604

Average Market Rent (AMR)

$989

$1,261

Required Income to Afford AMR

$39,600

$50,450

Source: Statistics Canada Community Profiles 2011 and 2006 and National Household Survey 2011; CMHC Housing Information Portal; SHS Calculations based on 30% of income spent on rent *2016 household incomes are estimated based growth rate of the Ontario’s CPI

Loughborough Housing Corporation Waiting List Data Loughborough Housing Corporation (LHC) operates a portfolio of 55 social housing units primarily serving senior citizens. About half of these units are rented at market rent and the other half are rented on a rent‐ geared‐to‐income basis. About three quarters of the units are one bedroom units and one quarter are two bedroom units. Another indicator of the need for seniors housing is the LHC waiting list and related data. Tables 11‐14 display these statistics. The tables show that the number of applicants on the waiting list has consistently remained in the 75‐80 range for the past five years. By far the majority of applicants are seeking market rent units. About half of the applicants are seeking one bedroom units, a quarter are seeking two bedroom units and the remainder are seeking either. The data show that only a handful of units are turning over annually (approximately 6‐7 on average), which means that it could take 10 years for all current applicants

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief289 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

to be housed. Rents are highly affordable – well below current CMHC market rents for the area. The units are primarily targeted to seniors. These observations provide further evidence of the need to expand the supply of affordable rental housing for seniors, as the current waiting period is extremely long and few other options are available to area seniors. Table 11 Loughborough Housing Corporation ‐ Waiting List, 2010‐2016

Waiting List Figures RGI low (one bed) high avg.* Market one bed two bed either Total Total Wait List

2010 4

2011 3

2012 14

2013 4

2014 4

2015 1

2016 5

7 6 19 21 0 40

10 7 19 17 10 46

17 16 27 20 15 62

18 11 29 19 12 60

6 5 33 22 17 72

14 8 33 23 15 71

11 8 34 21 13 68

46

53

78

71

77

79

76

2014 6.5% 93.5% 100% 49.4% 28.6% 22.1% 100%

2015 9.6% 90.4% 100% 51.6% 29.3% 19.1% 100%

2016 10.5% 89.5% 100% 55.3% 27.6% 17.1% 100%

Note: *average for RGI units derived from low/high wait list figures

Table 12 Loughborough Housing Corporation ‐ Waiting List Share 2010‐2016 Waiting List Share RGI Market Total one bed two bed either Total

2010 12.1% 87.9% 100% 53.8% 46.2% 0.0% 100%

2011 12.4% 87.6% 100% 48.6% 32.4% 19.0% 100%

2012 20.0% 80.0% 100% 54.8% 25.8% 19.4% 100%

2013 15.5% 84.5% 100% 56.3% 26.8% 16.9% 100%

Source: Loughborough Housing Corp.

Table 13 Loughborough Housing Corporation ‐ Annual Unit Turnover 2010‐2016 Applicants Housed RGI Market Total Annual turnover rate

4 2 6

2 4 6

2 0 2

6 0 6

3 0 3

6 1 7

0 1 1

10.9%

10.9%

3.6%

10.9%

5.5%

12.7%

1.8%

Source: Loughborough Housing Corp.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief290 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 14 Loughborough Housing Corporation ‐ General Information General Information

4377 William St. (Maple Ridge) 4361 William St. (Meadowbrook) Total

Unit Mix RGI 15 13 28 50.9%

Market 15 12 27 49.1%

Total 30 25 55 100.0%

2017 Market Rents One bed 24 18 42 76.4%

Two bed 6 7 13 23.6%

$ $

One’s 678 661

$ $

Two 770 759

Notes: Geared to seniors, primarily 65+ but younger permitted on cascading age policy basis (uncommon) 3 units are considered modified/accessible, have been occupied for 7+ years, no one waiting for them Rents include electricity and water Source: Loughborough Housing Corp.

Summary of analysis As a result of the above analysis, demographic and housing profiles for South Frontenac Township have been established that show: 

More than 18.5% of the of the Township’s population are seniors and this population in expected to grow at a rate faster than any other segment of the population.



An expected growth of 1750 households in the next 20 years demonstrates the need for steady growth in the supply of housing in South Frontenac.



Household income has grown strongly in South Frontenac in recent years. This points to the need to ensure a range of rent levels within a new seniors housing project to enable a wider range of housing choices in South Frontenac for seniors at all points on the income scale.



The majority of dwellings (over 90%) are ownership tenure and trends continue to show senior owners are staying in their homes longer, due in part to the lack of suitable local housing alternatives.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief291 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)



The lack of new rental supply or other housing types aimed at seniors is limiting the choice of options within the South Frontenac market.



In addition to limited housing options, renters face continued increases in rents and as a result, almost half have an affordability problem (i.e. they spend more than 30% of their gross income on housing). As a result, the new seniors housing project should include some units at below market rents.



Waiting list data for Loughborough Housing Corporation shows a strong unmet demand for seniors units. At least half the units should be one bedroom units.

This analysis demonstrates that there is a continued demand for affordable, purpose‐built rental housing and that, as the seniors population continues to grow in the Township, a greater range of options will be required to meet their needs and enable them to remain in the community. Given the commitment of County Council to contribute public dollars towards the project, there needs to be a clear public benefit, particularly in relation to affordability.

Community-based Indicators To augment this analysis and gather local community perspectives on housing needs, a community open house session was held on November 16, 2016 at the Town Hall in Sydenham. At this session, an overview of housing needs in South Frontenac was presented as well as background on the study process. A recap of study work to date was also provided to attendees. A discussion then took place around potential sites for the project, types of amenities and services to be provided, unit mix and rent levels, governance and other key issues. In addition, a questionnaire survey was provided in hard copy to those attending the session and on line to enable interested respondents to express their views. A total of 15 responses were received. The key themes arising from the open house session and the questionnaire responses are summarized below. An overwhelming majority felt there is a need for more seniors housing in South Frontenac. Most felt the greatest need was for lower end of market rental accommodation. It was felt that the gap was going to continue to grow due to the increasing seniors population in the area. About 20% of respondents would consider moving in right away; others felt they would be interested in a 5‐10 year time frame. Most respondents identified Sydenham as the area of greatest need and indicated that preference should be given to South Frontenac residents. It was emphasized that the site selected for the project should have strong access to seniors support services and good transportation linkages to the core area of Sydenham where most of the shopping, banking, health care offices, pharmacy, post office, town hall and other amenities were located.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief292 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

The preferred form of housing is a one storey apartment building with self‐contained apartment units for independent living. A two storey building would also be acceptable, providing it is highly accessible. Other features of interest included a courtyard, garden, shared yard space and grounds for walking, as well as a common room, common laundry area, guest suite and hobby/project room. Only one respondent felt that meals should be provided. This could potentially be addressed through linking with an external meals on wheels service. Other services that could be provided would include hairdressing and exercise classes. Several respondents emphasized that the building should be designed to enhance socialization. In terms of unit type, most respondents favoured a mix of one and two bedroom units, with one bedroom units averaging about 650‐750 sq. ft. and two bedroom units averaging 800‐1000 sq. ft. It was suggested that rents should average $800 ‐ $1000 per month, with a modest number of units at rent‐ geared‐to‐income rents if possible for those seniors on low fixed incomes. It was emphasized that the building should be highly accessible to help seniors live independently. In terms of governance, the majority felt that the facility should be owned and operated by a non‐profit Board/organization. Possible options could include ownership by the Township with property management contracted to an external property management organization; a public/private partnership; or a non‐profit Board with Township backing. It was felt that financial support from all levels of government was highly desirable to ensure the long term sustainability and affordability of the units, although there was some concern about the types of terms and conditions that might accompany such funding.

Housing Task Force Direction On December 6, 2016, the consultants met with the Township’s Housing Task Force and reviewed the findings that were arising from the research and consultation. The Committee expressed its support for the concept that was emerging and confirmed the following direction for preparation of the business plan:    





The project should be located in Sydenham A project size of 10‐12 independent rental apartment units is preferred The property adjacent to the Grace Centre appears suitable for the project and should be given highest consideration Partnering in some fashion with the two community‐based non‐profit agencies in the area (South Frontenac Community Services Corporation and Loughborough Housing Corporation) was of interest and would enhance the success of the project The Township was not interested in setting up its own corporation to own or manage the facility. Given their experience in managing senior citizen housing, Loughborough Housing Corporation should be approached to determine its potential interest in managing the facility The preferred unit mix is 60% at market rent and 40% at affordable rent (i.e. lower end of market), although a 50/50 mix should be explored to determine if it could be sustained financially.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief293 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

The following sections of this report provide a suggested concept plan for the project, based on the above direction.

PROJECT CONCEPT This section of the business plan defines the project concept, as informed by local needs, stakeholder feedback and Housing Task Force Direction. These parameters establish the form, scale, unit mix and affordability for the prospective project. Associated amenities are also defined, recognizing the small‐scale nature of the project. As a result of these attributes, configuration options for securing them are reviewed and a preferred project concept is identified. This concept is then analyzed in terms of development potential and financial feasibility in subsequent sections.

Form and scale In terms of project form, it is clear that seniors tend to favour low rise forms which are grade‐related. This building configuration is highly supportive of accessibility and eliminates the need for stairs, lifts or elevators. As such, a single storey slab‐on‐grade configuration offers the accessibility and straight‐forward layout suitable for a project of this scale and client type. Likewise, using conventional wood frame construction and a standard slope roof for this building form would be highly economical. At the same time, it is recognized that a single storey building requires more land than a multi‐storey building and that, when combined with the land area required for a septic system, creates a need for a sizeable property. Therefore, a two storey building might also be considered, which is actually consistent with seniors buildings owned and operated by LHC. In terms of the units themselves, demand has shown a strong affinity for self‐contained apartments that are geared to seniors capable of independent living. This means that each residential unit would have its own kitchen and washroom facilities unlike congregate living arrangements where these facilities can be shared. From that perspective, the project would be much like a typical low rise rental building. Aligning these residential units around a double‐loaded corridor would also provide a high degree of efficiency. Given the current level of demand and the stated Task Force preference for smaller scale, the proposed project is being recommended at 12 units.

Unit mix and affordability Traditionally, seniors housing projects tend to have smaller unit sizes – either one or two bedroom units ‐ as compared with family units, reflecting their inherently smaller household size. Furthermore, affordable seniors units tend to be predominantly one bedroom in size rather than two bedroom, a direct reflection of the rental cost of the unit. Where affordability is less of a concern, seniors projects would typically have a higher share of two bedroom units. Given the affordability profile envisioned for the project, a unit mix

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief294 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

of 50% one bedroom and 50% two bedroom is proposed. For a project of 12 units in total, this would mean 6 one bedroom units and 6 two bedroom units. As indicated through community feedback, there is a high degree of interest in rental tenure for the project. This is in contrast to seniors housing models that allow for ownership or some form of equity stake (i.e. condominium, life lease, etc.). Apart from the affordability that rental accommodation provides, there was a clear sense from consultations that prospective residents who were homeowners and would be downsizing would not be interested in locking up equity in such a project. Instead they would choose to reserve the use of their equity for other retirement purposes. The consultation and income analysis showed that a mix of market rent and affordable rent units was most desirable for the project. Funding may be available through the Investment in Affordable Housing Program administered by the City of Kingston, Service Manager for the area, to help achieve this. As such, two scenarios have been developed – one with the 6 one bedroom units rented at 80% of Average Market Rent for the area and funded under the IAH Program, and one with them at full market rent. All of the 6 two bedroom units are assumed to be rented at lower end of market rent. To encourage energy conservation and to buffer against utility cost impacts, tenants would be responsible for their own heat and hydro costs. To better facilitate this, individual unit heating/cooling systems have been assumed rather than large shared systems. Given the affordability parameters for the project and the senior client group, it is assumed that a modest unit size would be suitable. This reflects the fact that unit size has a direct influence on overall unit cost and as such, influences the project financial viability. However, because many units are anticipated to rent at near market rates, they would need to provide comparable value in the market place in order to attract/retain tenants. Small‐scale projects like this do not benefit from scale economies and as such, can be more expensive to build on a per unit basis. It is important therefore to rationalize built floor area with regard for maximum chargeable rent in order to support viability. With this in mind, 1 bedroom units are assumed at a size of about 600 square feet (gross floor area, GFA) while 2 bedroom units have been assumed at about 800 square feet GFA.

Amenities In terms of in‐unit amenities, it is anticipated that standard appliances would be provided (fridge + stove) along with modest storage space. It is also assumed that visitability would be provided interior to the units by maintaining open radius layouts in both the kitchen and bathroom of each suite. Building in options for grab bars in unit bathrooms is also assumed. In terms of building visitability, wider common corridors and open radius layouts in laundry and common areas would be employed. In addition to constructing the building at grade, common entry doors would provide for full accessibility. Two units would also be modified to accommodate a tenant with mobility impairment, incorporating additional unit features like a roll‐in shower and accessible kitchen. This would provide the ability to meet changing needs as tenants age in place. Surface parking would also be provided, recognizing that while most tenants would prefer walkability, there would be a need to provide for basic parking as well as visitor parking in accordance with zoning requirements. It is assumed that 14 parking spaces would be provided as part of the project concept.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief295 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Community consultations identified a wide range of potential amenities/features that could be included within the common area of the project. At the same time, there was a recognition that only modest opportunities for amenity space would exist for a project of this small scale. As above, scale economies for smaller projects make it challenging to add additional GFA due to the limited offsetting income potential of this space. The more amenity space that is added, the more expensive the project is to build and operate on a per unit basis. While there are cost pressures inherent in adding amenity space, creating opportunities for tenants to socialize in a sheltered space was highly valued by stakeholders. To strike a balance in this regard, it has been assumed that a double loaded common corridor would be used to connect all units internally, providing a common access point to the project as well as sheltered access to each unit. Modest coin operated laundry facilities would also be provided (1 washer/dryer pair) for resident convenience. Adjacent or in combination with this space, it is also assumed that a common room would be provided for the benefit of all tenants. This informal space would provide year round indoor shelter and would account for not more than 500 square feet GFA. The size and configuration of this space would be subject to adjustment based on overall building layout. In addition to small individual patio areas for each unit, a common outdoor amenity area would also be provided adjacent to the common interior space. There would also be a small property management office in the building.

Preferred project concept Based on evaluated needs, consultation feedback and with regard for project development experience, a preferred project concept has been developed. The proposed project concept assumes:    

  

 

12 self‐contained rental apartment units configured around a common, double loaded corridor Of these units, 6 would be 1 bedroom units (600 s.f.) and 6 would be 2 bedroom units (800 sq. ft.) – two units would be modified for full accessibility Units would be geared to seniors (65+) who are able to live independently. Rents charged for all units would be equivalent to 10% below CMHC average market rent for the Kingston area and would not include utilities (i.e. heat/hydro paid by tenants), unless IAH funding is obtained for the one bedroom units, which would reduce rents in those units to 80% of AMR Laundry facilities and a common room would be provided to accommodate tenant socialization. Total initial building GFA is estimated to be in the order of 10,600 s.f. (GFA) Building construction is anticipated to be in a single storey, slab‐on‐grade form with conventional wood framing and a standard sloped roof (providing sufficient land area is available for septic system) To facilitate aging in place, the building and the units would be designed to a visitable standard Surface parking for 14 spaces would be included in the project.

While the ultimate design of the project would provide for component space and the overall configuration of the building, a conceptual layout is provided for illustrative purposes in Figure 2.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief296 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 2 ‐ Conceptual Project Layout

Having established the preferred project concept, subsequent sections of this report will assess associated development considerations and evaluate the financial feasibility of the project.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief297 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS A number of development considerations were examined as part of the project concept evaluation process. These included a review of possible development opportunities, options for procuring the project, as well as technical/servicing considerations. This section of the report also examines required land use approvals and sustainability features associated with the preferred project.

Potential development opportunities Based on existing needs, community amenities and consultation feedback, a project location within the Village of Sydenham was deemed highly desirable for siting of the project. Two general approaches to development were considered for the project based on identified opportunities in the Village; redevelopment of existing building(s) and new construction. Apart from preliminary technical reviews of each of these options, site visits were also conducted in the late fall of 2016 to assess potential for each prospective location. Given the preliminary nature of this assessment, development opportunities are discussed in general terms to maintain the anonymity of current building/land owners. General site locations as dicussed below are illustrated in Figure 3.

Redevelopment and acquisition/rehabilitation opportunities Proximity to the Village centre and its associated amenities was deemed a high priority by stakeholders, noting the desire to have walkability to the project where possible. As a mature village, the core of Sydenham is substantially developed and there are very few vacant parcels available for development, most of which are insufficient in size to accommodate the required project and its associated parking and septic system requirements. As a result, acquisition and consolidation of existing developed parcels would be required to establish a project site of sufficient size. This would entail the purchase of multiple sites and their existing structures at costs higher than vacant parcels located in the periphery of the Village. The demolition of structures and prospective remediation due to past uses would be further potential costs incurred. William Street and to a lesser extent Mill Street are primary corridors in the Village centre along which a number of amenities are located. In fact, the Loughborough Housing Corporation maintains two affordable apartment buildings with a total of 55 units on William Street, and is well‐positioned to access these amenities. No vacant structures suitable for conversion or acquisition/rehabilitation were identified through scanning with stakeholders. However, two prospective locations in this corridor were identified as having possible redevelopment potential. Upon review, it was confirmed that each would require substantive lot consolidation, re‐zoning and demolition of existing structures to facilitate construction of the new project. Septic system requirements would also impact on required land area, obliging sizable lot area where costs are generally higher due to location. Given the current conditions, the costs for pursuing redevelopment in this general area were deemed higher than average and would require a significant degree of cooperation from multiple parties to facilitate.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief298 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 3 ‐ Development Opportunities Reviewed in Sydenham

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief299 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

By contrast, there were a number of vacant parcels identified on the periphery of the central area which offered the potential to more economically address site requirements for the project while still maintaining reasonable proximity to the village centre. As a result, neither redevelopment nor acquisition/rehabilitation options were considered to be suitable for fulfilling the requirements of the preferred development concept. Based on this cursory review, new construction on appropriate vacant lands outside the central area is considered a more appropriate option because it:     

does not require extensive land assembly with multiple parties to affect provides more financial and design flexibility to configure spaces in accordance with the preferred building concept avoids any potential issues associated with adaptive re‐use or demolition of existing structures (i.e., code issues, designated substances, servicing and HVAC constraints, etc.) better suits the visitability/accessibility requirements of the project in a single storey configuration due to larger available site areas allows greater potential for expansion in the future where demand warrants

New Development Opportunities Opportunities to accommodate the building concept via new construction were also considered as part of the review process. As the central part of the Village has been developed over the years, there are limited opportunities to accommodate new construction. In addition, the assumed floor plate of 10,600 square feet and lot requirements for septic system services mean that the minimum lot size for the preferred project concept in a single storey configuration would be in the order 2+ acres, depending on soils conditions and surrounding uses. There are limited options in terms of vacant parcels within the Village and water servicing boundaries that could meet these requirements. While there are larger sites available beyond, piped water services are not available and extending them would not be cost effective. Locating in these outer locales would also situate the potential project even further from the array of community amenities that are resident in the central area of the Village. As a result, five prospective locations were identified with stakeholders that lie just outside the central area. They are between a 600m and 800m distance walk from the central intersection of Mill and William Streets, and lie within the Village’s piped water boundary. Access to piped municipal water is seen as highly desirable as it reduces site area and well water requirements for the project, enabling higher density and more cost‐effective development. Vacant site review During the site visit to Sydenham in the late fall of 2016, vacant properties in five prospective locations were examined for suitability under a new construction scenario. It should be noted that all sites would require development approvals in order to accommodate the permitted use and from that perspective, were deemed equally impacted. The first two locations are proximal to the intersection of Church Street and Portland Avenue, across the river and northwest of the Village core. While both large in size and in direct proximity to the Cataraqui Trail, the parcel to the east of the intersection has limited usability due to its configuration. The parcel to the west is more useable in terms of configuration and frontage but would require a severance. Both sites

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief300 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

are decidedly more rural in character and do not have any adjacent amenities/services. As of this date, it is not known if the respective private owners would be willing to sell a part of their land holdings or under what terms. A third potential site is located south of Rutledge Road off Morgan Drive, south of the Village centre. The site is located in an established subdivision and is long and narrow, with limited frontage. This configuration makes the site more challenging to use, especially in terms of accommodating the proposed unit count in a single storey configuration and providing the necessary space for a large septic bed. While somewhat more proximal to community services in the core, there are few surrounding amenities. The private owner has indicated an interest in selling the land and/or developing seniors housing, provided suitable funding was made available. The fourth site lies farther west on Rutledge Road, in the area south of the Johnston Lane intersection. This large site would have ample room to accommodate the potential project but would require a severance to size the new parcel appropriately. Despite flexibility in parcel sizing and configuration, there are very limited amenities in proximity to these lands and they are more removed from the village core. The site is also situated on higher topography, obliging a more laboured pedestrian access from the Village centre. Inquiries regarding the site determined that the owner was not interested in selling a part of the property. The fifth site reviewed is located on Stage Coach Road, south of Rutledge Road. The 1.7 acre parcel is fairly rectangular and flat, with ample frontage. This configuration makes the site very amenable to accommodating the required project footprint, although residual lands to the west would enhance site size for development. Initial discussions have indicated that an addition 0.7 acre parcel to the west could be secured at a reasonable cost. The primary lands are owned by the South Frontenac Community Services Corporation (SFCSC) whose community services facility (The Grace Centre) is located immediately to the north. Apart from these social services, there is an ambulance and fire station nearby. While situated within walking distance, the site location on higher topography obliges a more laboured pedestrian access from the Village centre. The owner is a community‐minded organization that provides services to residents, including seniors, and has expressed an interest in seeing a seniors housing facility developed. The proximity to their service centre would enhance the attractiveness of the location for seniors. Preferred property The fifth property identified on Stage Coach Road has a number of strategic advantages when weighed against other vacant property options. The subject site is:     

suitable in size and has sufficient frontage to support the proposed concept within the piped water servicing area, thereby not requiring private water servicing proximal to the central area of the Village and the many amenities it offers directly adjacent to a social support agency that already provides services to seniors and has ambulance and fire services nearby owned by an organization interested in seniors housing and a potential partner for the project who could make the property available for the project under favourable conditions

The partnership opportunity with SFCSC makes this site very compelling both locationally and from a financial perspective. Securing the property and the adjacent parcel for a modest consideration would be extremely beneficial to the financial viability of the project. The opportunity to access services offered by

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief301 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

SFCSC at the Grace Centre is equally beneficial to the project and would provide a unique housing and service relationship for seniors in the Village. Figure 4 ‐ Preferred site and adjacent lands

For the purposes of this analysis and based on preliminary discussions, it has been assumed that SFCSC would be willing to provide their portion of the subject lands at a modest cost. Negotiations with the adjacent land owner would have to be undertaken to add that parcel. No environmental issues are known to exist in the vicinity of the lands in question but to ensure this, an Environmental Site Assessment would need to be undertaken as part of the due diligence process. As a vacant property, soils investigations would also be required as part of the due diligence process to confirm septic servicing parameters prior to acquisition. These costs have been included within the financial modelling.

Preferred option and procurement With regard to development options available and given the defined project concept, there is a clear benefit to developing the proposed project under a new construction scenario rather than an acquisition/ rehabilitation approach. Based on the range of potential local sites reviewed, there are some suitable development options that could be pursued for a seniors housing project. However, there is a clearly

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief302 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

preferred option in the form of the SFCSC site and adjacent parcel on Stage Coach Road, subject to appropriate due diligence investigations and agreement on terms with the property owner. While this preferred site is not immediately adjacent to the central Village area, there is reasonable access to amenities nearby and general walkability. The site can accommodate the building form/size currently envisioned but any potential future expansion would need to accommodate incremental servicing and land use requirements. Typically in a new construction scenario of this type, procurement of the project would be pursued through a formal tender and fixed priced construction contract. To help guide the development process, a proponent would also engage an experienced development consultant. The role of the consultant would be to marshal the proponent through the development process, from initial concept and feasibility testing through to construction and move‐in. As part of this process, the proponent would also engage an architect to undertake project design. Once design drawings and construction documents were developed and approved, the project would be tendered for pricing, either by invitation or by public tender call. This would encourage competitive pricing for the project among qualified local contractors. This is a standard procurement approach and one that is commonly used where public funds are involved. Financial modelling assumptions have assumed a typical design and tender process with conventional construction techniques. As such, pro forma figures include development consultant, architect and contractor estimates. Only 12 units are anticipated under this initial concept but it would be prudent to design allowing for the potential expansion of the project in the future. In that regard, initial project siting should have regard for the requirements of any possible future expansion. The same holds true for the design and siting of the septic system. A wide range of septic technology exists and it would be advisable to design in the potential for future expandability for this system to help make most efficient use of the site area.

Servicing & technical considerations As noted, there are technical and service considerations associated with project development, many of which must be considered as part of the due diligence process prior to property acquisition and configuration. In the case of the proposed project, the most basic of these is the requirement for an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). A phase 1 ESA would be undertaken as a screen to determine if there are any potential environmental issues associated with the property. This is primarily due to legislation around environmental liability which places obligations on property owners in regards to found contaminants. While no known environmental conditions exist for the property options identified through this study, if any were discovered through the phase 1 process, a determination would need to be made as to whether to proceed with the lands in question. The current financial pro forma has allowed for a phase 1 ESA but has not included any allowance for environmental remediation. A second consideration is soils conditions, particularly as they relate to septic system requirements. It is assumed that a class 4 septic system would be required for the project in order to meet legislated requirements. Given the vacant rural location of the proposed project, it is assumed that this system would be comprised of a distribution tank and filter bed. The size and design of such systems are based on anticipated flow calculations as well as the type/quality of the filter medium used. For that reason, the

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief303 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

condition of the soil on site is a key factor in determining septic system requirements. As such, pro forma assumptions have allowed for soils testing that will assist in determining septic system requirements. These same studies could also be used in determining structural bearing requirements for footings and site works. Given the preference for a single storey slab‐on‐grade form with wood frame construction, these requirements are anticipated to be quite minor. It should be noted that emerging technologies are continuing to expand the range of available options to address septic requirements. In many instances, these options serve to enhance efficiency by reducing the area necessary for treatment/filter medium, thereby promoting more efficient use of land. While pro forma assumptions have allowed for a basic tank and distribution system, the result of soils analysis may identify other potential options for consideration. This would include consideration of options that could be expanded in the future to accommodate additional units. Given the siting restrictions for septic systems, it will be important to consider design options early in the development process to help inform site configuration and layout. A sizable allowance has been provided in the pro forma to account for septic design and installation. A third consideration for the project is potable water provision. Within the Village, piped municipal water is provided and would be available at the lot frontage on Stage Coach Road. Discussions with municipal representatives have indicated that there are no service system capacity constraints as it relates to connecting at this site. Where there is consideration for a possible future expansion to the project, associated water requirements should be factored into current design, especially where it may oblige upgrades to service pipe diameter. Hydro servicing would also need to be confirmed as part of the pre‐acquisition checklist. Through the site visit process, a visual check indicated proximity to hydro service for the preferred site. However, capacity and access points for service would need to be confirmed once siting and building location are confirmed. A modest connection fee has been assumed in the pro forma construction figures. Natural gas is not commonly available in Sydenham and as such, residential heating is commonly provided through electric, oil or propane sources (TBC). Renewable energy sources are also possible (e.g. solar, wind) but would have to be evaluated on a cost/benefit basis given the small scale of the project.

Land use approvals Land use approvals can play a significant role in project development, depending on prevailing rules and regulations. A review of local land use documents and discussions with officials confirmed that a number of land use approvals may be required to facilitate the proposed project at the preferred site. These include: Severance – the preferred site owned by SFCSC represents the major part of the project site but there is a desire to add an additional remnant piece of land to the rear of the site to help expand the development potential and accommodate the sizeable septic system. To add this remnant piece, a severance and lot consolidation would be required to create one homogenous parcel of about 2.6 acres. It is not anticipated that issues would be encountered in securing this approval.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief304 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Official Plan Amendment (OPA) – the preferred site is designated “Settlement Area” under the Township’s Official Plan. While there are a broad range of permissions under this designation, the Plan goes on to denote Sydenham as Special Study Area and flag servicing provisions regarding minimum lot area and the ability of private septic systems to meet performance standards (e.g., minimum lot size, setbacks and separation distances). Depending on the application of these policies, an OPA may be required for the preferred site if servicing studies identify performance standard issues but these are not anticipated. If a site‐specific OPA is required, additional studies may need to be submitted in support of the OPA (e.g. soils/servicing report) above and beyond the application and planning rationale. Zoning Bylaw Amendment (ZBA) – under the current zoning bylaw, the preferred site and residual lands fall within the “Urban Residential ‐ First Density (UR‐1)” zone which does not allow for the proposed multi‐residential use. As such, a site‐specific ZBA would be required to re‐zone the lands to Urban Multiple Residential (UMR) to permit the development of a seniors multi‐unit housing facility. Through final building and septic system design, it may become evident that relief from other performance standards may be required and these could be handled as part of the same ZBA application. In order to expedite approvals and given the common issues involved, IF an OPA is required it would be prudent to make application for both the OPA and ZBA concurrently. Building Permit – As part of the construction process, a building permit would be required, ensuring that the project was designed in conformity with the Ontario Building Code. While this approval is typically straight forward, the confirmation of septic system design would be required before a permit could be issued. As such, the approach to servicing would have to be confirmed prior to application for a building permit. As a proponent of the seniors housing project and as the approval authority, it is not anticipated that the Township would have issues in supporting the land use approvals for the proposed project. That said, there are mandatory public consultation requirements associated with most of these approval processes and rights of public appeal on municipal decisions. Appeals of decisions could result in delays and add costs to overall project development. Provided that care was taken in addressing the concerns of neighbours through the planning process, it should be possible to secure necessary approvals. Each of the approvals processes also involve the remittance of fees which would add development costs to the project. Given the small scale of the project and given that the Township is a primary proponent of the project, it is assumed in pro forma modelling that application fees would be waived by the Township.

Sustainability An important lens for project development is the County’s sustainability principles, as articulated in “Directions for our Future: County of Frontenac Guide to Sustainability”. A stated objective of this business plan is to ensure that the proposed project concept supports sustainability objectives. In comparing the proposed project concept with “Directions for our Future”, it’s clear that a number of objectives are being promoted across a range of sustainability areas. These include:

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief305 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

     

Land use planning/management – the efficient and orderly development of vacant lands in a compact footprint, allowing for future expandability as warranted Energy – the inclusion of energy efficient building features and conservation measures that can be adapted over time (e.g. low voltage lighting, occupancy sensors in common areas, etc.) Water – having safe, effective waste management systems (i.e. septic) that protect groundwater and features that promote conservation (e.g. low flow faucets, toilets) Solid waste management – reduction in solid waste through the use of recycling and composting Transportation – encouraging walkability and pedestrian access to the Village centre Housing – providing more diversity in housing choice, encouraging ‘aging in place’ for area residents and promoting quality, compact design

While pursuing sustainability practices is a prime consideration of the County, it is recognized that utilizing certain green and renewable energy technologies can be cost‐prohibitive for projects of a smaller scale. In these instances, the payback period can be unrealistic for the upfront investment required. For that reason, practical, modest cost features are encouraged to promote energy efficiency. These can include things like:    

Solar orientation of the building Added insulation in roof and walls Efficient thermal windows and doors High efficiency HVAC systems

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief306 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY A key part of determining a project’s viability involves assessing its financial feasibility. At the initial concept phase, this feasibility is based on preliminary assumptions, recognizing that a project’s composition can change as the concept is refined. Throughout a project’s development, this feasibility is tested repeatedly at key milestones as estimates, costs and assumptions are refined. This process enables continued viability checks leading up to the point of construction and allows for decision‐making at key milestones as to whether to proceed. For the purposes of this business plan, financial feasibility has been based on preliminary estimates and assumptions that reflect the current project concept. It is fully expected that as this concept evolves, financial parameters would need to be reviewed and re‐tested to ensure continued viability. Two development scenarios have been created for the purposes stated above. Option 1 includes 6 one bedroom units funded through the Investment in Affordable Housing (IAH) capital funding program. In this scenario, rents for funded units are set at 80% of average market rent (AMR), receiving $150,000 per unit. The remaining 6 two bedroom unit rents are set at 90% AMR and do not receive capital funding from this program. The outcome of this scenario requires an estimated additional equity contribution of about $350,000 beyond the County commitment of $350,000 to make it financially feasible. Option 2 does not receive capital funding from the IAH program. Rent amounts for the one bedroom units are set at 100% AMR and for the two bedroom units are set at 90% AMR. The outcome of this scenario requires an estimated equity contribution of about $1,095,000 beyond the County commitment of $350,000 to make it financially feasible and to offset the absence of the capital funding mentioned above.

Project assumptions/parameters As an integral part of the business plan, the project must demonstrate financial self‐sufficiency in order to attract financing commitments. Therefore, the pro forma must clearly show that the operation of the project will generate sufficient revenues to cover debt service (i.e. mortgage), operating costs and funding of a capital reserve fund, all while achieving a positive debt service ratio. In order to achieve operational viability, capital costs and associated borrowing requirements must be minimized where possible. Contributions to offset capital costs are also used to reduce debt service costs for the project (i.e. mortgage payments) and in that regard, a number of funding sources have been identified to meet these costs. General assumptions utilized in the financial analysis of the project are as follows: 

12 units total – 6 @ 1 bedroom (590 sf/unit) and 6 @ 2 bedroom (805 sf/unit)



Total buildable area – 10,636 sf (GFA), including modest amenity space



Building construction – single storey slab on grade, wood frame with standard sloped roof

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief307 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)



servicing – Township water and septic system



Procurement ‐ design/tender (stipulated price contract)



Financing – conventional mortgage via private lender with CMHC insurance



Contributions – fees waivers and capital contributions from County, land at nominal cost, one scenario assumes IAH funding for 6 units ($150,000 x 6 = $900,000) for option 1



Owner status – non‐profit housing corporation

Using these guiding assumptions, a financial plan for the proposed project has been established and tested for feasibility. The following sections identify the estimated capital and operating costs of the proposed project as well as the funding and capital equity requirements. In addition to detailed assumptions that are discussed in the sections following, summary pro forma tables are also provided in Appendix B that help to clarify the basis for the estimates used.

Estimated capital budget Capital costs are those costs associated with establishing the project and include land, construction and associated development costs. The table below is a general summary of the overall estimated capital costs for the proposed seniors housing project. Table 1 ‐ Estimated Capital Budget – Option 1 (6 units funded under IAH Program)

Capital Costs Soft Costs Building Consultant Costs Site Costs Legal and Organizational Costs Financing Costs Fees and Permits Contingency SOFT COSTS TOTAL

$294,828 $30,000 $65,000 $47,761 $103,889 $54,198 $596,178

Hard Costs Construction Costs Land Costs HARD COSTS TOTAL

$1,986,544 $20,100 $2,000,654

HST TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS

$318,807 $2,922,636

The total capital costs for the proposed project under this configuration are estimated to be $2,922,636. This total includes hard costs (land and construction) of $2,000,654 and soft costs of $596,178. It also includes an HST amount of $318,807. Details regarding component capital costs are identified below. Total capital costs would be offset by the financial resources and funding outlined in Section 5.4 below.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief308 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 2 ‐ Estimated Capital Budget – Option 2 (no units funded under IAH Program)

Capital Costs Soft Costs Building Consultant Costs Site Costs Legal and Organizational Costs Financing Costs Fees and Permits Contingency SOFT COSTS TOTAL

$294,828 $30,000 $65,000 $58,612 $103,889 $55,283 $608,112

Hard Costs Construction Costs Land Costs HARD COSTS TOTAL

$1,986,544 $20,100 $2,006,654

HST TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS

$321,135 $2.935,900

The total capital costs for the proposed project under this configuration are estimated to be $2,935,900. This total includes hard costs (land and construction) of $2,006,654 and soft costs of $608,112. It also includes an HST amount of $321,135. Details regarding component capital costs are identified below. Total capital costs would be offset by the financial resources and funding outlined in Section 5.4 below.

Soft Costs Soft costs account for the many items/tasks necessary to design and bring the project to the point where construction can occur. Soft costs for the proposed project are assumed to include:  Building consultant costs – includes architect and development consultant costs as well as associated disbursements  Site‐related costs – includes site surveying, technical testing and a phase 1 environmental site assessment  Legals and organizational expenses – includes legal and organizational expenses as well as capital audit, appraisal and property taxes during construction  Financing costs – includes interest during construction as well as lender fees and mortgage insurance premiums (CMHC insured mortgage)  Fees and permits – these include development application fees, development charges and permit fees ( offsets for these costs are identified in Section 5.4)  Contingency ‐ a contingency of 10% has been included to account for unforeseen soft cost variances

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief309 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Hard Costs Hard costs account for land, construction and associated costs for building and fitting up the project. For the proposed project, hard costs are assumed to include the following: 

Construction costs – base costs are assumed at $160/sf (GFA) and reflect build‐on‐site construction



Site servicing – includes costs for water hook‐ups, installation of new septic bed and hydro connection fees



Appliances ‐ includes costs for in‐unit appliances (fridges/stoves) as well as washer/dryer facilities in the common area



Escalation and contingency – assumed at 10% of construction cost + site servicing costs to account for unforeseen costs/charges



Land – cost of $20,000 (based on key informants) + land transfer taxes



Harmonized Sales Tax – assumed as applicable for total capital costs

Estimated operating budget Once built, there are on‐going costs associated with operating and maintaining a project. The table below is a general summary of the overall estimated operating costs for the first year of operation for the proposed seniors housing project. Option 1 The total operating costs for the proposed project under this configuration are estimated to be $106,538. This total includes maintenance and administration costs, as well as mortgage costs and capital reserve contributions. HST payable and associated rebates have also been factored into these costs. Net revenues are projected at $115,992 and include rents, laundry revenues and vacancy loss. As a result, a net annual surplus of $9,001 is projected which translates into a debt coverage ratio of 1.20, which demonstrates financial feasibility. Details regarding component costs and revenues are identified in the section that follows. Option 2 The total operating costs for the proposed project under Option 2 are estimated to be $115,711. This total includes maintenance and administration costs, as well as mortgage costs and capital reserve contributions. HST payable and associated rebates have also been factored into these costs. Net revenues are projected at $126,084 and include rents, laundry revenues and vacancy loss. As a result, a net annual surplus of $10,314 is projected which translates into a debt coverage ratio of 1.20, which demonstrates financial feasibility. Details regarding component costs and revenues are identified in the section that follows.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief310 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 3 ‐ Estimated Year One Operating Budget – Option 1 (6 units funded under IAH Program)

Operating Budget Estimated Operating Revenue Rental Income from Tenants Laundry Revenue Vacancy Loss Total Operating Revenue Estimated Operating Expenses Maintenance – Wages, Materials and Services Heat & Water Electricity Property Management Fee Other Administrative Materials & Services Capital Replacement Reserves Contribution Insurance Property Taxes HST HST Rebate Mortgage Payments Total Operating Expenses Net Operating Income Debt Service Debt Coverage Ratio NET OPERATING PROFIT/LOSS

re fact

$115,992 $3,120 ‐$3,573 $115,539 $15,000 $7,200 $1,920 $7,590 $3,000 $5,203 $2,400 $16,200 $3,456 ‐$0 $44,569 $106,538 $53,570 $44,569 1.20 $9,001

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief311 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 4 ‐ Estimated Year One Operating Budget – Option 2 (no units funded under IAH Program)

Operating Budget Estimated Operating Revenue Rental Income from Tenants Laundry Revenue Vacancy Loss Total Operating Revenue Estimated Operating Expenses Maintenance – Wages, Materials and Services Heat & Water Electricity Property Management Fee Other Administrative Materials & Services Capital Replacement Reserves Contribution Insurance Property Taxes HST HST Rebate Mortgage Payments Total Operating Expenses Net Operating Income Debt Service Debt Coverage Ratio NET OPERATING PROFIT/LOSS

$126,864 $3,120 ‐$3,900 $126,084 $15,000 $7,200 $1,920 $7,570 $3,000 $5,203 $2,400 $18,000 $3,454 ‐$0 $63,747 $115,711 $62,338 $52,024 1.20 $10,314

Operating Revenue The operating revenue refers to the ongoing income for the project and would include such components as rental income, sundry income and funding contributions. The sources of revenue during the operational phase of this seniors housing development are expected to include only rental income from tenants and laundry revenue. Operating revenues in the first year are assumed to include the following: 

Rental income – rents are based on rent levels for CMHC Zone 4 of the Kingston area



Laundry revenue ‐ laundry revenue generated from coin‐operated machines has been estimated at $3,120 annually



Vacancy loss – throughout a typical year, vacancies can occur due to the timing of move‐ins and move‐outs. An allowance of 3% of revenue has been used to account for this loss.

While not defined in first year budget figures, it is anticipated that the annual increase in tenant income will be based on the average rate of change of the Ontario Rent Increase Guideline over the last five years.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief312 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Operating Expenses Operating expenses include regular day‐to‐day costs for running the housing project, such as maintenance and services, utility costs, property taxes, landscaping, property management, insurance, administrative materials and services, HST and contributions to a long‐term capital replacement reserve fund. Estimates for operating expenses for the proposed project have been developed using data from projects of a similar nature. The total operating expenses for the proposed project are estimated for the first year to be $61,969 for option 1 and $63,747 for option 2 and are comprised of the following notable items: 

Maintenance, administration, insurance and property management – Cost estimates are based on average per unit costs in actual projects and assume the use of contract or part time staff for necessary duties, given the small scale of the project.



Utilities – have been assumed for heat and hydro in common areas only as it is expected that heat and hydro for individual units would be paid directly by tenants.



Capital Replacement reserves – in accordance with CMHC mortgage insurance requirements and prudent practice, an annual contribution to the project’s capital reserve fund is assumed in an amount equal to 4% of total operating revenue. This reserve would be used to fund future lifecycle capital repair costs as needs arise.



Property taxes – property taxes are assumed at a reduced rate for funded units, equivalent to the single residential rate, which is consistent with recent projects developed under affordable housing programs. This would require a formal tax reduction by the Township and County. Property taxes for non‐funded units have been assumed at the multiple residential rate.



Harmonized Sales Tax – applicable HST has been assumed as well as an associated rebate. The rebate is equivalent to that permitted by non‐profit housing providers.



Mortgage payment – Option 1: An annual mortgage payment of $44,569 has been assumed based on the projected lending amount ($1,000,397), a 40‐year amortization period and an interest rate of 3.25%. Option 2: An annual mortgage payment of $52,024 has been assumed based on the projected lending amount ($1,167,735), a 40‐year amortization period and an interest rate of 3.25%.



Preferred rates and amortization are assumed as the mortgage would be CMHC insured but held with a private lender. Consideration could also be given for self‐financing by the Township or County as this could result in savings to the project for financing costs.

While not expressed in the first year operating budget, expenses for maintenance, other administrative materials and services, insurance and property taxes are assumed to increase by 2% per year. This is based on the 5 year average rate of increase in the Consumer Price Index. Other expenses, such as heat and hydro, are assumed to increase by 4.34% annually based on the five‐year average rate of increase in the Consumer Price Index for utilities. As part of the analysis, viability was also examined beyond the first year of operation. By applying the above inflationary adjustments, costs and revenues were escalated over a five year period. The analysis showed that the project remains viable over the analysis period.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief313 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Funding/capital requirements As an affordable housing project, there typically are contributions, fee relief and/or funding that is required in order to ensure affordability and maintain financial viability. These contributions provide an important revenue bridge between the lending capacity of the project and total costs. The table below provides a general summary of the sources of funding that have been assumed for the proposed seniors housing project. Table 5 ‐ Anticipated Project Contributions – Option 1 (6 units funded under IAH Program)

Contributions HST Rebate Fees and Charges Waived Capital Grant from the County IAH Funding Equity Contribution TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS

$ 218,350 $103,889 $350,000 $900,000 $350,000 $1,922,239

Table 6 ‐ Anticipated Project Contributions – Option 2 (no units funded under IAH Program)

Contributions HST Rebate Fees and Charges Waived Capital Grant from the County IAH Funding Equity Contribution TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS

$219,277 $103,889 $350,000 $0 $1,095,000 $1,768,165

Many of these contributions involve waivers of municipal fees/charges while others involve eligible tax rebates or cash contributions. Details regarding contributions are identified below. 

HST Rebate – The project has been assumed as sponsored by a non‐profit entity and as such, the project would be entitled to receive an 82% PST rebate and a 50% GST rebate, resulting in a total HST rebate of $218,250 for development option 1 and $219,277 for option 2.



Wavier of Planning/Building Fees and Development Charges – As a County and Township‐supported project, it is assumed that municipal contributions in‐kind that enhance financial viability would be welcome. Accordingly, it has been assumed that municipal fees for required land use planning approvals, building permit fees and development charges, estimated in the order of $103,889, would be waived for both development options of the project.



Capital Grant from the County – In accordance with the terms of reference for the business plan and based on funding allocated for seniors housing by the County, it has been assumed that the project would receive a capital grant of $350,000 from the County of Frontenac



Land Value – Discussions with SFCSC indicate they may be willing to transfer ownership of their portion of the preferred site at a nominal cost.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief314 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)



Equity Contribution – Based on current estimates of total project costs, potential contributions and assumed debt service capacity, a projected capital shortfall of approximately $350,000 exists for development option 1. In order to achieve financial feasibility, an equity injection of this amount would be required to support the project. This equity could be secured in the form of fund raising, an additional cash contribution, program funding or some combination of the above. Without IAH funding, a larger equity contribution is required. For development option 2, a total equity contribution of $1,095,000 is required to make the project financially viable.

Financial viability The financial plan outlined above presents capital and operating budgets that result in a feasible and self‐ sustaining project based on current assumptions. Based on these estimates, total project costs would be in the order of $2.92M for development option 1 and $2.93M for option 2. Funding for development costs in option 1 would be provided through conventional financing of approximately $1,000,397, and a range of project contributions/rebates totaling $1,922,239. For option 2, these costs include $1,167,735 in mortgage costs and contributions and rebates totalling $1,768,165. Operationally, development option 1 is estimated to have an initial annual operating cost of $106,538 which would be offset by rents and revenues in the order of almost $115,539. This would result in a modest annual operating surplus of approximately $9,001. Calculations show that, based on this operating cost structure, the project would achieve a debt coverage ratio of 1.2, demonstrating that it is financially viable. Development option 2 is estimated to have an initial annual operating cost of $115,771 which would be offset by rents and revenues in the order of almost $126,084. This would result in a modest annual operating surplus of approximately $10,314. Calculations show that, based on this operating cost structure, the project would achieve a debt coverage ratio of 1.2, demonstrating that it is financially viable. That said, viability assumptions do rely on a number of contributions and fee relief to help defray project costs. These contributions would require the support of both the Township and the County in order to be realized. Going forward, it will be critical to re‐test assumptions as cost and revenue estimates are refined. This will help ensure that as the project concept evolves, options to maintain financial viability can be considered and applied as needed.

GOVERNANCE An important consideration in moving forward with the proposed project is understanding how it will be sponsored and operated on an on‐going basis. This has implications not only for basic operations and sustainability but can have an impact the financial assumptions for the project. Following is a review of key governance issues.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief315 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Project ownership/oversight The project sponsor – the owner – has a fundamental role in the development and long term success of the project. Typically for a project of this nature, an established non‐profit housing organization would be a prime sponsor. The experience they have in project operations and property management would be highly beneficial. The one local organization with experience in the ownership and management of affordable seniors rental housing is Loughborough Housing Corporation, which owns and operates two such buildings in Sydenham. Preliminary discussions have been held with the Corporation, who have indicated an interest in some form of involvement in the project. Their expertise and experience in property management of affordable seniors housing make them well suited to be retained as the property managers for the project. This should be strongly considered. Any other form of involvement in the ownership of the building would need to be discussed with their Board and senior staff. The Township of Frontenac has no previous experience in the ownership and operation of seniors housing of this nature and have expressed the view that, while they may be prepared to support the project in various ways, they do not believe they would be suited to be the owners or managers of the building. Similar views were expressed by South Frontenac Community Services Corporation, which is highly interested in providing supports and services to seniors in the building (especially given the proposed location adjacent to their Grace Centre), but has no experience or expertise in the ownership or management of seniors housing. One approach which may be suitable in view of the interest of all three organizations in the project would be the creation of a separate, legally distinct non‐profit housing corporation that has representation from all three organizations on its Board of Directors. This mix of representation on the Board of the corporation would facilitate arm’s length local oversight while at the same time compartmentalizing liability and risks associated with operations. The on‐going involvement of the Township would further help to provide stability and continuity for the project. The stability of this approach is seen as highly desirable in getting the project up and running.

Planned approach to management As noted above, Loughborough Housing Corporation possesses the experience and expertise to undertake the property management and maintenance of a building of this nature. Given the modest size of the project, this involvement would be on a part‐time basis. They could be retained on this basis for an annual property management fee which would be negotiated with the Board of Directors.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief316 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

MOVING FORWARD Summary of preferred concept Based on demonstrated needs, community consultation and business case analysis, the concept for a small scale seniors housing project situated in Sydenham has been developed. This concept has been tested and found to be viable, subject to the assumptions outlined in this report. Based on the proposed concept, the seniors housing project would: 

Be modest in scale – 12 self‐contained apartment units (6 @ one bedroom, 6 @ two bedroom) plus amenity space for a total buildable area of 10,600 sf (GFA)



Include basic amenity space ‐ laundry facilities (1 pair) and a small indoor common area for gathering/socialization would be provided



Accommodate seniors mobility needs – providing a safe, indoor access to apartment units while incorporating visitability and accessibility throughout units and common spaces



Support basic affordability – all units would be rental and offered at or below average market rent level. Rents for the one bedroom units could be lowered to 80% of average market rent if IAH funding is obtained from the City of Kingston.



Be procured as new construction – this approach would enable a single storey slab‐on‐grade building, with a cost‐effective double‐loaded main corridor, wood frame structure and standard sloped roof



Incorporate practical sustainability features that promote energy efficiency



Be situated adjacent to the Grace Centre on land currently owned by South Frontenac Community Services Corporation, plus an adjacent parcel



Be procured through a formal design/tender process (stipulated price contract)



Be financed using a conventional mortgage that is CMHC‐insured, as well as an equity contribution of $350,000 from the County and an additional equity contribution in the order of $350,000 for the IAH‐funded option and $1,095,000 in the non‐funded option



Be owned by a newly constituted non‐profit housing corporation



Be managed by Loughborough Housing Corporation, should they be agreeable to take on that role.

As a result of the financial analysis, it has been determined that the project would be viable based on preliminary cost estimates, anticipated revenues and assumed contributions. While a series of land use approvals are required to permit the intended use, there do not appear to be any significant barriers to securing these approvals. Prior to acquiring the project site, due diligence testing would be required to ensure that no environmental concerns or project servicing impediments exist. Based on an initial scan of current conditions and background information, no impediments are anticipated. Viable project governance options exist, the most plausible of which would see the creation of a new non‐profit corporation which would legally own and operate the project.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief317 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Process/critical path While preliminary feasibility of the project concept has been demonstrated, there are a number of steps necessary to advance the project. Moving forward through these steps, there are a number of decision points where the plausibility of advancing would need to be reconfirmed as the project concept is refined. Initially, this would involve steps confirming the parameters for moving forward from the initial feasibility testing, including the following tasks: 

Confirm decision to move forward – in addition to endorsing the business plan, this task would involve securing development consulting expertise to advance the project



Confirm decisions with regards governance/oversight – this would involve defining the Township role in the project going forward, as well as pursuing incorporation of the sponsor entity (if this approach is confirmed). Discussions would be required with the Boards of Loughborough Housing Corporation and South Frontenac Community Services Corporation about potential representation on the Board of Directors.



Enter into a conditional agreement re property – this would involve meeting the South Frontenac Community Services Corporation to develop an agreement to lease or purchase the preferred property and the adjacent parcel. This agreement would be conditional on all of the requirements of the project being met



Enter into discussions with Loughborough Housing Corporation about property management – this would involve meeting with Loughborough Housing Corporation to determine their interest in assuming the role of property managers of the building



Confirm initial funding commitments – to enable project planning, County and Township contributions would need to be confirmed. Access to financing would also need to be confirmed on a preliminary basis as well as the funding/resources necessary to undertake the next stage of pre‐development work. The City of Kingston would need to be approached regarding the availability of IAH funding.

With these activities completed, a decision regarding proceeding/not would be made in order to move forward to the pre‐development stage. Under this phase, the following activities would be required to advance development of the project to the point of construction commitment: 

Assemble technical/design team – this would involve identifying or recruiting development team members, including a project architect and technical testing specialists



Formalize project design – preliminary design drawings would be developed for comment and subsequent refinement in accordance with the finalized project concept



Complete due diligence for land – in order to finalize site acquisition, environmental and technical testing would need to be conducted to formally confirm that no development constraints existed



Confirm specific service requirements – having confirmed technical parameters and preliminary design, final servicing designs would be developed for septic systems and utilities into the site

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief318 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)



Re‐confirm costs, funding and mortgage financing – in addition to updated pro forma figures, a conditional financing commitment would be secured to confirm financial parameters prior to tendering

With these activities completed, a decision regarding proceeding/not would be made in order to move forward to the construction stage. Under this phase, the following activities would be required: 

Prepare contract documents for bidding – final design drawings and accompanying specification would be developed for tendering purposes



Tendering for construction pricing – contract documents would be tendered for pricing to qualified bidders and results would be evaluated against budgeted construction costs. Both conventional contractors and modular contractors should be invited.



Reconfirm financing and project commitment – final budget adjustments would be made based on tendered costs to secure final financing approvals, thereby enabling owner approval for project commitment to proceed with construction



Negotiate construction contract and commence construction – with approval in hand, a standard construction contract would be executed with the selected bidder



Construction monitoring – through the construction process, regular progress reviews would be undertaken to track progress against the building schedule as well as costs versus budget.



Pre‐occupancy planning – during the construction phase, planning would be undertaken in order to prepare for tenant move‐in and project operations



Post‐occupancy wrap‐up – with the conclusion of construction and the subsequent certification for project occupancy, capital cost reconciliation, HST self‐assessment, warranty inspections, etc. would be completed in order to close out the capital development phase of the project

Key elements & critical success factors As noted, there are a number of tasks require to move the project forward through successive stages of development. Each stage is punctuated with a decision point on whether to proceed or not to the next stage. While this progressive process lays out a stepwise approach to move from initial viability through to construction, there are some fundamental success factors that are key ingredients for realizing the proposed project. Having these elements in place goes a long way to supporting project viability. Key elements required for a successful project include: 

Allocating sufficient resources – having the funds/resources to undertake pre‐development work and advance through construction is essential to the success of the project



Having a clear governance/accountability framework – during development and after occupancy, having a clear and straight‐forward decision‐making structure for oversight



Acquiring strong technical expertise – through the development process, a range of technical issues must be addressed/overcome and having an experienced team is key to staying on track

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief319 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)



Firming up an agreement for the preferred property – a fundamental project requirement is reaching agreement on the preferred property, which is currently owned by South Frontenac Community Services Corporation and its neighbour



Securing access to financing – securing financing is a critical component to meeting the financial obligations of development

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief320 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

APPENDIX ‘A’ – NEEDS PROFILE The “Seniors Community Housing Pilot Project Study” completed for the County in 2012 contained a comprehensive profile of housing and need indicators for the County and its constituent townships. This profile was based on data available at the time. Since completion of the pilot study, additional Census and market data have been released that serve to provide a more current picture of local conditions. This appendix provides an abbreviated update of the original profile, highlighting key housing and need indicators at the County level. Seniors‐based indicators are also examined at the County level and summarized as part of this update. As a result, relevant local conditions in the Frontenac Islands have been highlighted in the body of the report with regard for the broader analysis provided in this appendix.

County-wide Housing Needs and Market Indicators Demographic Profile Frontenac County The County of Frontenac is rural in character, covering an expansive area of some 4,000 square kilometres. The County has a permanent population of just over 26,000, complimented by a substantial number of seasonal residents who cottage throughout the Frontenacs. The county is comprised of four townships ‐ North, Central and South Frontenac and Frontenac Islands. The majority of dwellings in the County are single‐detached homes, located in one of the many small villages and hamlets or scattered throughout the extensive rural area. As a result, the land use pattern for the County is very low density in nature. Like other jurisdictions in Ontario, the County is experiencing aging in its population. In fact, the share of the senior population in the County of Frontenac is actually increasing more rapidly than that of the province as a whole. General Population Trends In 2011, the County of Frontenac had a permanent population of 26,375. The majority of this population (68.7%) lives in South Frontenac. Central Frontenac accounts for 17.3% of the population while the rest of the population is divided between Frontenac Islands (7.1%) and North Frontenac (7.0%). Table 7. Population Counts, Frontenac County and the Townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac, Central Frontenac and North Frontenac, 1996‐2036

Geography Frontenac County Frontenac Islands South Frontenac Central Frontenac North Frontenac

1996 23,760 1,661 15,711 4,615 1,773

2001 24,411 1,638 16,415 4,557 1,801

2006 26,658 1,862 18,227 4,665 1,904

2011 26,375 1,864 18,113 4,556 1,842

2016 28,605 2,120 19,315 5,120 2,050

2021 29,895 2,225 20,250 5,280 2,140

2026 30,900 2,295 21,025 5,380 2,200

2031 31,705 2,365 21,580 5,530 2,230

2036 32,400 2,435 22,050 5,650 2,265

Source: Statistics Canada 1996‐2011 Community and Census Profiles; Watson & Associates, Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs, June 2014

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief321 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Over the last 15 years the population of the County has increased by 11.0% overall, growing from a population of 23,760 in 1996. From 2006 to 2011, the County’s population declined 1.1%. While the County has experienced a slight decline recently, it is still important to note that the County’s population is expected to grow and that based on projections by Watson and Associates undertaken in 2014, the population is estimated to increase by some 6,000 people from 2011 to 2036 (23%). Locationally, the population distribution is expected to remain the same, with 68.1% still expected to reside in South Frontenac in 2036 (compared to 68.7% in 2011). The other Townships are also expected to maintain their proportions, with Frontenac Islands’ share rising slightly from 7.1% in 2011 to 7.5% in 2036. Figure 5. Population Growth and Decline Trends, Frontenac County and the Townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac, Central Frontenac and North Frontenac, 1996‐2036

Population by Age When broken down by age range, Ministry of Finance data shows that the largest age group in the County of Frontenac (including the City of Kingston)1 in 2011 was persons aged under 25 years, comprising nearly a third (29.5%) of the population. The number of persons in this age group is expected to increase by 4,770 by 2036 (10.8%), but the age group’s proportion will drop to 24.7% of the total population. All age groups are expected to increase in real numbers from 2011 to 2036, but senior age groups will see the most sizable increases, with the 65 to 74 year old age group increasing by over 10,000 persons (76.0% increase) and the 75 years and older group more than doubling (17,000+ persons or a 144.8% increase). This compares to a 32.4% increase for the population as a whole.

1

Ministry of Finance figures do not disaggregate data for the County and City of Kingston. As such, figures are reported based on County + City totals.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief322 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Also expected to experience notable growth us the 35 to 44 year age group, indicating there will be more persons of working age in the County in a couple of decades. This could lead to an even greater increase in seniors as this population group ages in the future. Table 8. Population Counts and Trends by Age, Frontenac County (including the City of Kingston), 2011 and 2036

2011

2036

% Change 2011‐2036

Age

%

% % 0 ‐ 24 44,120 29.5% 48,890 24.7% 10.8% 25 ‐ 34 19,125 12.8% 23,910 12.1% 25.0% 35 ‐ 44 18,115 12.1% 26,360 13.3% 45.5% 45 ‐ 54 23,305 15.6% 26,380 13.3% 13.2% 55 ‐ 64 20,155 13.5% 20,720 10.5% 2.8% 65 ‐ 74 13,175 8.8% 23,190 11.7% 76.0% 75+ 11,745 7.8% 28,750 14.5% 144.8% TOTAL 149,740 100.0% 198,200 100.0% 32.4% Source: Statistics Canada, Community Profiles, 2011; Ontario Ministry of Finance, Population Projections Update, 2014

Households In terms of household growth, the number of households in the County has grown 26.0% from 1996 to 2011, from 8,650 households to 10,900 in 2011. This rate of household growth is notably higher than the population growth rate during the same time period, which is due in part to trending towards smaller, more diverse household types. This is reinforced by the fact that even though the County’s population declined 1.1% from 2006 to 2011, households grew 6.2%. Like population trends, the largest proportion of households is situated in South Frontenac, with 66.2% of households. Another 17.5% are located in Central Frontenac with just 8.4% and 7.8% in North Frontenac and Frontenac Islands, respectively. It is projected that households will continue to grow at similar rates over the next 20 years, with an expected increase of 26.6% from 2011 to 2036 for the County. Despite this overall trend, the rate of household growth will be slower in South Frontenac and Frontenac Islands, and faster in North Frontenac and especially in Central Frontenac. Geographical distribution of households amongst the Townships is also expected to remain steady.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief323 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 6. Household Growth Trends, Frontenac County and the Townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac, Central Frontenac and North Frontenac, 1996‐2036

Tenure Along with population and household trends, tenure is also a key indicator for tracking housing trends. Ownership continues to be very prominent throughout the County. As can be seen in the figure below, the share of households with ownership tenure has been on the rise, with the proportion of owners rising from 85.9% in 1996 to 91.3% in 2011. In contrast, there was a decline in the proportion of renter households during this same period to 8.7% in 2011. In real terms, the number of owners rose 33.0% during this time period, while the number of actual renters declined 23.4%, in 2011, indicating that. Figure 7. Tenure Trends, County of Frontenac, 1996 and 2011

Income An important element in determining housing need is the economic capacity of a household. By examining income trends and characteristics, it is possible to better identify the affordability limitations of households and the impact these have on the housing options available to them.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief324 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

In 2010, the median individual income in the County of Frontenac (including Kingston2) was $31,814, slightly higher than the Provincial median income of $30,526. However, the County’s 2010 average individual income ($40,983) was lower than the Provincial average ($42,264). Despite this, incomes in the County are rising at rate faster than the Province. The County’s average individual income level increased by 36.2% from 2000, when it was $40,091, a higher rate of increase than that seen for the Province (28.6%). Similarly, median individual income rose 38.6% for the County from 2000 to 2010, compared to just a 23.0% increase for the Province. Figure 8. Median and Average Individual Income, County of Frontenac (including City of Kingston), 2000 and 2010

This trend towards higher average incomes is evident in changes for those with low or moderate incomes. As can be seen in the figure below, the proportion of individuals earning less than $40,000/year has decreased significantly since 2000 – in particular, those earning less than $10,000/year have dropped from 23.8% in proportion to 14.9% and those earning $10,000 to $19,999 have dropped from 22.0% of the population to 16.1%. On the other hand, those earning $60,000 or more have experienced notable increases, with this group’s proportion growing from 8.5% in 2000 to 21.8% in 2010. While upward trending in incomes is encouraging, the fact remains that nearly half (44.3%) of the County’s population earns less than $30,000/year as an individual.

2

NHS income data for 2010 does not disaggregate figures for the County and the City of Kingston. As such, average and median income figures are reported which include both the County and the City.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief325 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Figure 9. Individual Income Ranges, County of Frontenac (including City of Kingston), 2000 and 2010

In terms of household income, the chart below shows that median and average household incomes have been rising at a rate similar to those of individuals. For the County as a whole (including Kingston3), median household income rose 32.1% from 2000 to 2010 and average household income 35.8%. In comparison, median household income for the Province rose 23.7% to reach $66,358 in 2010, and average household income 28.3% to reach $85,772. Like individual incomes, average and median household incomes for the Province are higher than the County, but growth in household incomes is occurring at a faster rate in the County. Figure 10. Median and Average Household Income, County of Frontenac (including City of Kingston), 2000 and 2010

3

As previously noted, NHS income data for 2010 agglomerates figures for the County and the City of Kingston.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief326 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Housing Profile Housing supply is typically measured based on the availability of housing options for households within a community. These housing options are then compared to housing demand to identify any gaps that may exist. However, gaps in the market are not simply borne out of demand; they can also be driven by factors which limit choices. Generally speaking, households with higher incomes and the ability to live independently are able to exercise this choice in the housing market. By contrast, those with lower incomes and higher care requirements will have much fewer choices. The private market traditionally supplies the majority of housing in most communities and this is certainly the case in the County of Frontenac. Dwellings The majority of dwellings in the County of Frontenac are single‐detached dwellings (95.3% or 9,895 dwellings). The remaining 4.7% (490 dwellings) are comprised of low‐rise apartment building units (1.8%), movable dwellings (0.9%), detached duplex apartment units (0.9%), semi‐detached dwellings (0.8%), as well as a few row houses and other single‐attached dwellings. These proportions have not changed much since 2001 when there were 8,615 single‐detached dwellings and which comprised 93.9% of the dwelling stock. However, the number and proportion of semi‐detached homes did drop by almost half from 2001 to 2011, and the proportion of low‐rise apartment building units and movable dwellings dropped slightly as well. In real terms, South Frontenac and Central Frontenac have a slightly more diverse range of housing types as compared to North Frontenac and Frontenac Islands where dwelling types are quite limited. This tendency towards low density development in the County is typical for many rural communities. Table 9. Dwellings by Type, Frontenac County and the Townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac, Central Frontenac and North Frontenac, 2011

Frontenac County

% Single‐detached house Semi‐detached house Row house Apartment, detached duplex Apartment, building that has five or more storeys Apartment, building that has fewer than five storeys Other single‐attached house Movable dwelling

Frontenac Islands

%

South Frontenac

%

Central Frontenac

%

North Frontenac

%

9,895 80 30 90

95.3% 0.8% 0.3% 0.9%

760 5 0 10

96.8% 0.6% 0.0% 1.3%

6475 50 15 65

95.2% 0.7% 0.2% 1.0%

1775 20 10 15

93.9% 1.1% 0.5% 0.8%

885 5 5 0

97.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

185 10 95

1.8% 0.1% 0.9%

10 0 0

1.3% 0.0% 0.0%

140 5 55

2.1% 0.1% 0.8%

35 5 30

1.9% 0.3% 1.6%

0 0 10

0.0% 0.0% 1.1%

TOTAL 10,385 100.0% Source: Statistics Canada, Census Profile, 2011

785

100.0%

6,805

100.0%

1,890

100.0%

905

100.0%

Seasonal Dwellings Seasonal dwellings – those used on a non‐permanent basis – have traditionally accounted for roughly 40% of the County’s total dwellings and are located throughout the County. However, the percentage of seasonal households in the County of Frontenac declined from 42% in 2001 to 37% in 2011, to reach 6,068

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief327 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

dwellings. All of the townships experienced a decrease in seasonal households during this time period, due in part to conversion to permanent dwellings. In contrast, by 2036 the proportion of seasonal dwellings in the County as a whole is expected to rise slightly to 38% or 8,465 dwellings due to new construction, and this growth is expected to be primarily in South Frontenac and North Frontenac. The Frontenacs are becoming more attractive to empty nesters and seniors (within the 55 to 74 age range) and a growing proportion of this group is choosing to retire / semi‐retire at their seasonal properties, converting these to permanent residences. As a result, more recent projections suggest some upswing in the conversion of seasonal dwellings, albeit at a minor rate. According to Watson and Associates (2011), this trend is expected to continue over the next few years with absorption of converted stock. Over the next 25 years, the influence of seasonal dwelling conversion on housing development will have significant impacts within the County, as it will increase the permanent housing stock if conversions continue to occur in favour of development of permanent dwellings. Figure 11. Seasonal Dwelling Trends, Frontenac County and the Townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac, Central Frontenac and North Frontenac, 2001‐2036

Age and Condition of Dwellings According to 2011 Census data, 28.4% of the County’s dwellings were built prior to 1960, compared to just 11.6% built after 2000, indicating that the County has a somewhat older housing stock. Nearly a third (28.9%) of the dwellings were built between 1961 and 1980. Despite the aging profile of the stock, housing in the County is in reasonably good shape with just 7.8% (805 dwellings) requiring major repairs in 2011, compared to 8.8% in 2001. Residential Development Potential The Provincial Policy Statement as well as the Official Plans for the Townships within the County of Frontenac encourage new residential development in designated settlement areas. A review conducted by Watson and Associates (2014) showed that as of June 2014, the County had a total of 2,569 hectares of vacant land designated as settlement areas in the Township Official plans.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief328 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Table 10. Overview of Vacant Lands Designated as Settlement Areas by Municipality

North Frontenac Central Frontenac South Frontenac Frontenac Islands Total Frontenac County

Vacant Designated Land (Hectare) 647 411 1,498 13

% of Total Vacant Land within Settlement Areas 25.2% 16.0% 58.3% 0.5%

2,569

100.0%

Source: Watson & Associates (June 2014). Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs

The above table shows that the majority of this land (58.3%) is located in South Frontenac while the smallest proportion of vacant land is located in the Township of Frontenac Islands (0.5%). The availability of substantial vacant lands in South Frontenac correlates with population and dwelling counts that show most growth in the County has and will continue to occur there. Ownership Housing Market As mentioned earlier, 91.3%, or 9,495 dwellings in the County, were owned as of 2011, up from 7,140 dwellings in 1996. This indicates that ownership housing is not only by far the most dominant form of tenure, but the County’s preference for ownership housing is growing. Price is also an important consideration in the ownership market. According to Statistics Canada Census data for 2011 the County’s average dwelling value for 2010 was $304,496, which is an increase of 95.7% since 2000, when the average dwelling value was $155,557. This substantial increase is mainly due to the production of larger homes, seasonal conversions and sustained lower interest rates which foster greater buying power for owners. Mortgage status can also provide important information on a housing market. In 2011, 55.8% of the County’s owner households, or 5,067 households, had a mortgage, indicating that a large proportion of the County’s owners (about 45%) do not have a mortgage and have a substantial amount of accumulated equity in their homes. Rental Housing Market As mentioned earlier, just 8.7% of dwellings in the County (800 units), were rented in 2011 and the number of rental dwellings has actually gone down. Since 1996, rental units have decreasing by 275 units (23%) in the County. This suggests that there is a very limited supply within the County and that the supply is diminishing. It should be noted that in 2011, 14.4% of renter households, or 128 households, were in subsidized housing in the County, indicating that a large proportion of renter households struggle to meet housing costs. These trends show that there is a very limited supply of affordable rental housing in the County. Average rents are an important consideration in the rental market. According to Statistics Canada Census data for 2011 the County’s average monthly shelter cost for rented dwellings in 2010 was $895, which is

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief329 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

an increase of 32.6% since 2000, when the average monthly shelter cost for rented dwellings was $675. It is presumed that rising utility costs during this period would have had some influence on these increases. Average market rents for the entire County of Frontenac are not reported by CMHC but rents are monitored for the Kingston CMA which includes South Frontenac, Frontenac Islands and Loyalist Township (Zone 4 within the CMA). In the last 9 years, overall average market rents in the CMA have increased by some 34.4%, from $751 in 2005 to $1,009 in 2014. Average market rents vary by unit size, tending to increase as the size of the unit increases. In 2014, average market rents for the Kingston CMA were $662 for bachelor units, $888 for one bedroom units, $1,070 for two bedroom units and $1,411 for 3 bedroom units. Rents in Zone 4 of the CMA tend to be higher than the CMA averages. This was especially true in 2014 for one and two‐bedroom units in Zone 4 which were the highest in the CMA at $963 and $1,271 respectively. Figure 12. Overall Average Rents, Kingston CMA and Zones, 2005 and 2014

Overall, vacancy rates for rental units in the Kingston CMA decreased from 2.1% in 2005 to 1.9% in 2014 for a total of 13,092 units in 2014, compared to 12,381 units in 2006. A healthy vacancy rate is generally considered at about 3.0% so a rate of 1.9% shows a significant tightening of the rental market and when considered with the limited options available, explains the higher average rents being commanded. The vacancy rate of 2.4% for Zone 4 was higher than the Kingston CMA overall in 2014 and up from just 1.3% in 2005. While the rise in vacancy rates could suggest there is more housing stock to meet demand in 2014 compared to nearly a decade ago, vacancy rates are still below the 3.0% level that is considered a balanced market , indicating a slight undersupply of units. While the rental data does not provide a complete picture for the County of Frontenac, it is clear that there is a limited supply of rental housing and that demand for units continues to be strong, based on lower vacancy rates and overall trends. Spending on Housing and Shelter Costs As a standard measure of affordability, where households spend more than 30% of their gross income on shelter costs, they are considered to have an affordability problem. In 2010, 15.7% of owners in the County (1,426 households) were spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs, compared to 16.5% in

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief330 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

2000 (1,305 households). While the real number of owners spending more than 30% has increased, their proportion has actually decreased. This is in contrast to renters where both the number and proportion of renters spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs increased from 2000 to 2010. In 2010, 47.9% of renter households (426) were spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs, compared to 38.7% of renter households in (370). This data indicates that renters are increasingly struggling with housing costs in the County due to limited supply and increasing rents.

Profile of Seniors Indicators Population Trends Data on the age of the population shows that in 2011, seniors comprised just over 17% of the population in the County and just over 21% of the population in Frontenac Islands. Both areas had similar increases in the number of seniors, 49.8% for Frontenac County and 43.6% for Frontenac Islands. Table 11. Senior Population, Frontenac County and Frontenac Islands, 1996 and 2011

2001

Frontenac County Frontenac Islands

2011

Total

Seniors 65+

Seniors Proportion

23,760 1,640

3,050 275

12.8% 16.8%

Total

Seniors 65+

Seniors Proportion

% Change 1996‐2011

26,375 1,864

4,570 395

17.3% 21.2%

49.8% 43.6%

Source: Statistics Canada, Census and Community Profiles, 1996 and 2011

When considering sub‐area demographics, it is clear that seniors are not evenly distributed within the County. In real numbers, those 65+ are most prominent in South Frontenac, given the more populace nature of this Township. Proportionally though, seniors make up a much larger share of the current population in both Central Frontenac and Frontenac Islands, and especially North Frontenac where seniors account for one out of every three persons. Table 12. Seniors as a Share of Population, Frontenac County and the Townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac, Central Frontenac and North Frontenac, 2011

Seniors (65+) as share of population

Total Seniors Pop

Total Pop

Frontenac Islands 395 1,864 South Frontenac 2,535 18,113 Central Frontenac 1,040 4,556 North Frontenac 600 1,842 Frontenac County 4,570 26,375 Source: Statistics Canada, Census Profile, 2011

Seniors as % of Total 21.2% 14.0% 22.8% 32.6% 17.3%

The Ontario Ministry of Finance produces an updated set of population projections every year to provide planners and researchers with a demographic outlook reflecting the most up‐to‐date trends and historical

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief331 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

data. Based on Ontario Ministry of Finance population projections, the following table illustrates that between 2012 and 2036, Frontenac County’s (including the City of Kingston) senior population will rise 94.5%, compared to an overall population increase of just 27.0%. The proportion of seniors will also increase from 17.1% in 2012 to 26.2% in 2036. Table 13. Overall Population and Senior Growth Trends, Frontenac County, 2012 and 2036

2012

% Change 2012‐ 2036

2036

Frontenac County (inc. Kingston) 156,060 198,190 27.0% Seniors 65+ 26,700 51,940 94.5% Proportion 17.1% 26.2% Source: Ontario Ministry of Finance, Population Projections Update, 2014

The discussion above shows that the County’s population will be aging significantly, and by 2036 a quarter of the total population will be a senior. This suggests that there will be a sustained need for seniors housing options as the proportion of the senior population increases. This will be especially true for the population aged 75 years and older, which will increase 144.8% from 2011 to 2036, compared to a 76% increase for those aged 65 to 74 years. Households Household structure is another factor to be considered in assessing housing needs. Given the population and households characteristics of the County, it is not surprising that a high proportion of households, including senior households, are family‐based, with related individuals in either a marital, common‐law or lone‐parent structure. Non‐family households – those comprised of individuals living alone or together – make up a much smaller share of all households. Table 14. Household Living Arrangements for Seniors in Private Households, Frontenac County and the Townships of Frontenac Islands, South Frontenac, Central Frontenac and North Frontenac 2011

Frontenac County

% Number of persons not in census families aged 65 years and over Living with relatives Living with non‐relatives only Living alone Number of census family persons aged 65 years and over TOTAL

Frontenac Islands

%

South Frontenac

%

Central Frontenac

%

North Frontenac

%

1,080 160 70 850

23.9% 14.8% 6.5% 78.7%

80 10 0 65

20.3% 12.5% 0.0% 81.3%

575 115 40 420

22.8% 20.0% 7.0% 73.0%

245 30 20 195

24.3% 12.2% 8.2% 79.6%

180 5 10 170

3,435

76.1%

315

79.7%

1,945

77.2%

765

75.7%

410

69.5%

4,515 100.0% 395 100.0% 2,520 100.0% 1,010 100.0% Source: Statistics Canada, Census and Community Profiles, 2001 and 2011

590

100.0%

re fact

30.5% 2.8% 5.6% 94.4%

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief332 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

The majority of seniors in the County reside in a family structure (76.1%). The majority of the County seniors’ not in a census family (78.7% of seniors not in a census family) were living alone. Proportions are similar across the Townships, and especially for Frontenac Islands. These proportions have not changed notably since 2001 although the proportion of seniors in census family structures has risen slightly for all areas. For the County as a whole, the actual number of seniors in census families has increased as compared to seniors not in census families during this period (40.5% versus 20.0%). Tenure As shown in the figure below, the proportion of ownership tenure has been increasing for all senior and soon‐to‐be senior age groups in the County of Frontenac, and ownership tenure is very prominent among these age groups. Figure 13. Proportion of Households Aged 55+ by Tenure, County of Frontenac, 1996 and 2011

While the tendency towards ownership in senior households is very clear, the increasing ownership proportion in the 75+ age groups in particular suggests that more seniors are staying in their own homes longer as they age. This may be due in part to a lack of other housing alternatives for seniors in the community. This trend may also be influenced by the conversion of seasonal dwellings to permanent dwellings by in‐migrating seniors as they choose to retire and make the County their permanent homes. For senior households who have paid off their mortgage, owning their home provides them with housing stability and built‐up equity. Accessing this equity can be an important factor because while housing costs are reduced with mortgage pay‐down, so too are incomes for retired individuals. Given the typically lower income of seniors in the County, the current pricing and the limited supply of units, rental housing remains a viable but limited option for seniors and it is not always affordable. Increasing the supply of rental units at affordable rates would assist in creating more housing choices for seniors in the County. Income Assistance There are a number of pension benefits available to Canadians when they reach age 65. These include the Old Age Security (OAS) pension, which is a monthly benefit, and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), which is available to low‐income seniors receiving OAS benefits. GIS benefits vary from $506.86/month to

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief333 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

$764/month depending on if the recipient is single or has a spouse/partner that receives or does not receive OAS pension. In addition, the Guaranteed Annual Income System (GAINS) provides monthly payments to eligible Ontario seniors on top of the OAS and GIS payments. The amount of GAINS benefit is directly linked to the GIS monthly payments and ranges from $2.50 to $83 per month. The following table shows the maximum monthly benefit that a senior living in Ontario can receive. This shows that if a single senior did not have a private pension, they would receive a maximum of $16,934 a year or $1,411 a month. Table 15. Maximum Monthly Benefits for Benefit Period October 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014

Benefit Program OAS GIS GAINS

Per Month $563.74 $764.40 $83.00

Single Per Year $6,764.88 $9,172.80 $996.00

Qualified Couple Per Month Per Year $1,127.48 $13,529.76 $1,013.72 $12,164.64 $166.00 $1,992.00

$1,411.14

$16,933.68

$2,307.20

Total

$27,686.40

Source: Ontario Ministry of Finance (2014). GAINS Benefit Rates

The maximum annual income for a person to receive OAS is $114,815, and for GIS it is $17,088. For a couple where one person receives OAS it is $22,650 and for a couple that does not receive OAS it is $40,944. Another benefit for seniors is the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) which provides a monthly taxable benefit to retired seniors who worked and contributed to the plan. Beneficiaries have to be at least 65 years old or between age 60 and 65 and meet the requirements of the work cessation test. The CPP pension is designed to replace about 25% of a senior’s average pre‐retirement employment income. The following table provides a summary of the CPP payment rates and shows that a senior would receive an average of $7,284 a year and a maximum of $12,456 a year when they retire. Table 16. 2014 Canada Pension Plan Rates

Average Benefit (June 2011)

Maximum Amount

Retirement (at age 65)

$607.33

$1,038.33

Post Retirement Benefit (at age 65)

$9.55

$25.96

Disability

$901.40

$1,236.35

Survivor ‐ younger than 65

$409.26

$567.91

Survivor ‐ 65 and older

$311.19

$623.00

Children of disabled contributors

$230.72

$230.72

Type of Benefit

Children of deceased contributors

$230.72

$230.72

Death (maximum one‐time payment)

$2,294.07

$2,500.00

Combined benefits Survivor / retirement (at age 65)

$798.82

$1,038.33

Survivor / disability

$1,009.71

$1,236.35

Source: Service Canada, Canada Pension Plan Payment Rates, January‐December 2014

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief334 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

The Ontario Disability Support Program is an income assistance program that provides financial assistance to low‐income persons with disabilities. The amount of Income Support received depends on family size, income, assets and housing costs. The table below provides the most recent ODSP monthly shelter allowance rates. Table 17. Ontario Disability Support Program Maximum Monthly Shelter Allowances, 2013

Benefit Unit Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 or more

Maximum Monthly Shelter Allowance $479 $753 $816 $886 $956 $990

Source: Ontario Ministry of Community and Social Services, Shelter Calculation, 2013

ODSP benefits are not automatically terminated once a person reaches the age of 65. Seniors who do not receive Old Age Security (OAS) are eligible for ODSP. Seniors who receive OAS may still be able to keep their ODSP benefits if they are financially eligible, that is, if their income is less than what they would receive from ODSP. Most seniors would have a higher income than what they would receive from ODSP due to the combined benefits from OAS, GIS, and GAINS but some seniors may still qualify for Extended Health Benefits (EHB) if their health care expenses are high.

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief335 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g)

APPENDIX B – PRO FORMA DETAILS  Option 1 – Assisted Model  Option 2 – Market Model

re fact

Township of South Frontenac Business Plan for Seniors Housing (Sydenham)

consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief336 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #g) Option 1 – Assisted Model Project Statistics Sponsor Group: Project Address: Project Type:

South Frontenac Community Services 4295 Stage Coach Rd New Construction 115,851 SF 10,763 m2

Site Area:

Units 1 Bedroom, IAH Funded 1 Bedroom, IAH Funded, Modified 2 Bedroom, IAH Funded 1 Bedroom, Not Funded 2 Bedroom, Not Funded

of Units

6 0 0 0 6

Total # of RGI Units

Total # of Units

0

12

Circulation Community Room Office Laundry Total Building Area Total parking spaces Revenue generating parking spaces Number of storage lockers

Capital Budget

Unit Size (SF)

Construction Period: 12 months

Unit Size (m2)

589 54.7 589 54.7 806 74.8 589 54.7 806 74.8 Total Size of Dwelling Units (SF)

(m2)

8,365

777.1

(SF) 1,198 455 310 310 10,636

(m2) 111 42 29 29 988

Rent per Rents as % 100% unit per Comments of AMR AMR month $603 80% $754 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $603 80% $754 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $807 80% $1,009 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $754 100% $754 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $1,008 100% $1,009 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data Actual Total Rent Per Total Rent, All Units, Annum from Tenants Total AMR Rent, All Units All Sources ($ and % of AMR) $115,992 91.4% $115,992 $126,950 % of Total Space 11.26% 4.27% 2.91% 2.91%

Comments 1 Storey Double Loaded Hallway Common Room Corner Office Laundry

Comments

14 0 0

South Frontenac Community Services 4295 Stage Coach Rd

SOFT COSTS 1 Professional Fees 2 Architect, Engineer, Landscape 3 Cost Consultant (Quantity Surveyor) 4 Development Consultant 5 Planning Consultant 6 Disbursements (Architect/Engineers) 7 Advocate Architect 8 Building Sub-total

Total Cost

Per Unit

$134,828.16 $25,000 $110,000 $10,000 $5,000 $10,000 $294,828

$11,236 $2,083 $9,167 $833 $417 $833 $24,569

9 Site 10 Building and Property Appraisal 11 Topographic Survey 12 Boundary Surveys 13 Geotechnical Assessment 14 Environmental Assessment 15 Other Site Studies 16 Site Sub-total

Total Cost

Per Unit

$5,000 $2,500 $2,500 $7,500 $5,000 $7,500 $30,000

$417 $208 $208 $625 $417 $625 $2,500

17 Legal and Organizational 18 Legal Fees 19 Organizational Expenses 20 Marketing/Rent-up 21 Capital Cost Audit 22 Market Appraisal for HST purposes 23 Property Taxes During Construction 24 Insurance During Construction 25 Legal and Organizational Sub-total

Total Cost

Per Unit

$25,000 $10,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $4,500 $5,000 $65,500

$2,083 $833 $500 $583 $667 $375 $417 $5,458

26 Financing Costs 27 Interest During Construction 28 Lender’s Legal Financing Fee 29 Lender’s Mortgage Advance Fee 30 Lender’s Application Fee

Total Cost

Per Unit

$17,091 $10,000 $1,750 $8,000

$1,424 $833 $146 $667

31 CMHC Mortgage Insurance Application Fee on Residential Units

$2,400

$200

$200

per unit for the first 100 units, $100 thereafter, 0.3% of nonresidential loan amount

CMHC Mortgage Insurance Premium on Non-funded Residential Portion

$3,470

$289

4.50%

residential funded portion: premiums waived; non-funded and commercial portion: 4.5% of Loan Value

$4,000 $1,050 $47,761

$333 $88 $3,980

Total Cost

Per Unit

$1,300 $0 $300

$108 $0 $25

32

33 Insurance Consultant and Title Insurance 34 CMHC Mortgage Advance Fee 35 Financing Costs Sub-Total

36 Fees and Permits 37 Rezoning Application 38 Official Plan Amendment Application 39 Site Plan Approval Application

17-­‐02-­‐02

Prepared  by  SHS  Consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief337 Administrative

6.0% of construction costs plus HST, excludes group’s appliances and furniture and fixtures, includes Based on similar projects 3.8% of total project costs Needed for Rezoning Based on similar projects typically a cost in design-build projects

Comments Based on similar projects Based on similar projects Based on similar projects Based on similar projects $5,000 minimum ESA Phase 1 Use for projects where actual studies not known

Comments

Based on similar projects Based on similar projects Use $500 per unit as minimum for non-RGI units Based on similar projects typical cost $8,000, needed if project’s Fair Market Value will be higher than input tax credits 0.00% use vacant land tax rate or multi residential tax rate and apply to land/property cost, remember t Assumes builder’s risk, etc. carried by contractor

Comments 4.80% interest during construction To be confirmed by financing proposal/agreement $350 per cash advance, charged on all advances Varies, to be confirmed by financing proposal/agreement

$350 per cash advance, first 2 draws not charged

Comments Schd. A to By-law No. 2016-79 - UR1 To URM Rezoning Schedule A to By-law No. 2016-79 - Not Need Likely Schedule A to By-law No. 2016-79

1  of  3

AGENDA ITEM #g)

40 Building Permit Fees

$27,811.75

$2,318

42 Local

$74,477

$6,206

43 Fees and Permits Sub-total

$103,889

$8,657

Total Cost

Per Unit

$541,978 $54,198 $596,176

$45,165 $4,516 $49,681

Total Cost

Per Unit

$1,701,792 $68,000 $10,000

$141,816 $5,667 $833

$14.000 $14.00 per $1000 of project value( construction costs)

41 Development Charges

44 Soft Costs Summary 45 Soft Costs Sub-total (8,16,25,35,43) 46 Soft Cost Contingency 47 Soft Costs Total

$6,206 BY-LAW NO. 2014-54 2017 Rate

Comments 10.0% includes financing costs of

$47,761

48 HARD COSTS 49 Construction Costs 50 Base Construction Cost, Residential 51 Site Servicing 52 Hydro Connection Fee

Comments

$160 per square foot of construction Site Servicing & Septic only those costs beyond allowance in construction contract, estimated based on similar projects

53 Fire Safety Plan

$2,200

$183

54 Appliances (Fridge & Stove)

$12,000

$1,000

$1,000

55 Appliances (Washer/Dryer)

$6,966

$581

$6,966

56 Furniture and Equipment 57 Contingency 58 Construction Costs Sub-total

$5,000 $180,596 $1,986,554

$417 $15,050 $165,546

59 Land / Property Acquisition Costs 60 Purchase Price / Value

Total Cost

Per Unit

$20,000

$1,667

61 Provincial Land Transfer Tax

Based on similar projects; required for occupancy $1,000 per unit for a fridge and a stove for non-modified units

Commercial washer $2,215, commercial dryer $1,268. Use 1 set per 9 units. Office & Common Room 10.0% of construction costs

Comments SFCSC will transfer their portion of land for a nominal amount First $55,000 at 0.5% + $55,000-$250,000 at 1% + $250,000 and up 1.5%

$100

$8

$20,100

$1,675

63 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS 64 Hard Cost Total 65 Soft Cost Total 66 HST 67 Total Project Cost

Total Cost

Per Unit

$2,006,654 $596,176 $319,806 $2,922,636

$167,221 $49,681 $26,651 $243,553

68 Contributions 69 Rezoning Application waived 70 Official Plan Amendment Application waived 71 Site Plan Approval Application waived 72 Building Permit Fees waived 73 Development Charges 74 Local Development Charges waived

Total Cost

Per Unit

$1,300 $0 $300 $27,812

$108 $0 $25 $2,318

Assuming Fee Waived Assuming Fee Waived Assuming Fee Waived Assuming Fee Waived

62 Land Cost Sub-total

Comments 13%

Comments

$74,477

$6,206

Assuming Fee Waived

75 County Equity Contribution

$350,000

$29,167

County Equity Contribution

76 Additional Equity Required

$350,000

$29,167

77 Capital Contribution: Investment in Affordable Housing for Ontario

$900,000

$75,000

78 Additional Contribution

$150,000

Additional Equity Required for 1.20 DCR per unit or 75% of total capital cost per funded unit, whichever is less. For Funded Units Above

$0

$0

79 HST rebate (PST portion)

$158,099

$13,175

82%

rebate applied to the PST portion of HST, residential component only

80 HST rebate (GST portion)

$60,251

$5,021

50%

rebate applied to the GST portion of HST, residential component only

$1,922,239 $1,000,397

$160,187 $83,366

81 Total Contributions 82 Total Project Cost Less Contributions 83 Mortgage

Comments

84 Mortgage Amount

$1,000,397

85 Mortgage Interest Rate 86 Mortgage Amortization 87 Annual Mortgage Payments 87 Operating Budget 87 First Full Year

3.25% 40 years $44,569

South Frontenac Community Services 4295 Stage Coach Rd Total

88 Estimated Operating Revenue 89 Rental Income from Tenants 90 Rent Supplement/Subsidy Top-Up 91 Commercial Rental Income 92 Utilities Recovery (ie. from commercial tenants) 93 Laundry Revenue 94 Parking Revenue 96 Vacancy Loss 97 Total Operating Revenue

$115,992 $0 $0 $0 $3,120 $0 -$3,573 $115,539

98 Estimated Operating Expenses 99 Maintenance - Salaries 100 Maintenance - Materials & Services

$4,800 $10,200

17-­‐02-­‐02

based on most recent lender quotes

Total

Per Unit Comments $9,666 $0 Top-up to 100% AMR on RGI units only $0 $1 per SF of Commercial rental space $0 0% of Heat, Electricity, and Water/Sewer costs $260 Estimated at $5 per unit per week $0 Estimated at $40 per parking space per month -$298 3% of Rental, Parking, Laundry, Locker, Commercial Revenue $9,628

Per Unit Comments $400 Based on $300 Per Unit $850 Based on $650 Per Unit

Prepared  by  SHS  Consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief338 Administrative

2  of  3

AGENDA ITEM #g)

101 Heat 102 Electricity 103 Water/Sewer 104 Administrative Salaries 105 Property Management Fee 106 Other Administrative Materials & Services 107 Capital Replacement Reserves Contribution 108 Insurance 109 Property Taxes 110 HST 111 HST Rebate

$2,400 $1,920 $4,800 $0 $7,590 $3,000 $5,203 $2,400 $16,200 $3,456 $0

112 Sub-total 113 Mortgage Payments 114 Total Operating Expenses

$61,969 $44,569 $106,538

115 Net Operating Income 116 Debt Service

$53,570 $44,569

117 Debt Coverage Ratio 118 Net Operating Profit/Loss

17-­‐02-­‐02

$200 Heat for common areas only $160 Tenant Pays Hydro $400 Building Pays Water $0 Included in Property Management Fee $632 6% of (100% AMR + other revenue) $250 Based on $250 per Unit $434 4% of 100% Average Market Rent and Other Income $200 Minimum of $200 per unit, adjust based on owner’s portfolio average $1,350 Property Tax Rate - Funded & Market $288 Assumes that all Operating expenses are before tax $0 Only applicable to groups with municipal status $5,164 $3,714 $8,878

1.20

Should be 1.2 for residential building with 100% funded units

$9,001

Prepared  by  SHS  Consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief339 Administrative

3  of  3

AGENDA ITEM #g) Option 2 – Market Model Project Statistics Sponsor Group: Project Address: Project Type:

South Frontenac Community Services 4295 Stage Coach Rd New Construction 115,851 SF 10,763 m2

Site Area:

Units 1 Bedroom, IAH Funded 1 Bedroom, IAH Funded, Modified 2 Bedroom, IAH Funded 1 Bedroom, Not Funded 2 Bedroom, Not Funded

of Units

0 0 0 6 6

Total # of RGI Units

Total # of Units

0

12

Circulation Community Room Office Laundry Total Building Area Total parking spaces Revenue generating parking spaces Number of storage lockers

Capital Budget

Unit Size (SF)

Construction Period: 12 months

Unit Size (m2)

589 54.7 589 54.7 806 74.8 589 54.7 806 74.8 Total Size of Dwelling Units (SF)

(m2)

8,365

777.1

(SF) 1,198 455 310 310 10,636

(m2) 111 42 29 29 988

Rent per Rents as % 100% unit per Comments of AMR AMR month $603 80% $754 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $603 80% $754 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $807 80% $1,009 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $754 100% $754 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data $1,008 100% $1,009 2015 Kingston CMA and Zone 4 Data Actual Total Rent Per Total Rent, All Units, Annum from Tenants Total AMR Rent, All Units All Sources ($ and % of AMR) $126,864 99.9% $126,864 $126,950 % of Total Space 11.26% 4.27% 2.91% 2.91%

Comments 1 Storey Double Loaded Hallway Common Room Corner Office Laundry

Comments

14 0 0

South Frontenac Community Services 4295 Stage Coach Rd

SOFT COSTS 1 Professional Fees 2 Architect, Engineer, Landscape 3 Cost Consultant (Quantity Surveyor) 4 Development Consultant 5 Planning Consultant 6 Disbursements (Architect/Engineers) 7 Advocate Architect 8 Building Sub-total

Total Cost

Per Unit

$134,828.16 $25,000 $110,000 $10,000 $5,000 $10,000 $294,828

$11,236 $2,083 $9,167 $833 $417 $833 $24,569

9 Site 10 Building and Property Appraisal 11 Topographic Survey 12 Boundary Surveys 13 Geotechnical Assessment 14 Environmental Assessment 15 Other Site Studies 16 Site Sub-total

Total Cost

Per Unit

$5,000 $2,500 $2,500 $7,500 $5,000 $7,500 $30,000

$417 $208 $208 $625 $417 $625 $2,500

17 Legal and Organizational 18 Legal Fees 19 Organizational Expenses 20 Marketing/Rent-up 21 Capital Cost Audit 22 Market Appraisal for HST purposes 23 Property Taxes During Construction 24 Insurance During Construction 25 Legal and Organizational Sub-total

Total Cost

Per Unit

$25,000 $10,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $4,500 $5,000 $65,500

$2,083 $833 $500 $583 $667 $375 $417 $5,458

26 Financing Costs 27 Interest During Construction 28 Lender’s Legal Financing Fee 29 Lender’s Mortgage Advance Fee 30 Lender’s Application Fee

Total Cost

Per Unit

$18,810 $10,000 $1,750 $8,000

$1,568 $833 $146 $667

31 CMHC Mortgage Insurance Application Fee on Residential Units

$2,400

$200

$200

per unit for the first 100 units, $100 thereafter, 0.3% of nonresidential loan amount

CMHC Mortgage Insurance Premium on Non-funded Residential Portion

$12,602

$1,050

4.50%

residential funded portion: premiums waived; non-funded and commercial portion: 4.5% of Loan Value

$4,000 $1,050 $58,612

$333 $88 $4,884

$350 per cash advance, first 2 draws not charged

Total Cost

Per Unit

$1,300 $0 $300

$108 $0 $25

32

33 Insurance Consultant and Title Insurance 34 CMHC Mortgage Advance Fee 35 Financing Costs Sub-Total

36 Fees and Permits 37 Rezoning Application 38 Official Plan Amendment Application 39 Site Plan Approval Application

17-­‐02-­‐02

Prepared  by  SHS  Consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief340 Administrative

6.0% of construction costs plus HST, excludes group’s appliances and furniture and fixtures, includes Based on similar projects 3.7% of total project costs Needed for Rezoning Based on similar projects typically a cost in design-build projects

Comments Based on similar projects Based on similar projects Based on similar projects Based on similar projects $5,000 minimum ESA Phase 1 Use for projects where actual studies not known

Comments

Based on similar projects Based on similar projects Use $500 per unit as minimum for non-RGI units Based on similar projects typical cost $8,000, needed if project’s Fair Market Value will be higher than input tax credits 0.00% use vacant land tax rate or multi residential tax rate and apply to land/property cost, remember t Assumes builder’s risk, etc. carried by contractor

Comments 4.80% interest during construction To be confirmed by financing proposal/agreement $350 per cash advance, charged on all advances Varies, to be confirmed by financing proposal/agreement

Comments Schd. A to By-law No. 2016-79 - UR1 To URM Rezoning Schedule A to By-law No. 2016-79 - Not Need Likely Schedule A to By-law No. 2016-79

1  of  3

AGENDA ITEM #g)

40 Building Permit Fees

$27,811.75

$2,318

42 Local

$74,477

$6,206

43 Fees and Permits Sub-total

$103,889

$8,657

Total Cost

Per Unit

$552,829 $55,283 $608,112

$46,069 $4,607 $50,676

Total Cost

Per Unit

$1,701,792 $68,000 $10,000

$141,816 $5,667 $833

$14.000 $14.00 per $1000 of project value( construction costs)

41 Development Charges

44 Soft Costs Summary 45 Soft Costs Sub-total (8,16,25,35,43) 46 Soft Cost Contingency 47 Soft Costs Total

$6,206 BY-LAW NO. 2014-54 2017 Rate

Comments 10.0% includes financing costs of

$58,612

48 HARD COSTS 49 Construction Costs 50 Base Construction Cost, Residential 51 Site Servicing 52 Hydro Connection Fee

Comments

$160 per square foot of construction Site Servicing & Septic only those costs beyond allowance in construction contract, estimated based on similar projects

53 Fire Safety Plan

$2,200

$183

54 Appliances (Fridge & Stove)

$12,000

$1,000

$1,000

55 Appliances (Washer/Dryer)

$6,966

$581

$6,966

56 Furniture and Equipment 57 Contingency 58 Construction Costs Sub-total

$5,000 $180,596 $1,986,554

$417 $15,050 $165,546

59 Land / Property Acquisition Costs 60 Purchase Price / Value

Total Cost

Per Unit

$20,000

$1,667

61 Provincial Land Transfer Tax

$100

$8

$20,100

$1,675

63 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS 64 Hard Cost Total 65 Soft Cost Total 66 HST 67 Total Project Cost

Total Cost

Per Unit

$2,006,654 $608,112 $321,135 $2,935,900

$167,221 $50,676 $26,761 $244,658

68 Contributions 69 Rezoning Application waived 70 Official Plan Amendment Application waived 71 Site Plan Approval Application waived 72 Building Permit Fees waived 73 Development Charges 74 Local Development Charges waived

Total Cost

Per Unit

$1,300 $0 $300 $27,812

$108 $0 $25 $2,318

62 Land Cost Sub-total

Based on similar projects; required for occupancy $1,000 per unit for a fridge and a stove for non-modified units

Commercial washer $2,215, commercial dryer $1,268. Use 1 set per 9 units. Office & Common Room 10.0% of construction costs

Comments SFCSC will transfer their portion of land for a nominal amount First $55,000 at 0.5% + $55,000-$250,000 at 1% + $250,000 and up 1.5%

Comments 13%

Comments

$74,477

$6,206

Assuming Fee Waived Assuming Fee Waived Assuming Fee Waived Assuming Fee Waived Waived as per funding agreement Assuming Fee Waived

75 County Equity Contribution

$350,000

$29,167

County Equity Contribution

76 Additional Equity Required

$1,095,000

$91,250

$0

$0

77 Capital Contribution: Investment in Affordable Housing for Ontario 78 Additional Contribution

$150,000

Additional Equity Required for 1.20 DCR per unit or 75% of total capital cost per funded unit, whichever is less. For Funded Units Above

$0

$0

79 HST rebate (PST portion)

$158,770

$13,231

82%

rebate applied to the PST portion of HST, residential component only

80 HST rebate (GST portion)

$60,507

$5,042

50%

rebate applied to the GST portion of HST, residential component only

$1,768,165 $1,167,735

$147,347 $97,311

81 Total Contributions 82 Total Project Cost Less Contributions 83 Mortgage

Comments

84 Mortgage Amount

$1,167,735

85 Mortgage Interest Rate 86 Mortgage Amortization 87 Annual Mortgage Payments 87 Operating Budget 87 First Full Year

3.25% 40 years $52,024

South Frontenac Community Services 4295 Stage Coach Rd Total

88 Estimated Operating Revenue 89 Rental Income from Tenants 90 Rent Supplement/Subsidy Top-Up 91 Commercial Rental Income 92 Utilities Recovery (ie. from commercial tenants) 93 Laundry Revenue 94 Parking Revenue 96 Vacancy Loss 97 Total Operating Revenue

$126,864 $0 $0 $0 $3,120 $0 -$3,900 $126,084

98 Estimated Operating Expenses 99 Maintenance - Salaries 100 Maintenance - Materials & Services

$4,800 $10,200

17-­‐02-­‐02

based on most recent lender quotes

Total

Per Unit Comments $10,572 $0 Top-up to 100% AMR on RGI units only $0 $1 per SF of Commercial rental space $0 0% of Heat, Electricity, and Water/Sewer costs $260 Estimated at $5 per unit per week $0 Estimated at $40 per parking space per month -$325 3% of Rental, Parking, Laundry, Locker, Commercial Revenue $10,507

Per Unit Comments $400 Based on $300 Per Unit $850 Based on $650 Per Unit

Prepared  by  SHS  Consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief341 Administrative

2  of  3

AGENDA ITEM #g)

101 Heat 102 Electricity 103 Water/Sewer 104 Administrative Salaries 105 Property Management Fee 106 Other Administrative Materials & Services 107 Capital Replacement Reserves Contribution 108 Insurance 109 Property Taxes 110 HST 111 HST Rebate

$2,400 $1,920 $4,800 $0 $7,570 $3,000 $5,203 $2,400 $18,000 $3,454 $0

112 Sub-total 113 Mortgage Payments 114 Total Operating Expenses

$63,747 $52,024 $115,771

115 Net Operating Income 116 Debt Service

$62,338 $52,024

117 Debt Coverage Ratio 118 Net Operating Profit/Loss

17-­‐02-­‐02

$200 Heat for common areas only $160 Tenant Pays Hydro $400 Building Pays Water $0 Included in Property Management Fee $631 6% of (100% AMR + other revenue) $250 Based on $250 per Unit $434 4% of 100% Average Market Rent and Other Income $200 Minimum of $200 per unit, adjust based on owner’s portfolio average $1,500 Property Tax Rate - Market $288 Assumes that all Operating expenses are before tax $0 Only applicable to groups with municipal status $5,312 $4,335 $9,648

1.20

Should be 1.2 for residential building with 100% funded units

$10,314

Prepared  by  SHS  Consulting

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief342 Administrative

3  of  3

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief343 Administrative

County of Fronte enac Strrategic Goals Imple ementation Plan

Version # For Council Review w

Da ate Sept 3, 3 2014

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief344 Administrative

Contents Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3 Principles ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6 Goal #1: Seniors Issues …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 Goal #2: Solid Waste Management …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10 Goal #3: Prudent Financial Management and Focused Economic Development ……………………………………………….. 12 Recommendation ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 16

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

Page |2

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation Plan

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief345 Administrative

Introduction In early January of 2014, Frontenac County Council began working with Performance Concepts to assist with the development of goals for the balance of the 2010-14 term and the 2015-18 term. The process involved a series of one-onone interviews with Council and senior staff, plus meetings with our four member municipal Councils and culminated in a public meeting held on May 15, 2014. On June 18, 2014 County Council approved the following three goals: Goal #1: Meeting the Aging Tsunami Challenge for Frontenac Seniors by: 9 Addressing the existing gap in Seniors Transportation by ensuring 100% of Seniors receive a timely, affordable ride to scheduled medical appointments (when requests received in a timely fashion) – to be accomplished by the end of the 2015-18 term of Council. 9 Addressing the existing gap in Seniors Affordable Housing stock by leveraging and/or funding the construction of a project in each of the four Frontenac townships – to be accomplished by the end of the 2015-18 term of Council. Goal #2: Meet the emerging “post landfill” Solid Waste Management challenge for Frontenac residents: 9 Coordinate the establishment of a “Made in Frontenac” position and financial plan to be executed by the end of the current Council term, to inform the Eastern Ontario Wardens caucus on solid waste management solutions, including energy-from-waste. 9 Frontenac’s position will be supported by technical data and financial planning in collaboration with local municipalities. Goal #3: Respect for the taxpayer and focused economic development:

9 Council agrees to prioritize support to the economic development objective of employment/revenue generation; and to support continued efforts to rationalize costs across the Townships and County.

Implementation Plan

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

Page |3

AGENDA ITEM #g)

9 Recognizing that there is only one ratepayer that bears the burden of property taxes and further that ongoing spending control is a priority, Council will develop a long term financial plan that is sustainable.

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief346 Administrative

The three goalls are intended T d to focus the efforts e of Coun ncil and administration on pro ojects and outccomes that willl address s service issues for County ressidents. IIt is understood d that this implementation pllan will be a livving document that will evolvve and progresss as decisionss are m made or coursse corrections are a required. Itt is further und derstood that as a goals are acchieved, Counccil will adopt new goals a the processs of improving and g the quality off life for our citizens will continue. For the purposse of this reporrt, implementattion will be discussed within a SMART fram F mework, where eby goals are c considered to be: •

Specificc – target a spe ecific area for improvement.

• • • •

Measurrable – quantifyy or at least su uggest an indiccator of progress. Assigna able – specify who w will do it. Realistic – state what results can re ealistically be achieved, a given n available ressources. Time-re elated – specifyy when the ressult(s) can be achieved. a

Each of the thrree goals was designed to be as specific as E a possible. Th hey were vetted d by County C Council, our me ember m municipalities and a by citizenss during a pub blic meeting. Th he implementa ation plan build ds upon existin ng partnershipss, p programs and services and principles p exprressed during the t process. This graphic illustrates the planning hierarcchy for the Cou T unty with the implementation n of strategic priorities p as be eing a key com mponent of e establishing the direction of the t municipalitty. It is a logica al extension off t Long Rang the ge Financial Plan and a lead into Business Plans and B Budgets.

C Strategiic Goals Frontenac County

Page |4

AGENDA ITEM #g)

IImplementation Plan

• Directions for Our Futuree • Official O Plan • Lo ong Range Financial F Plaan • Sttrategic Prio orities • Business Plan ns & Budgetts

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief347 Administrative

The County of Frontenac team assembled to lead the implementation process consists of the following:

Marian VanBruinessen Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer

Paul Charbonneau Chief/Director of Emergency & Transportation Services

Joe Gallivan Manager of Sustainability Planning

Anne Marie Young Manager of Economic Development

Alison Vandervelde Communications Officer

Kelly Pender Chief Administrative Officer

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

Page |5

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation Plan

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief348 Administrative

Principles As implementation proceeds, the following principles will be utilized as a filter for decision making: • • • • • • • •

The County role will generally be to act as a quarterback for implementation, not as a primary delivery agent Community consultation and engagement is a necessary component for any municipal implementation plan Sustainability principles will be applied to all projects Partnerships should be supported by written agreements that clearly define roles and expectations Business approaches and business planning will be utilized for all projects, with all costs fully documented and explained and results tracked and reported Regional collaboration with member and partner municipalities1, the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC) and/or across the Province will result in efficiencies that should be considered Best practices will be research, evaluated and considered Transparency and accountability are the foundation of effective municipal governance

While the strategic priorities established by Council will have various lifecycles and impact, this report will primarily focus on the actions to be completed in the 2015-18 term of Council.

Member municipalities are the four local municipalities in Frontenac County. Partner municipalities extend beyond the boundaries of Frontenac County to include any municipality where collaboration and partnership is possible.

Implementation Plan

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

Page |6

AGENDA ITEM #g)

1

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief349 Administrative

Goal #1: Seniors Issues

Meeting the Aging Tsunami Challenge for Frontenac Seniors by:

9 Addressing the existing gap in Seniors Transportation by ensuring 100% of Seniors receive a timely, affordable ride to scheduled medical appointments (when requests received in a timely fashion) – to be accomplished by the end of the 2015-18 term of Council. 9 Addressing the existing gap in Seniors Affordable Housing stock by leveraging and/or funding the construction of a project in each of the four Frontenac townships – to be accomplished by the end of the 2015-18 term of Council. Discussion: Issues surrounding seniors is a common theme running through County of Frontenac documents, including the Strategic Plan, Official Plan and Directions for Our Future. The demographic makeup of our community is aging faster than the rest of Ontario and addressing the needs of seniors will help build and maintain the health of our population. SENIORS TRANSPORTATION: Work completed to date includes partnerships with the local Community Health organizations for the delivery of transportation services and an initial scan of best practices.

Partners Frontenac Community Services Corporations (2) Implementation Plan

Role Current delivery agency for transportation

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

Page |7

AGENDA ITEM #g)

SENIORS AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Completion of the Seniors Housing Pilot Study (more information: http://www.frontenaccounty.ca/en/corporate/StudiesandProjects.asp), the work of the Senior’s Housing Task Force and the award of a contract for the development of a housing business plan has begun the process of developing a business plan for a seniors housing project for the village of Marysville on Wolfe Island.

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief350 Administrative

City of Kingston Potential for private sector partners Potential for non-profit partner(s) Potential for funding from senior level government funding agencies (project will need to conform to funding requirements of the agency) ID Task Assigned

Delivers housing services to Frontenac County Funding and/or management of housing projects Funding and/or management of housing projects Funding Resources

Measured

Completed by

Transportation County Planning & Economic Development Staff

Internal Resources

As a % of total seniors population

January 2015

T2

Survey seniors in 2015 to identify the percent of seniors who are not receiving timely, affordable rides to scheduled medical appointments. Survey to include a question regarding the amount expected to be paid and the challenges identified in T1

County Planning & Economic Development Staff

$7,500

% Complete

May 2015

T3

Review T1 and T2 Outcomes and Consider Implementation Strategy – Council decision point

Council

TBD

TBD

TBD

T4

Commission a study to examine current state, best practices and evaluate options – building upon recent work of Rural Ontario Institute on coordinated rural transportation options.

$’s TBD

% Complete

September 2015

T6

Monitor future ridership and report against the 100% target identified in the goal.

TBD

% of Target

October 2018

Planning Staff and CAO

External Consultant ($20-25k)

% Complete

Fall 2014

County Council + Frontenac Islands Council

TBD

% Complete

TBD

Housing Complete Business Plan for Frontenac Islands (Marysville Project) - Commissioning of Plan H1 Approved by Council2 H2

2

Consider Frontenac Islands (Marysville Project) – Council decision point

County Planning & Economic Development Staff + External transit planner County Planning & Ec Dev Staff + Delivery Partners

Study is underway for Frontenac Islands – Marysville project. Anticipated completion date is October 15/14

Implementation Plan

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

Page |8

AGENDA ITEM #g)

T1

Work with existing providers to develop a baseline of current ridership and assessment of future needs

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief351 Administrative

H3

Consider future housing projects – Council decision point

Council + Affected Partner Municipalities

H4

Monitor and report results of housing projects

County Planning & Ec Dev Staff + Delivery Partners

TBD

One additional project in each municipality % Complete

TBD

TBD

% of Target

October 2018

Reference: Housing Study, SHS Consulting Growth Study, Watson and Associates County Official Plan Transportation Study Rural Ontario Institute, Towards Coordinated Rural Transportation: A Resource Document (August, 2014)

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

Page |9

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation Plan

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief352 Administrative

Goal #2: Solid Waste Management

Meet the emerging “post landfill” Solid Waste Management challenge for Frontenac residents:

9 Coordinate the establishment of a “Made in Frontenac” position and financial plan to be executed by the end of the current Council term, to inform the Eastern Ontario Wardens caucus on solid waste management solutions, including energy-from-waste. 9 Frontenac’s position will be supported by technical data and financial planning in collaboration with local municipalities. Discussion: It is recognized that the days for landfill operations in Frontenac County and Ontario are coming to an end and that municipalities are facing an economic cliff with respect to the cost of closure, ongoing monitoring and ultimately finding an alternative solution to landfills. Our ability to address this issue will define our ability to address complex issues on a County/Regional basis.

Implementation Plan

Role Coordination and recommendations Research, lobbying efforts and leadership Research and lobbying

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

P a g e | 10

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Partners Area municipalities – in particular the Public Works Managers’ Committee (Manager of Sustainability Planning currently participates on this Committee) Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus Association of Municipalities of Ontario

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief353 Administrative

ID LF1 LF2 LF3 LF4 LF5 LF6

Task

Assigned

Resources

Measured

Completed by

Area municipalities to receive and review report from the Public Works Managers (PWM) regarding waste management. Council decision point

Manager of Sustainability Planning & PWMs

TBD

TBD

TBD by PWMs

TBD

TBD

Early in Council 2015 term

TBD

TBD

CAO/Treasurer, PWM Committee

Internal

% Complete

Councils

TBD

TBD

Work with the EOWC and PWM to host a symposium on the future of landfills and post landfill solutions. Technical report by PWM/County/EOWC regarding options and recommendations Develop a policy framework and reserve strategy aimed at the costs associated with post landfill waste management Implementation – Council decision point

CAO, PWM Committee and Ec Dev Staff PWM/County/ EOWC

Early in Council 2015 term Early in Council 2015 term As part of LRFP Fall 2015

Reference: Growth Study, Watson and Associates EOWC Environmental Services Report

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

P a g e | 11

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation Plan

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief354 Administrative

Goal #3: Prudent Financial Management and Focused Economic Development

Respect for the taxpayer and focused economic development:

9 Recognizing that there is only one ratepayer that bears the burden of property taxes and further that ongoing spending control is a priority, Council will develop a long term financial plan that is sustainable. 9 Council agrees to prioritize support to the economic development objective of employment/revenue generation; and to support continued efforts to rationalize costs across the Townships and County.

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

P a g e | 12

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation Plan

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief355 Administrative

Discussion: FINANCIAL PLANNING: The economic future of Frontenac County must be addressed in a comprehensive and coordinated manner. As an initial step, Council is committed to developing a long range financial plan (LRFP) based upon six principles: • • • • • •

A long term vision expressed through a strategic plan Recognition of existing contracts & obligations Asset management planning Effective use of revenue sources, including taxes, user fees, grants and borrowing Service delivery review and continuous improvement Business planning and sound operating budgets

The development of a LRFP plan was also recommended by our Auditor and KPMG through the Service Delivery and Organizational Review (SDOR) process. LRFP is a planning tool that provides Council with the ability to set policy frameworks, analyze options and smooth out tax spikes.

Implementation Plan

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

P a g e | 13

AGENDA ITEM #g)

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The time for studies and consultants is over. It is now time to take action towards building community capacity and growing our economy. The attached graphic “Schedule A” illustrates the building blocks for moving forward. The principles proposed are as follows: • The County role in economic development is as a partner, facilitator and where appropriate supporting infrastructure investment • By developing partnerships with agencies that are already working on the ground we will be able leverage resources • The County will support EOWC and Provincial economic development initiatives • Results should be measured and reported • Results need to be examined and evaluated for success over the short-term, medium-term and long-term • Community consultation needs to be regular, substantive and sustained.

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief356 Administrative

RATIONALIZE COSTS BETWEEN TOWNSHIPS AND COUNTY: The efficient use of resources (labour, materials and contracts) is in the best interest of our member municipalities and the County. Building upon the recommendations contained in the SDOR, the CAO committee has been charged with reviewing existing service delivery and making recommendations on the potential for shared service delivery. In keeping with the SDOR recommendation, shared services should be delineated by an agreement. Partners Long Range Financial Plan County Auditor External Agencies (City, Health Unit, Library, Province) Member municipalities Partner municipalities – Leeds & Grenville, Lanark, Lennox & Addington Economic Development Land O’ Lakes Tourist Association Frontenac Community Futures Development Corporation

Implementation Plan

Review/comment on LRFP Funder and/or service provider Shared service opportunities Cross boarder and shared service opportunities Tourism marketing and events Business loans, business education/skills development + linkages to banking industry Marketing/Promotion Regional Tourism Marketing Trails and Marketing Economic Development and Regional Growth Promotion, marketing, projects Service delivery For local service delivery options For regional service delivery options Shared service agreements

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

P a g e | 14

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Frontenac Arch Biosphere RTO 9/11 Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority City of Kingston and KEDCO Stewardship Foundation Member Municipalities Rationalize Costs Member Municipalities Eastern Ontario Municipalities (EOWC) City of Kingston

Role

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief357 Administrative

ID

Task

Assigned

Resources

Measured

Completed by

Long Range Financial Planning FP1

Develop a framework for Long Term Financial Planning

FP2 Adoption in Principle – Council decision point FP3 Develop and monitor LRFP Scorecard FP4 Ongoing assessment and environmental scan Economic Development and Revenue Generation Meet with partner agencies to develop a “framework” ED1 for regional economic development ED2

Prepare an Economic Development Charter

ED3

Review by Council – Council decision Point

ED4

Develop Partnership Agreements

ED5 Measure & Report Rationalize Costs RC1 CAO Committee to provide initial report Implementation of shared service delivery options RC2 Council decision point RC3 Regular assessment of shared service agreements

CAO & Treasurer

CAO & Treasurer CAO & Treasurer CAO & Mgr of Ec. Dev. Partners & Mgr of Ec Dev

Internal, Auditor, Public Sector Digest Internal Internal Internal

% Complete

Fall 2014/Early 2015

% Complete TBD TBD

Early 2015 Spring 2015 Ongoing

Internal

% Complete

Feb 2015

Internal

% Complete

March 2015

Internal

Complete

March 2015

CAO & Mgr of Ec Dev Mgr of Ec Dev

TBD

% Complete

Fall 2015

TBD

TBD

Ongoing

CAOs

TBD

% Complete

Fall 2015

Reference: Service Delivery and Organizational Review, KPMG Growth Study, Watson and Associates EOWC Economic Development Study

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

P a g e | 15

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation Plan

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief358 Administrative

Recommendation

Whereas in January 2014 County Council engaged Performance Concepts to assist with the process of developing goals for the balance of its term and for the 2015-18 term; Whereas on May 15, 2014 Council approved three goals resulting from this initiative; Whereas an implementation plan is deemed necessary to ensure that Council direction is carried out by County administration; Now Therefore Committee of the Whole recommends to County Council that the Strategic Goals – Implementation Plan presented by staff on September 3, 2014 be approved in principle; And Further that staff be directed to continue with the implementation plan as presented up to the Council decision points noted in the plan, including funding support as indicated.

Frontenac County Strategic Goals

P a g e | 16

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Implementation Plan

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Page 1 of 5 Housing and Social Services Department

Kingston-Frontenac Renovates Program Program Guidelines and Requirements The Kingston-Frontenac Renovates Program (KFRP): The City of Kingston, as the Consolidated Municipal Service Manager (CMSM) serving the City of Kingston and the County of Frontenac, has committed funds provided under the Canada/Ontario Investment in Affordable Housing Extension (IAH-E) program for the creation of KFRP to provide grants for accessibility projects (to a maximum of $5,000) and/or interest free forgivable loans (to a maximum of $10,000) to assist Homeowner(s) to complete emergency repairs to their homes. Program Rules 1.0 Household Eligibility Criteria

1. At least one member of the household must be eighteen (18) years of age to apply.
2. The household must be a permanent resident of the City of Kingston or Frontenac County.
3. The applicant(s) must be able to live independently (with or without support services).
4. The Homeowner(s) must be a Canadian Citizen, a Landed Immigrant, or have applied for permanent residency or refugee claimant status and must provide documentation to confirm (i.e. - Birth Certificate, Social Insurance Number Card, Passport, Landed Immigrant Papers, Refugee Status Papers, etc). See List of Acceptable Citizenship Documents.
5. The applicant(s) must own the home for which repair funds are being requested and the home must be registered in the applicant(s) name.
6. The home must be the sole and principal residence of the applicant(s). They must reside there at the time of application and throughout the ten (10) year affordability period.
7. The combined gross income of the Homeowner(s) must be at or below the maximum household income limits as set by the City of Kingston and adjusted annually. The income limits will be provided as part of the information package released with each round of program funding.

Kingston Frontenac Renovates Program Terms and Conditions

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief359 Administrative

2018-03-22

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Page 2 of 5 8. The combined total assets and investments of the Homeowner(s) must not be greater than Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000) not including Registered Retirement Savings Plan assets. 9. Homeowner(s) must not have a vested interest in any other property. 10. The Homeowner(s) must not be applying for bankruptcy or have an active bankruptcy file. 11. Misrepresentation of income or information will result in the applicant(s) being deemed ineligible and, if all or a portion of the forgivable loan or accessibility grant has been paid, the loan or grant will immediately become due and payable to the Service Manager. 12. Households who have received two (2) years of KFRP funding in the past are not eligible. 13. If a Homeowner(s) has received previous funding under KFRP for a home they have since sold, the new home will not be eligible for repairs. 2.0 Eligible Home Repairs

1. The home must be owned by the applicant(s).
2. The home must be located within the City of Kingston or Frontenac County.
3. The home must be at least ten (10) years old (unless the application is for ‘accessibility’ purposes only, in which case there is no age limitation for the home).
4. The value of the home must be at or below the maximum house value as determined by the Service Manager.
5. The Homeowner(s) must not have a mortgage that is in default
6. Property taxes on the subject property must be paid in full.
7. Homes may be detached, semi-detached, row houses or condominiums (Condos: will consider indoor repairs only and which reflect repair requirements separate from those common repairs that are considered part of the collective Condominium Capital Repair Responsibility).
8. Mobile Homes: Structural modifications are not eligible. Some other types of repairs may be considered on a case-by-case basis.
9. Homes must be considered to be habitable pending completion of eligible and approved home repairs (see attachment for examples of some eligible home repairs).
10. Work done prior to applying for program assistance is not eligible for funding consideration.
11. The funding is available for only ‘approved’ repairs to the applicant’s home (other costs that may be included in the ‘approved’ project repairs costs are: Permit Fees, Consultant Fees and/or Project Management Fees, etc.).
12. The funding cannot be used for any other purpose other than that approved.

Kingston Frontenac Renovates Program Terms and Conditions

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief360 Administrative

2018-03-22

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Page 3 of 5 13. Contractors participating in the program must be experienced in the applicable trade and able to complete all work in compliance with all relevant codes and legislative requirements. 14. Contractors must confirm to have proper insurance coverage in place at the time of service. 3.0 Application and Selection Process

1. Up-to-date information will be posted on the City of Kingston website on an ongoing basis and will include: application forms, program guidelines, current program funding levels, maximum household income limits, and maximum house values, as well as any other information which may be pertinent at the time of the information release and subsequent updates.
2. All prospective Kingston-Frontenac Renovates Program applicants must complete an application form and provide all specified supportive information and documentation as required.
3. All applications and documentation must be delivered to the Housing and Social Services Department, City of Kingston, 362 Montreal Street, Kingston, ON K7K 3H5.
4. Applications must be complete and all documents received before eligibility review.
5. Eligible applicants will be considered on a priority basis, assisting those in greatest need first, until all funding is allocated for the current funding year.
6. Eligible applicants will be placed on a waiting list in order of receipt of the completed application and determination of eligibility.
7. Prior to project approval, the Service Manager (or delegate) may conduct a ‘pre-approval’ home inspection to determine if there is any other work that needs to be completed, prior to or in conjunction with the approved work, to ensure that the home will continue to be safe, sound and habitable upon completion of the approved repairs. At the sole discretion of the Service Manager, an application for assistance through the KFRP would be considered to be ineligible if findings during the home inspection warrant a discontinuation of assistance.
8. If all eligibility criteria are met and the requested project is selected, based upon the priority rating process, the Homeowner(s) will be given a Conditional Letter of Approval confirming program eligibility and identifying the specific work to be done.
9. Upon receipt of the Conditional Letter of Approval the applicant must, within 30 days, obtain a minimum of two (2) written quotes from ‘eligible’ contractors to complete the approved work and submit these quotes to the Service Manager. (NOTE: The Service Manager may request more than two (2) competitive quotes if deemed necessary).
10. Contractors must provide proof of insurance on quote.

Kingston Frontenac Renovates Program Terms and Conditions

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief361 Administrative

2018-03-22

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Page 4 of 5 11. The lowest valid bid will be accepted and considered to be the successful bid. If however the quotes are within five 5% of each other, the Homeowner(s) may exercise their discretion if there is an identified and valid reason to accept other than the lowest valid bid. 12. Funding will be approved based upon selection process in section 3 clause 8 above but will not exceed the maximum funding level of $10,000. 13. If the Service Manager approves funding, the Homeowner(s) will be required to sign a Letter of Agreement and Promissory Note which sets out the terms and conditions of the funding. (Note: The Letter of Agreement and Promissory Note will be registered on title at the Service Manager’s expense for all projects valued at $2,000 or more). 14. Work cannot be assigned to the contractor until ‘Final Approval’ is provided in writing, by way of receipt of a signed the Letter of Agreement and Promissory Note with the Service Manager. 15. Applications will continue to be received, evaluated and funding assigned until such time as all program funding has been allocated. 4.0 Terms and Conditions of Funding

1. Funding is to be used only for completion of the approved project located at the ‘approved’ address and only for the approved work to be done.
2. Payment for any additional work done, which was not pre-approved in writing by the Service Manager and included in the Agreement and Promissory Note, will be the sole responsibility of the Homeowner(s).
3. Provisions of the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, as amended or replaced from time to time will apply to work completed. In accordance with the Act, holdbacks of ten percent (10%) may be retained by the Service Manager.
4. The Homeowner(s) is/are required to collect and submit to the Service Manager, invoices for all progress and/or final payments due to contractors. If an acceptable invoice is not collected and submitted to the Service Manager, payment will be withheld. An acceptable invoice will include the contractor(s) name and address and Business Number or HST Number and the total amount of the contract. (Total amount of the contract = “final costs” including labour, material, soft costs, permits and all applicable taxes).
5. Upon receipt of an invoice for work completed, the Service Manager will make payment directly to the contractor.
6. Progress payments may be considered if required for large, higher cost projects.
7. The Homeowner(s) will be required to execute a Letter of Agreement and a Promissory Note. (For all projects valued at $2,000 or more, the Promissory Note will be registered on title at the expense of the Service Manager).

Kingston Frontenac Renovates Program Terms and Conditions

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief362 Administrative

2018-03-22

AGENDA ITEM #g)

Page 5 of 5 8. The period of forgiveness is ten (10) years and forgiven at an equal rate (10% per year) over the ten (10) year affordability period. The term of loan forgiveness begins on the date of repair completion. 9. If the home is sold, rented, or transferred prior to the loan forgiveness being fully earned, the Homeowner(s) must notify the Service Manager. 10. Funding which was approved for accessibility repairs made to a home, up to a maximum of $5,000, will be in the form of a grant and will not require repayment. 5.0 Continued Eligibility Throughout the duration of the ten (10) year affordability period:

1. The Homeowner(s) must continue to own and reside in the home as their sole and principal residence.
2. On an annual basis, the Homeowner(s) must provide (in whatever form is required by the Service Manager) confirmation of their continued residency in their home.
3. The mortgage must not fall into default.
4. House insurance must remain in place and be current.
5. If the Homeowner(s) breaches or defaults on the terms and conditions of the Letter of Agreement and/or the Promissory Note, the full ‘un-forgiven’ portion of the Loan will immediately become due and payable.
6. At the end of the ten (10) year affordability period when the loan is wholly forgiven or if the Agreement should fall into default and reimbursement in full has been made to the Service Manager, the Homeowner(s) may request that registered documents be removed from title at the Homeowner(s)’ expense.

Inquiries can be directed to: Housing Programs, 362 Montreal Street, Kingston, ON K7K 3H5 Phone: 613-546-2695 extension 4949 Fax: 613-546-2623 Email: housing@cityofkingston.ca

Kingston Frontenac Renovates Program Terms and Conditions

Page of 420 Officer Request by the Towns… 2018-067 Office of the Chief363 Administrative

2018-03-22

AGENDA ITEM #h)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-068

Recommend Report to Council To:

Warden and Members of County Council

From:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Susan Brant, Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer Barb McCulloch, Manager of Human Resources

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Office of the Chief Chief Administrative Administrative Officer Officer— – Joint Joint Council Compensation Survey; Joint Management/Non-Union Market Compensation Survey

Recommendation: Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Office of Chief Officer — – Joint Administrative Officer JointCouncil Council Compensation Compensation Survey; Survey; Joint Joint Management/NonManagement/NonUnion Market Compensation Survey report for information; And Further That Council authorize the use of consultant Krecklo & Associates Inc. to complete the Joint Council Compensation Survey; Joint Management/Non-Union Market Compensation Survey in conjunction with the compensation surveys for North Frontenac Township, Central Frontenac Township and the Township of Frontenac Islands. Background The purpose of this report is to address the requirement for a review of compensation for County Council including the Warden, Deputy Warden, Councillors and the Management/Non-Union group. A market review is important to ensure the Warden, Deputy Warden and County Councillors are fairly compensated for their contributions and effective 2019, non-

Page of 420 Officer Joint Council Compen… 2018-068 Office of the Chief364 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #h)

officials will taxable allowances paid to elected officials will be be included included in in their theirincome. income. This change was established in budget, which received royal assent on June 22, in the 2017 federal budget, 2017 (Bill C C 44). 44). The Thefederal federalgovernment’s government’sdecision decision to to eliminate eliminate the the tax tax free free status status of of 2017 (Bill one third of Council salary will result in in a reduction of net salary. It is a responsible practice of corporations to review its market competitiveness to ensure that the County is The potential potential for is able able to to attract attract and and retain retain top top talent. talent. The increased retirements over the upcoming years also identifies identifies the the need to be competitive in order to hire the most talented. Comment Council direction Corporate Services Services — – Non-Union direction from from the the 2015 2015 Corporate Non-Union Staff Compensation Review directed directed staff staff to monitor and report annually (most recent update report Review regarding regarding Corporate Corporate Services Services Non-Union Non-Union Pay Pay Equity EquityMaintenance Maintenance Report Report2018-009) 2018-009) to Council regarding pay equity compliance and market equity performance. The last compensation review for for Council Council and and Management/Non-Union Management/Non-Union was conducted in 2014-2015 with implementation implementation in 2014-2015 with in 2015. 2015. The County of Frontenac currently has a total of 29 management/non-union management/non-union positions positions within within the organization structure structure with with incumbents incumbents covering covering Corporate Corporate Services, Services, Planning and Economic Development, Fairmount Home and Emergency & & Transportation Transportation Services. This Thisgroup group is is directly directly responsible for for the strategic strategic management management and supervision in three bargaining bargaining units. supervision of of over over 350 350 full and part time unionized employees in Compensation management management also also requires requires that that policy policy and procedural issues such as, 1, internal equity compression2 and performance management be addressed equity’, salary compression2 based upon consistent policies in in order order to to ensure that compensation practices remain compliant. The firm Krecklo & Associates Associates Inc. are compensation experts, with with over over 100 100 participating participating municipalities municipalitiesand and186 186 potential potential position positionmatches matcheswith withover over10,000 10,000 data points points for for Towns/Cities Towns/Cities and and Counties in in the Krecklo Krecklo & Associate’s Associate’s database. database. Process for Compensation Review:

a. Council CouncilCompensation CompensationSurvey Survey–this this would would be be lead lead by by Krecklo Krecklo & & Associates Associates Inc. who would undertake a survey of 2017 Council compensation compensation practices of 2017 Council municipalities Frontenac’s comparator comparator group group in in order order to to municipalities selected selected as the County of Frontenac’s

1 Defined as: as: internal internal salary salary practices practices are are consistent consistent across the organization based upon a review of job 1 Defined

duties. 2 Defined Defined as: as: sufficient sufficient differentiation differentiation between salary bands in in order order to to incent individuals to seek 2

promotion. Recommend Report to Council Officer — – Joint Office of the Chief Administrative Officer JointCouncil Council Compensation Compensation Survey; Survey; Joint Joint Management/Non-Union Management/Non-Union Market Compensation Survey report May 16, 2018 Page 2 of 3

Page of 420 Officer Joint Council Compen… 2018-068 Office of the Chief365 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #h)

determine determine the the market market competitiveness competitiveness of of the the County’s County’s compensation compensation practices practices for for the Warden, Deputy Warden and Councillors. b. Staff StaffMarket MarketCompensation Compensation Survey Survey – this this is is similar similar to to the framework of the Council compensation and would allow Council and Management to determine the market market competitiveness the competitiveness of of the the County’s County’s compensation compensation practices practices for for staff. staff. Sustainability Implications Fair and consistent remuneration practices are a a prerequisite prerequisite to to achieving achieving the the County’s County’s mission of exceptional service delivery as this ensures that the County is able to attract and retain experienced and qualified staff to perform their duties and achieve overall Ensuring fair fair compensation compensation is an effective preventative success for the municipality. Ensuring measure that that allows ability to to remain remain competitive competitive in in attracting attracting qualified measure allows the the County’s County’s ability qualified and and knowledgeable staff and is a responsibility that we have to maintain. Council compensation review ensures we are providing fair compensation practices that reflect the workload and responsibility associated with being a member of Council. Financial Implications The cost for an experienced consulting firm with a large data base to conduct a compensation survey for Council and Management/Non-Union is estimated to be $14,300 + HST ($7,300 for for Council Council and and $7,000 $7,000 for for CS CS Management/NU). Management/NU). The cost of the surveys will be charged to the County Operations Reserve, which receives annual allocations for this project. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Krecklo and Associates Inc.

Recommend Report to Council Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Officer — – Joint JointCouncil Council Compensation Compensation Survey; Survey; Joint Joint Management/Non-Union Management/Non-Union Market Compensation Survey report May 16, 2018 Page 3 of 3

Page of 420 Officer Joint Council Compen… 2018-068 Office of the Chief366 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #i)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-069

Recommend Report to Council To:

Warden and Members of County Council

From:

Kelly J. Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Richard Allen, Manager of Economic Development

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

and Economic Economic Development Development — – Use Planning and Use of of Ontario Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund with K&P Trail

Recommendation Be It Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Planning and Economic Development Useof ofOntario Ontario Community Community Infrastructure Infrastructure Fund with K&P Trail Development — – Use report for information; And Further That the Council of the County of Frontenac Authorize staff to enter into an agreement with the Township of Central Frontenac to transfer its 2018 Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund allocation in the amount of $50,000 for the purposes of completing infrastructure improvements on Hampton and Tryon Roads. Background The Province created the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund to: (1) provide stable funding to help small communities address critical core infrastructure needs in relation to roads, bridge, water and wastewater; (2) further strengthen municipal asset management practices within small communities; and (3) help small communities use a broad range of financial tools to address critical infrastructure challenges and provide long-term financial support for the rehabilitation and repair of core infrastructure for those most in need. The Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund is composed of two components: (1) the Application-Based Component; and (2) (2) the the Formula-Based Formula-Based Component. Component. The Formula-Based Component of the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund is based on a municipalities local fiscal circumstances and its total core infrastructure assets with a minimum grant of fifty thousand dollars. While recreational trails are not eligible projects, sidewalks and/or cycling lanes located on existing roads are.

Page 367 ofDevelopment 420 2018-069 Planning and Economic Use of Ontario Community Infr…

AGENDA ITEM #i)

A recipient may transfer its yearly allocation to another recipient in the furtherance of a joint project, provided: a) The joint project is listed as a priority in the asset management plans for the Recipient a) and other recipients; b) b) The Recipient and other recipients inform the Province in writing that they are undertaking a joint project prior to implementation; and c) The Recipient and other recipients have an agreement in place governing the joint c) project, including how the joint project is being funded Comment The following road improvements have been identified as part of the Tichborne to Sharbot Lake phase of K&P Trail development: a) Hampton Road: Surface treatment should be applied to the Hampton Road portion of a) the trail to improve cycling and pedestrian safety, and to protect the road asset from erosion. The pitch and grade of Hampton Road results in the water travelling from the western of the the road road across across the western edge edge of the active active transportation transportation path path (the (the “Trail”) “Trail”) and and eroding is proposed proposed that that the the County County partner with the Township of out the stone and gravel. ItIt is Central Frontenac to apply a surface treatment program that could remedy this situation. b) b) Tryon Road: The Tryon Road intersection with the K&P Trail has difficult sightlines due is proposed proposed that that the County partner with the to its curved and hilly construction. construction. ItIt is Township of Central Frontenac to remove the hill on Tryon Road at the K&P intersection to improve pedestrian and cyclist safety. Sustainability Implications The completion of the K&P Trail is a key economic objective for the County and included in the Directions for Our Future, the Economic Development Charter and has been the subject of four studies since 2009. Financial Implications The financial impact of the infrastructure improvements will not exceed the 2018 Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund allocation in the amount of $50,000. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Susan Brant, Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer Central Frontenac Township

Recommend Report to Council Planning and Economic Use of of Ontario Ontario Community Community Infrastructure Infrastructure Fund Fund for work on K&P Trail Economic Development Development — – Use Page 2 of 2 May 16, 2018

Page 368 ofDevelopment 420 2018-069 Planning and Economic Use of Ontario Community Infr…

AGENDA ITEM #j)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-075 Council Recommend Report

To:

Council Warden and Council

From:

Chief Administrative Administrative Officer Kelly Pender, Chief

Prepared by:

Kelly Pender, Chief Chief Administrative Administrative Officer

Date of May 16, 16, 2018 2018 Date of meeting: meeting: May Re:

Office of of the the CAO CAO — – EORN Project — – Request EORN Broadband Project Request for Funding

Recommendation

ResolvedThat Thatthe theCouncil Councilof ofthe theCounty County of of Frontenac Frontenac accept accept the Eastern Ontario Resolved Broadband Project Project report; report; Regional Network (EORN) (EORN) Broadband Further That ThatCouncil Councilsupport support the the funding funding request in the 2018 County budget budget in the Further 2018 County amount of $40,000, with funds funds to be taken from the Stabilization Stabilization Reserve. $40,000, with Background

meeting of of the the At the April April 19-20, 19-20, 2018 2018 meeting the Eastern Eastern Ontario Ontario Wardens’ Wardens’ Caucus Caucus (EOWC) (EOWC) the following motion following motion was was passed: 1 (EOWC) That the the Eastern Eastern Ontario Ontario Warden’s Warden’s Caucus Caucus’ (EOWC) accepts the the EORN EORN Broadband Analysis project as presented.

This initiative initiative has been undertaken in in support support of direction provided provided by by the the Eastern Ontario at their their annual annual general general meeting meeting held held on January Ontario Wardens’ Wardens’ Caucus Caucus (EOWC) (EOWC) at 11, 2018. The purpose purpose of of this report is to provide a brief overview of the project and outline the funding request for the County.

1 The EOWC EOWCisiscomposed composedof of13 13members membersacross acrossrural rural Eastern Eastern Ontario, Ontario, including including 11 regional regional County 1 The

municipalities and municipalities and two two Single-tier municipalities, municipalities, including includingFrontenac, Frontenac, Haliburton, Haliburton, City City of of Kawartha Kawartha Lakes, Lanark, Leeds and and Grenville, Grenville, Lennox Lennox and and Addington, Addington, Northumberland, Peterborough, Prescott-Russell, Prince Edward, Renfrew and Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry. (www.eowc.org)

Page of 420 Officer EORN Broadband Proje… 2018-075 Office of the Chief369 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #j)

Ms Lisa Severson, Communications and Stakeholder Relations for EORN and Mr. Stéphane Parisien, Chief Administrative Officer, United Counties of Prescott-Russell and Stephane CAO Co-Lead for EORN will be in attendance at the meeting in support of the recommendation and will be available to answer questions from Council. Comment The original EORN broadband project resulted in new or improved broadband services for 89% of households in Eastern Ontario at up to 10Mbps or higher and a further 9% 2. from 1.5 Mbps to 9 Mbps, covering 750,000 residents to an area covering 50,000 km km2. While this achievement was and is significant, the continued increase in data consumption at over 50% year over year has changed the digital landscape. In the intervening years EORN has continued to work with their private sector partners to encourage broadband investment and has submitted a position paper to the CRTC regarding rural recommendation to to make regarding rural internet internet access access who who supported supported EORN’s EORN’s recommendation make internet access, both broadband and cellular, an essential service at speeds of 50 Mbps download and 10Mbps upload for 90% of Canadians by 2021. EORN recognizes that only in instances where market forces make the provision of services cost prohibitive (e.g., rural, rugged terrain and/or sparsely populated) should government support/intervention be warranted. In order to prepare Eastern Ontario for the challenge of improving broadband capacity in the region, EORN and EOWC are recommending the completion of a technical and economic gap analysis study for the region. This study will form the basis for future funding requests to provide residents and businesses with the access mandated by the CRTC. This work will keep Eastern Ontario on a path that ensures the region has the best possible internet access. Sustainability Implications The provision of broadband connectivity for businesses and families is known to be key drivers of a healthy economy and social fabric. Financial Implications EORN is requesting that each the 13 EOWC members provide a 2018 budget allocation of $40,000 in order to support this project. Staff recommend that this project be approved and that funds required for the project be taken from the Stabilization reserve. The 2017 year-end surplus of $325,184 was transferred to this reserve at the April 18, 2018 Council meeting. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Susan Brant, Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer David Fell, Chief Executive Officer, EORN Lisa Severson, Communications and Stakeholder Relations, EORN

Recommend Report to Council Office of of the the CAO CAO — – EORN Project — – Request EORN Broadband Project Request for for Funding Funding May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer EORN Broadband Proje… 2018-075 Office of the Chief370 Administrative

Page 2 of 2

AGENDA ITEM #k)

Report 2018-076 Council Recommend Report To:

Warden and Members of County Council

From:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Office of the CAO – EORN Cell Gap Capacity Expansion Project – Request for Funding

Recommendation Whereas at the April 19-20, 2018 meeting of the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC) a motion was passed recommending a funding for the distribution of costs related to the Eastern Ontario Regional Network’s cell gap project; Resolved That the Council of the County of Frontenac accept the Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN) Cell Gap Capacity Expansion Project report; Further That Council support the funding request in the 2019 County budget in the amount of $400,000, with final funding to be determined as part of the 2019 budget process; Further That Council express their sincere appreciation to EORN and the EOWC for their efforts to improve cellular coverage and capacity in Frontenac County and Eastern Ontario. Background At the April 19-20, 2018 meeting of the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC) the following motion was passed: That the Eastern Ontario Warden’s Caucus1 (EOWC) accepts the EORN Cell Gap Municipal Contribution Report as presented, and;

1 The EOWC is composed of 13 members across rural Eastern Ontario, including 11 regional County

municipalities and two Single-tier municipalities, including Frontenac, Haliburton, City of Kawartha Lakes,

Page of 420 Officer EORN Cell Gap Capaci… 2018-076 Office of the Chief371 Administrative

AGENDA ITEM #k)

That the EOWC support the Cell Gap and Capacity Expansion Project for the Eastern Ontario region; and, That EOWC support the funding level, subject to receipt of upper level government funding, and finalization of the municipal funding distribution formulae; and, That respective councils of the EOWC receive a report and presentation from Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN) for the decision on the respective local (municipal) contributions. This initiative is the number one priority for the EOWC and has been the central plank of the Caucus’ efforts in 2017 and 2018. On May 7, 2018, the Province of Ontario confirmed funding support for the Provincial share of the project at $71M. Negotiations with the Federal government regarding funding are ongoing. The purpose of this report is to provide a brief overview of the project and outline the funding request for the County. Ms. Lisa Severson, Communications and Stakeholder Relations for EORN and Mr. Stéphane Parisien, Chief Administrative Officer, United Counties of Prescott-Russell and CAO Co-Lead for EORN will be in attendance at the meeting in support of the recommendation and will be available to answer questions from Council. Comment In order for Eastern Ontario to remain economically competitive it is vital that our residents have both access to reliable cellular service and the cell capacity to conduct business or manage the household. This includes everything from autonomous vehicles, to the internet of things, to homework and watching Netflix. In simple terms, connectivity and the capacity to conduct business are both necessary elements of a modern connected lifestyle. Those communities that embrace technology and invest in its infrastructure will be better able to compete in the economy. For Frontenac County, the increased coverage and capacity will lead to greater opportunity for permanent and seasonal residents, plus tourists in all parts of the County. From Frontenac Islands where stronger cell strength will reduce U.S. roaming, to the more rural and remote parts of the County where increased tourism and recreation opportunities will be enhanced. The project will also lay the groundwork for the implementation of a 5G network. To illustrate the business impacts, the following statement (emphasis added) is provided from the recent accommodations review completed by the County:

Lanark, Leeds and Grenville, Lennox and Addington, Northumberland, Peterborough, Prescott-Russell, Prince Edward, Renfrew and Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry. (www.eowc.org) Recommend Report to Council Office of the CAO – EORN Cell Gap Capacity Expansion Project – Request for Funding May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer EORN Cell Gap Capaci… 2018-076 Office of the Chief372 Administrative

Page 2 of 4

AGENDA ITEM #k)

Broadband - Concerns were raised about the limited and sporadic broadband and cellphone connectivity in some areas of the Frontenac region. Broadband connectivity is increasingly becoming a necessity to the accommodation sector. Operators are concerned that more travelers are requesting broadband Internet access in their accommodations. Local operators noted that competitors in other parts of the province have been growing its broadband offerings. As broadband’s importance to the industry grows, accommodation operators in Frontenac are beginning to invest in broadband networks, services, and applications but are still lacking the infrastructure to do so.2 Improved cellular coverage and capacity is a large part of infrastructure required to meet this demand in Frontenac. On a regional level, the project will also support the three key priorities of the region’s economic development strategy3 being led by the Eastern Ontario Leadership Council (EOLC), namely:

1. Creating an integrated and intelligent transportation system;
2. Supporting technological integration and innovation;
3. Supporting workforce development. A second phase of this project is anticipated to be the installation of a Public Safety Broadband Network (PSBN) for the region. This project will help install some of the tower, broadband infrastructure necessary to complete the PSBN project. Sustainability Implications The provision of cell coverage and capacity are known to be key drivers of a healthy economy and social fabric. The CRTC has ruled that cellular coverage is an essential service for Canadians. Financial Implications EORN has been working since 2015 to develop a business case for this project and have completed four independent studies, including cell gap analysis, costing study, cell market analysis and economic impact. This effort means that Eastern Ontario has completed the work necessary to support a project of this magnitude. As well, EORN has developed a business model and a project management approach to these types of projects that is increasingly being utilized in other jurisdictions.

2 County of Frontenac Accommodation Review and Strategy for Growth, MDB Insight, July 2017, pg 19.

https://www.infrontenac.ca/en/invest-in-frontenac/resources/Documents/Frontenac-AccommodationReview-and-Strategy-for-Growth.pdf 3 http://www.eowc.org/en/economic-development-sustainability/eastern-ontario-leadership-council.aspx

Recommend Report to Council Office of the CAO – EORN Cell Gap Capacity Expansion Project – Request for Funding May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer EORN Cell Gap Capaci… 2018-076 Office of the Chief373 Administrative

Page 3 of 4

AGENDA ITEM #k)

In response, EORN is proposing a $213M public-private initiative that would build upon the high capacity, fibre-optic backbone. The proposed funding for the project similar to the original broadband project completed by EORN:   

One third funded by the Provincial Government - $71M (confirmed) One third funded by the Federal Government - $71M (in process) One third funded by the private and municipal sectors - $61M private sector (subject to and RFP process) and $10M from the municipal sector.

It is estimated that for every dollar contributed to the project by the municipal sector, the other parties will be contributing approximately $21. It is anticipated that the municipal contribution will be shared by 23 municipalities, including the 13 EOWC members and 10 separated towns and cities.4 The proposed funding formula approved by the EOWC and is composed of three parts:

1. An area contribution with a 20% weight – Frontenac is the 6th largest geographic area jurisdiction of the 23 municipalities
2. A 40% weighted contribution for permanent population (2016 FIR) – Frontenac has the 16th largest population of the 23 municipalities
3. 40% for total weighted assessment – Frontenac has the 13th largest assessment of the 23 municipalities When the $10M contribution is allocated based upon the above factors, the County’s share will be $385,277 (assuming all municipalities participate – 14th out of 23 municipalities). For 2019 budget purposes staff are recommending $400,000 be utilized. This will provide some allowance should a municipality choose not to participate. It should be noted that municipalities that choose not to participate will not be covered by the project. The County has two options with respect to the payment:  

Paid as a one-time upfront payment with 5% interest paid on the declining balance over three years; or A semi-annual installment basis without interest over a four-year period.

In order to ensure that the best option for the County is selected, staff will review investments and reserves prior to making a final finance recommendation in 2019. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Susan Brant, Director of Corporate Services/Treasurer David Fell, Chief Executive Officer, EORN Lisa Severson, Communications and Stakeholder Relations, EORN

4 City of Peterborough, Quinte West, Belleville, Kingston, Gananoque, Prescott, Brockville, Cornwall,

Pembroke and Smiths Falls. Recommend Report to Council Office of the CAO – EORN Cell Gap Capacity Expansion Project – Request for Funding May 16, 2018

Page of 420 Officer EORN Cell Gap Capaci… 2018-076 Office of the Chief374 Administrative

Page 4 of 4

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Report 2018-064 Council Information Report To:

Warden and Council

From:

Kelly J. Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Paul J. Charbonneau, Chief Paramedic/Director Emergency and Transportation Services

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Emergency and Transportation Services – 2017 Year in Review

Recommendation This report is for information purposes only. Background In order to improve service delivery and build upon past achievements, it is important to review accomplishments and successes. Comment The County Council document “Priorities 2017 – 2018 – Find Your Path” is a guide for staff as we strive to improve ourselves and the organization. Community Emergency and Transportation Services (ETS) continued to participate in outreach and education to the community. Frontenac Paramedic Services (FPS) participated in several school, church and community association events such as South Frontenac’s “Touch a Truck” event for Paramedic Week in Kingston’s Market Square and Remembrance Day services throughout the County and City of Kingston. Social media continued to be a focus of all divisions within ETS promoting, informing and creating awareness to the citizens we serve. The annual toy drive, organized by members of OPSEU Local 462 and the and food drive, organized by FPS members, demonstrated the social commitment of staff outside of the dedication to care and compassion for the public they serve on each 911 response.

Information Report to Council Emergency and Transportation Services – 2017 Year in Review May 16, 2018

Page 375 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Page 1 of 2

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Municipality ETS engaged with its partner municipalities in Emergency Management awareness and shared best practices/knowledge through our Emergency Management Program Coordinator, Mark Podgers. Marine services, in partnership with the Township of Frontenac Islands, participate in a public meeting regarding ferry operations to update the service users. Council ETS is markedly proud of its engagement with Council in 2017. Councillors continued to participate in “Take a Councillor to Work Days” with paramedic crews. Warden Vandewal and Councillor Nossal travelled to Ottawa to be present during the Awards Gala evening at the Ontario Association of Paramedics Chiefs Conference where four of our paramedics received special recognition from their country for exemplary service. FPS demonstrated, to Council at a regular meeting, the “Anatomy of a 911 Call” to educate and highlight the comprehensive nature of paramedic knowledge, education and skill sets. Internal FPS celebrated the unique culture of paramedics during National Paramedic Week with a family BBQ; many paramedics (and their partners and kids) celebrated with Councilors, support staff and the Leadership Team who we are. Key to FPS’s successes are the various committees that engage and help inform the decision-making process. In 2017, FPS embarked on a re-branding exercise with the engagement of staff, external partners and union leaders to further identify who we are and what do we stand for; this exercise will lead to a new brand identity and strategic plan for FPS. Sustainability Implications In viewing the 2017 Year in Review, one can appreciate the importance of community engagement and protection provided through the ETS programs and the quality patient care offered and advocacy undertaken by FPS. Financial Implications None Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected

Information Report to Council Emergency and Transportation Services – 2017 Year in Review May 16, 2018

Page 376 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Page 2 of 2

Emergency & Transportation Services

Page 377 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

2017 Year in Review

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 378 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Page 379 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

On behalf of Emergency and Transportation Services, we are pleased to present our 2017 Year in Review.

Paramedic Services This year again has been a busy year and I am so proud of the dedication and commitment of all staff while continuing to work with global system pressures such as the aging population, population growth in most urban centres, and the complexity of patient issues Paramedic Services are seeing, increased levels of demand being placed on an already stressed system. One of the focuses of 2017 has been Paramedic Mental Wellness, and we remain committed to supporting our employees’ ongoing health and wellness. Some components of our Psychological Health and Wellness Program include a Peer-to-Peer Support Team, independent decisionmaking by Superintendents to take crews “off the board” following difficult calls to balance their wellbeing, and the introduction of the Mental Health Commission of Canada’s Road to Mental Readiness (R2MR) program to frontline paramedics, support staff and the leadership team. The result of our commitment in 2016, to the physical wellness of our paramedics with the introduction of the Stryker Power load cot system, has seen injuries due to stretcher lifting go from 25% to only 3% of all injuries. FPS remains committed to providing evidence-based health care and improving the quality of life for our patients, and as such continues to participate in research such as the Ottawa Hospital C-Spine Study and the Canadian Research Consortium (CanRoc) regarding out-of-hospital cardiac arrests.

We were proud to acknowledge Andrea Baker, Julie Socha, Geoff Crawford and Kenny Heintz for receiving the Governor General’s Emergency Medical

In May, we were deeply saddened to lose one of our own, a great man, medic 36722 Gregory Allan. We thank Deb Cooper and Jeremie Hurtubise for their assistance during this difficult time.

Emergency Management Several improvements transpired within the Emergency Management portfolio including revisions to the Program Committee role as well as the appointment of the Emergency Management Program Coordinator. All requirements to meet the compliancy provisions of the Ontario Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act were completed under the leadership of Superintendent Mark Podgers. Mark has also provided advice and recommendations to our member Townships on all matters regarding the Act.

Marine Services The extensive flooding of the St. Lawrence River brought its own challenges to the Marine Services operation. As well, the Frontenac Howe Islander 5-year inspection changed the operations of the service. Despite these occurrence, we operated at a 98% up-time performance. A big congratulations and thank you to Ron Byrne, Joe Rothwell and Paul Norris for their outstanding long service. This report highlights the remarkable work of our employees, all of whom have contributed to providing the highest quality medical care and public service. It is an honour to lead such an esteem group of people.

Year in Review • 2017 • Chief Address

3

AGENDA ITEM #a)

March 17, 2017 was a particularly challenging day for FPS when it responded and assisted with a major spill of a toxic chemical on the 401. Several of our resources including ambulances, Emergency Support Unit and Command staff were assigned to two different incident locations to care for injured citizens and first responders.

Services Exemplary Service Medal for 20 years of career accomplishments. As well, we celebrated Terry bake and Barry McGrath receiving the 30 year bar for the same award.

Page 380 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

C-SPINE STUDY On March 1, 2017 Frontenac Paramedic Services along with 12 other services, joined the “C-Spine Study” conducted by the Ottawa Hospital. The Canadian C-Spine Rule is a clinical decision rule that has been used for many years in emergency departments, and is being evaluated for use by Paramedics in the prehospital environment. The purpose is to identify trauma patients who can safely be transported to the Emergency Department without the use of a cervical collar, improving comfort for the patient and helping to minimize the need for x-rays. Approximately 400 patients were evaluated by FPS using this tool in 2017. The study will continue until March 2018.

Year in Review • 2017 • Performance Standards

AGENDA ITEM #a)

4

Page 381 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Community Paramedicine

PARAMEDIC MENTAL WELLNESS

Frontenac continued to build its Community Paramedicine program, and expanded the service to include 37 clinics on Wolfe Island and in the County of Frontenac. A total of 378 clients received service at these clinics.

Bill 163, Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act, mandated that employers of first responders submit a PTSD Prevention Plan to the Minister of Labour by April 23, 2017.

Due in large part to the success of their Wellness Clinic pilot projects with the Ministry of Health, FPS also received $109,375 in 2017 for annual funding from the South East LHIN for the continuation and expansion of Community Paramedicine. Additionally, a Community Paramedicine/Education Coordinator position was approved by Council in late 2017. Beginning in 2018, the coordinator will oversee various initiatives and work with McMaster University on a project called “CP @ Clinic” which will see Wellness Clinics set up in subsidized housing buildings within Kingston. Paramedics made 60 direct referrals to Community Care Access Centre in 2017. “I’m writing this letter to you this morning to let you know how grateful **** and I are to you, to NFCS and the Paramedics that attended Tuesday’s Diners at the Kennebec Community Centre.

•

Front-line Paramedics

•

Joint Health and Safety members

•

Peer Support Team representatives

•

FPS Management staff

•

Occupational Health Nurse

•

Human Resources

All Paramedics attended Mental Health Commission of Canada’s, Road to Mental Readiness (R2MR) training in 2017. This is a program designed to improve short-term performance and long-term mental health outcomes, reduce barriers to care and encourage early access to care, and provide the tools and resources required to manage and support employees who may be experiencing a mental illness. Additionally it also aims to assist supervisors in maintaining their own mental health as well as promoting positive mental health in their employees.

The very fact that this was caught, through this pilot program, gives merit to the fact that it was sought out by and implemented by NFCS. Thank you *****, and all of the NFCS staff involved with this program and to the Paramedics who saw **** and gave him the proper guidance. Please use this letter in any way to enhance future programs. With thanks.”

Year in Review • 2017 • Performance Standards

5

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Through his routine monthly check it was determined that **** had A Fib with an irregular and rapid heartbeat. Had this program not been in place, we would never have been aware of this condition until it probably would have been too late or until **** suffered either a stroke or a heart attack. How fortunate for us that God’s guardian angel had a Neon green jacket on and was at Diners on Tuesday.

In order to develop a solid PTSD Prevention Plan Document and regularly assess it to ensure it meets the ongoing needs of the service, FPS formed a multi-discipline Mental Wellness Task Force, consisting of:

Page 382 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

CHANGES TO LEGISLATION As Paramedicine continues to grow and improve, so does our Paramedics scope of practice. With this comes the ongoing training and education to ensure our Paramedics have the tools they need to continue to provide life-saving interventions in the pre-hospital environment. In 2017, Paramedics were trained in the following new and revised standards: Significant changes to the Advanced Life Support Patient Care standards and Certification Standard came into effect on July 17, 2017 with further updates on December 11, 2017

•

The Documentation Standards were updated on April 1, 2017

•

Basic Life Support Patient Care Standards on December 11, 2017 (the first major update since January 2007)

Year in Review • 2017 • Performance Standards

AGENDA ITEM #a)

6

•

Page 383 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #a) 7 Year in Review • 2017 • Performance Standards

Page 384 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Year in Review • 2017 • Performance Standards

8

Page 385 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

NOTE:

City of Kingston

2016 Census Data

Population

Calls per Capita

Kingston

123, 798

0.15

North Frontenac

1,898 0.05

South Frontenac

18,646 0.06

Central Frontenac

4,373 0.11

Frontenac Islands

1,760 0.07

North Frontenac

Central Frontenac

Frontenac Islands

9

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Year in Review • 2017 • Performance Standards

South Frontenac

Page 386 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

401 Incident On March 15, 2017, FPS responded with Leeds and Grenville EMS and several partner first response services to a multi-vehicle, tractor-trailer collision on the 401 involving the spill of a toxic chemical. Severe winter conditions and closures on both the East and West bound lanes created a challenging scene to manage. Due to the diligence and expertise of our staff and partnering services, no employees were injured during this incident. All first responders transported to the hospital were precautionary and proactive in nature.

Over the course of three months, FPS Superintendents consulted front-line medics and other Ontario paramedic services to determine best practice and the appropriate resources needed at a large multipatient event.

Year in Review • 2017 • OPerations

AGENDA ITEM #a)

10

This incident provided many valuable learning opportunities and sparked the review of our Emergency Support Unit (ESU) function and deployment, which is used in large scale calls such as this one.

Page 387 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

The recommendations of this valuable research were as follows: •

Elimination of the large Emergency Support Unit (ESU) and redistribution of its equipment to smaller units.

•

The Duty Superintendent will act as the command and communication hub early in the incident.

•

For events with the potential for large numbers or prolonged scene time, a Ford 350 truck will be available. This vehicle will be equipped with additional shelter, lighting and patient movement equipment, and can also be used daily on the shifts where we have two Superintendents on duty.

•

A Logistics support unit will be deployed, that can transport large volumes of supplies or equipment to either the scene or to Kingston Health Science Centre, as determined by the scene command.

Airport Exercise As part of the Norman Rogers Airport annual exercise, FPS participated in a mock aircraft crash. With the presence of one ambulance crew, a Superintendent and the Deputy Chief of Operations, the scenario brought airport staff, Frontenac Paramedics, Kingston Police and Kingston Fire & Rescue together to work through an accident involving two aircraft and tens of patients.

In conclusion, FPS has reduced their fleet by one vehicle, which in turn decreases operational cost and has improves the functionality of our support vehicles. This new process will be taking effect in mid-2018.

• Kingston Whig Standard, Elliot Ferguson

Year in Review • 2017 • OPerations

11

AGENDA ITEM #a)

“Three paramedics from Frontenac Paramedic Services, four paramedics from Leeds and Grenville Paramedic Services, an off-duty Ottawa paramedic, seven firefighters and three OPP officers were transported to Kingston General Hospital for decontamination, treatment and observation”

Page 388 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Queen’s Homecoming Homecoming is one of Queen’s most important traditions and continues to be one of our busiest events of the year. Once again we up staffed ambulances in anticipation of increased requests for service; we saw a 25% increases in call volume over last year, especially in the University District area. Calls for intoxication began around 09:30 and continued into the evening, which has been a trend over the last few years and has also been observed by KGH and KPF. All local stakeholders are now working with Queen’s in an effort to reduce the impact on the greater community.

Stryker “Back-Up” We are pleased to report that after a full year with the Stryker power load and lift assist stretcher system, there have been only two stretcher related injuries in 2017 which represents 3% of our total injuries. This is down from 25% prior to the new system.

12

Year in Review • 2017 • Operations

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Staff satisfaction with the stretchers remains high and we hear endorsement and appreciation of the investment daily. This system has not only prevented back related injuries, but has also prolonged the careers of our employees.

Page 389 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Community Engagement We were proud to support 40 initiatives in 2017 that promoted community and paramedic well-being, safety, health, education, culture, sport and recreation.

13

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Year in Review • 2017 • Community Engagements

Page 390 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Year in Review • 2017 • Community Engagements

14

Page 391 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

In the News Frontenac Paramedic Services continues to have a strong presence in the media, with coverage in 2017 on multiple events and topics such as the Ontario Ambulance Act revisions, Queen’s University Homecoming Weekend, Fentanyl, participation in a study of vehicle and equipment ergonomics and Community Paramedicine.

15

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Year in Review • 2017 • In The News

Page 392 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Year in Review • 2017 • In The News

16

Page 393 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Recognition & Training Exemplary Service Award We were honoured to recognize Andrea Baker, Julie Socha, Geoff Crawford and Kenny Heintz for their 20 plus years of exemplary service. On Thursday September 28, 2017 they joined 109 Ontario medal recipients that received the Governor General’s Emergency Medical Service Exemplary Service Medal in recognition of their career accomplishments, presented by Major General Richard Rohmer (retired).

Just Culture

Year in Review • 2017 • Recognition & Training

17

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Barry McGrath and Terry Baker were also recognized for their 30 years of service, and were presented with their bars by the Lieutenant Governor at a ceremony at Queen’s Park on October 23, 2017.

We were pleased to once again host a series of training sessions on the Collaborative Culture of Safety, presented by Paul LeSage. The two days included a condensed workshop on mitigating risk, improving performance and limiting errors as well as assisting leaders, to integrate Reliability Management Systems into their organization. Attendees included employees and council members of the County of Frontenac, OPSEU Executive, neighbouring paramedic services, base hospitals, Ministry of Health, Regional Municipality of York, Region of Durham Paramedic Services, and Peel Region.

Page 394 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Program Committee

•

June 26, 2017 – Public Health Inspection Lecture - Kingston Frontenac Lennox & Addington Public Health

The County has an Emergency Management Program Committee and the composition of the Committee was revised in 2017 by a resolution of Council. The CEMC and a senior municipal official must be part of the Committee. The County’s Committee met on March 30th, May 2nd, June 26th and September 5th. The County’s program was reviewed including the Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, Emergency Response Plan, Training, Exercise, Public Awareness and Public Education.

•

July 24, 2017- Social Media and Cyber Risk Management - Frank Cowan

•

July 24, 2017- ESRI/Mapping Demonstration - Jeff Hughes, Kevin Farrell & Charlene Godfrey

•

December 12 &13- Incident Management System 200 - OFMEM & Mark Podgers

Emergency Response Plan: A report regarding proposed changes to the Emergency Response Plan was presented to Council for review and consideration at its regular meeting held December 20, 2017, resulting in the passage of By-law 2017-0048 being a by-law to Adopt an Emergency Management Program and Emergency Response Plan and to Meet Other Requirements Under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.

Training: The following is a list of emergency management training conducted in 2017. All members of the County Emergency Control Group (MECG) as appointed by Council are required to complete a minimum of four hours of training per year. May 8 & 9- Crisis Communications Conference for Emergency Communicators and Partners - Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police

•

June 26, 2017 – Climate Change - Peter Kimbell, Environment Canada

MECG members must participate in an annual exercise, which evaluates the municipal emergency plan and MECG procedures. The purpose of the annual exercise for 2017 was to test the Emergency Response Plan in a simulated widespread health incident. The exercise was held June 26th, and all CCG members were in attendance. In addition to the annual exercise there were two communications exercises conducted by our Emergency Management Communications colleagues in October as part of the Province’s Simulated Emergency Test (SET) which involved communicating with the Provincial Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) in Toronto from the County’s Emergency Operations Center location.

Year in Review • 2017 • Emergency Management

AGENDA ITEM #a)

18

•

Annual Emergency Management Exercise

Page 395 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Public Education A number of public education events were held this year including: •

Emergency Preparedness information and display was placed in the common area of Fairmount Home

•

A Weather Radio raffle was made available to all staff members during the annual Emergency Preparedness Week in May.

•

6 week twitter campaign was run from April until the end of Emergency Preparedness Week

•

A Question & Answer Twitter campaign was run in collaboration with the Limestone District School Board and the Algonquin and Lakeshore Catholic School Board during Emergency Preparedness Week

•

Maintain current emergency management information on the Frontenac County website

•

The Communications Officer provided social media messages on the County’s Twitter feed throughout the year

•

Information on the County Page regarding frozen services, power outages, flooding, well water safety, extreme heat, and winter driving.

Critical Infrastructure The Critical Infrastructure throughout the County was reviewed and updated with the assistance of County and township staff.

Continuity of Operations

Work will continue into 2018 to complete plans for all departments and finalize a County Continuity of Operations Plan that will enhance and compliment the County’s Emergency Management Programme.

Year in Review • 2017 • Emergency Management

19

AGENDA ITEM #a)

The County of Frontenac has initiated the preliminary steps in formulating a Continuity of Operations. The business units within the County have identified their critical functions on the basis of maximum allowable downtime and maximum tolerable period of disruption.

Page 396 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Howe Island Ferry Our purpose at Marine Services is to lead in providing an excellent client experience, and value for money through on-demand service, where staff value their role in the experience.

Howe Island Ferry Facts •

A 24/7/365 service between the mainland and the island

•

Operates 8,760 hours each year

•

18 crew members (9 full-time, 9 part-time/casual) and a supervisor

•

Shore-to-shore crossing takes 6-7 minutes, with 4-6 minutes on either end for embarking and disembarking

•

In 2017, 219,238 vehicles crossed and 23,824 voyages were made, a slight decrease from 2016 due to the ‘Out of Water Inspection’ in November

Howe Island Ferry History The County ferry operation is located at 2 Howe Island Ferry Road in the former Township of Pittsburgh located at the eastern side of Kingston. The Husky exit on the 401 leads directly to the ferry.

This wooden ferry was sold to a Mr. Pickett who moved the ferry to the current location. While under the ownership of Pickett, the ferry was upgraded to a steel hull with engine and carried 3 cars. This three car ferry operated as the Township owned “foot ferry”.

20

In 2004 the Ministry replaced the nine car with a 15 car ferry, The Frontenac- Howe Islander. The ferry is crewed by County of Frontenac employees.

Year in Review • 2017 • Marine Services

AGENDA ITEM #a)

The first ferry to Howe Island was at the “Narrows” on the north side of the island and was owned by a man named Foley.

In the late 60’s Frontenac Management Board purchased the ferry from Pickett and continued to run a ferry service until 1974-5. In 1974-5 the Ministry of Transportation issued a contract to construct a 9 car ferry built by Canada Dredge & Dock at Kingston. This 9-car ferry was owned by the Ministry of Transportation but operated by a Frontenac Management Board crew.

Page 397 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

SERVICE INTERUPTIONS Weather Related Ice, snow, flooding and heavy winds are unfortunately uncontrollable factors in delays for ferry operations, as •

Decks have to be shovelled of snow and ice to protect crew and provide a safe surface for cars to stop

•

Heavy winds can produce waves that roll and pitch the ferry, placing crews and passengers at risk of injury

•

Moving ice floes can impact in delaying the journey

This year, the weather accounted for 123.6 hours of out of service time.

Unscheduled The ferry is a complex system of interwoven electrical, hydraulic and mechanical components that deliver the regular service. Despite best efforts, unfortunately unscheduled maintenance does occur. In 2017, the County ferry was out of service for 21.78 hours due to unplanned mechanical service.

Scheduled

Year in Review • 2017 • Marine Services

21

AGENDA ITEM #a)

2017 was an exception as an additional 16 hours was required to change the ramps to accommodate the Quinte Loyalist during the dry docking coupled with additional minor work required on the Frontenac Howe Islander throughout the year. This was in addition to the 49 hours scheduled maintenance and bunkering, throughout the year.

Page 398 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation 22

For Howe Island Ferry updates, news and alerts: Twitter: @HICountyFerry http://enews.frontenaccounty.ca/

Year in Review • 2017 • Marine Services

AGENDA ITEM #a)

The extensive flooding of the St. Lawrence River in April was unprecedented, with the river cresting 6 cm higher than the record that was set in June 1952. There was also considerable flood damage inflected upon the shorelines of the islands. Despite the high water levels The Frontenac Howe Islander continued to provide uninterrupted service for the residents of Howe Island during this time of crisis, due largely to the exemplary work performed by the County of Frontenac Marine Services and the Ministry of Transportation.

Page 399 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

Staff Certification and Training All crew are certified by Transport Canada Marine Safety for the operation of the Frontenac Howe Islander. To ensure emergency service levels are kept to standard the crew perform regular Lifeboat and Fire drills as mandated by Transport Canada. This training is paramount in the event of an emergency, to ensure that passengers remain safe. Training is usually held at night to minimize interruptions to operations.

Why a Voyage May Take Longer?

1. Cold ambient temperature, as the vessel can encounter slush and ice.
2. Required snow removal aboard the vessel.
3. Waiting for other vessels to pass, as the ferry does not have privileged status over other vessels.
4. Occasionally additional time is required to load vehicles efficiently in order to maximize the 45 MT weight capacity of the ferry.
5. As a curtesy crew will usually drop the ramps to accommodate cars “just over the hill”. The wait time to board this last car does add significantly to the voyage time and reduces the time available for additional trips.
6. Heavy winds slow down the crossing and docking of the vessel.

Strong leadership, mentoring and encouragement along with long serving staff bring a wealth of knowledge and stability to the ferry operations. The County is fortunate to have this stable workforce in the Marine Services Group with several employees obtaining 30 plus years of service. In 2017, we acknowledge Ron Byrne, Joe Rothwell and Paul Norris for their outstanding long service.

Thank you for that.

Written note received from an island resident.

Year in Review • 2017 • Marine Services

23

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Service Recognition

We appreciate you, every single one of you, and what you do to keep us connected to the mainland, getting us to work, to school, to doctor’s appointment on time. You do this every day in all sorts of weather while we sit in our vehicles protected from the environs, and you do this with a smile and greeting.

Page 400 of 420 Services 2017 Year in Review 2018-064 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #a)

AGENDA ITEM #b)

FRONTENAC

IV.

Report 2018-065 Council Information Report To:

Warden and Members of County Council

From:

Kelly J. Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Paul J. Charbonneau, Chief Paramedic/Director

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Emergency and and Transportation Transportation Services Services— – Medical Emergency Medical Tiered Response Program Agreement - Criteria

Recommendation This report is for information purposes only. Background Medical Tiered Response Programs have been in place in this area since the mid-1990s. agreements were developed developed and authorized authorized between local response response agencies agencies These agreements (Township Councils), Councils), Kingston Kingston Central Central Ambulance Ambulance Communications Communications Centre, Centre, (Township Southeastern Ontario Base Hospital Program and the Ministry of Health and Long Term became clear that Medical Tiered Response Care, Emergency Health Services Branch. ItIt became Agreements were part of the the provincial provincial land land ambulance ambulance downloading downloading exercise and the Agreements County of Frontenac was to become a party to the agreements within its jurisdiction. The guiding principles of a medical tiered response program are: •

To ensure the timely availability of resources to safely and efficiently mitigate a life threatening incident; and

•

To deploy adequately trained and equipped personnel to the scene of agreed upon life threatening emergencies.

These principles are supported supported by by Frontenac Frontenac Paramedic Paramedic Services. Services. If the primary agency (Frontenac Paramedic Services) cannot respond within an acceptable dependent upon medical condition, timeframe, dependent upon the the patient’s patient’s medical condition, then a secondary agency should be deployed to ensure the citizen receives appropriate initial medical attention. However, the criteria by which medical tiered response is initiated and the issue of response times for the primary agency must be practical to local concerns.

Page 401 of 420 Services Medical Tiered Response P… 2018-065 Emergency and Transportation

AGENDA ITEM #b)

The County of Frontenac established established its its Medical Medical Tiered Tiered Response Response Program Program in in late late 2007 2007 following passage (2) motions motions by County Council: following passage of these two (2) Motion #114-07 Motion #114-07

Moved by: MayorVanden Vanden Hoek Hoek Moved by: Mayor Seconded by:

Mayor Davison

ResolvedThat Thatthe theCouncil Councilof ofthe theCounty County of of Frontenac Frontenac receive receive this this Emergency Resolved – Medical and Transportation Services — Medical Tiered Tiered Response Response Program report and Clerk to to execute an an agreement agreement with with any any township township authorize the Warden and Clerk within the County that wishes to participate in this program according to the terms outlined in this report. Carried Motion #224-07 Motion #224-07

Moved by: MayorGutowski Gutowski Moved by: Mayor Seconded by:

Mayor Davison

ResolvedThat Thatthe theCouncil Councilof ofthe theCounty County of of Frontenac Frontenac hereby hereby receives the Resolved Emergency & & Transportation Transportation Services — – Medical Emergency Medical Tiered Tiered Response Program with the City of Kingston Kingston report report and and authorize authorize the the Warden Warden and Clerk to execute an agreement with with the the City City of of Kingston Kingston to to participate participate in in this this program according to agreement outlined in this report. the terms outlined Carried initiated between the County, County, which which is Amendments to the current agreements must be initiated and Townships Townships participating participating in a responsible for land ambulance delivery, and the City and issues. ItIt is is an an opportune opportune time to review medical tiered response program due to PHIPA issues. the criteria for for response response as as well well with with the the Fire Fire & & Rescue Services. Comment

The Association Association of of Municipal MunicipalEmergency Emergency Medical Medical Services Services of ofOntario Ontario(AMEMSO), (AMEMSO), now known as the Ontario Association Association of ofParamedic Paramedic Chiefs Chiefs (OAPC) (OAPC) released the document Informing Around Medical Medical Tiered Response In Ontario: Informing The Public Dialogue Around Ontario: An September 2011. Independent Evidence-Based Review in September paper, the the peer-reviewed peer-reviewedscientific scientific literature literature shows shows that only As indicated in the OAPC OAPC paper, slightly more EMS 911 911calls callswould wouldbenefit benefitfrom from cardiac cardiac defibrillation, defibrillation, slightly more than than 2% 2% of EMS cardiopulmonary resuscitation resuscitation (CPR) (CPR) or other time-sensitive interventions offered by firefighters. Despite Despite the the low low actual actual clinical clinical need, urban Ontario fire departments have firefighters. EMS calls, calls, and and some some have have suggested suggested they asked to be sent to to between between 5 and 35% of EMS should respond EMS calls. calls. No Noscientific scientificevidence evidenceexists exists to to support support such should respond to to 100% 100% of EMS levels of response. In this project, project, Performance Performance Concepts Consulting Consulting has has conducted conducted an an evidence-based evidence-based EMS/Fire clinical clinical data sets extracted from examination of of 2010 2010 EMS/Fire from selected selected OAPC OAPC members from across the province.

Information Report to Council and Transportation Transportation Services Services — – Medical Emergency and Medical Tiered Tiered Response Response Program Program Agreement - Criteria May 16, 2018

Page 402 of 420 Services Medical Tiered Response P… 2018-065 Emergency and Transportation

Page 2 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Despite relatively large volumes of Fire tiered responses in the 2010 sample period, the proportion of calls where fire departments deliver patient procedures is small. In the the Peterborough Peterborough example, 93% of the fire small. In department tiered response calls did not involve the delivery of any patient procedures. There There is is no no clinical clinical evidence evidence emerging emerging from the AMEMSO case studies that an expanded scope of fire department tiered medical response would deliver an increase in meaningful fire patient procedures, improve patient outcomes, or provide relief to paramedic workload burdens. burdens.11 Increasing the the number number of of “lights-and-siren” “lights-and-siren” responses Increasing responses in in a a community community carries carries with with itit Although reasonably reasonably rare, rare, fire fire apparatus apparatus response crashes do occur, significant risks. Although and can be catastrophic because of the large size and weight of the pumpers, aerial Unfortunately, the risks of such ladders and elevating platform trucks trucks sent sent to to EMS EMS calls. calls. Unfortunately, crashes are disproportionately born born by by civilians, civilians, not not the the responders responders themselves. themselves. For a community to accept these risks, there would need to be clear scientific evidence of medical benefit from adding fire response to a call where an ambulance was already well on the way. Are all Paramedic Services calls time-sensitive? All calls to 911 are important, particularly particularly to to those those placing placing the the call. call. Fortunately, just as in hospital emergency departments, few EMS 911 calls involve critical illness or injury. Despite this this being being “self-evident” “self-evident” to Despite to those those in in medical medical professions, professions, the the public public position position of of the fire service unions and some of their management often suggest that every EMS call is is a a “life-or-death, “life-or-death, seconds-can-save-a-life” call seconds-can-save-a-life” emergency, emergency, warranting warranting emergency emergency response by whoever is available This promotes unwarranted fear in available in in the the community. community. This the community that death or disability could be avoided if only a fire truck responded in addition to a paramedic ambulance, ambulance, none none of of which which is is supported supported by by fact. fact. In most 911 calls, the arrival of first-aid trained firefighters provides no tangible benefit, other than firefighters’ willingness to help carry the paramedics' paramedics’ equipment back to the waiting the firefighters' ambulance. In fact, 911 calls can be reliably and safely classified and prioritized by dispatch personnel, with response ranging from immediate for the relatively few critical calls to less urgent low priorities for the majority of calls, most of which involve clearly nonToronto and and Niagara Niagara EMS EMS use use the the internationally-accepted Medical emergent patients. Toronto Priority Dispatch System (MPDS), a scripted interview process which highly reliably prioritizes calls based on patient patient problem problem and and incident incident type. type. MPDS is backed by an extensive published scientific literature in peer-reviewed medical journals, and allows most EMS calls to safely forgo police police or or firefighter firefighter response. response. OAPC advocates for the extension of this proven triage tool to all Ontario CACCs to allow for a more careful process of identifying urgent responses.

i.1

Performance Concepts Consulting. (2011). INFORMING INFORMINGTHE THEPUBLIC PUBLIC DIALOGUE DIALOGUE AROUND AROUNDMEDICAL MEDICALTIERED TIERED RESPONSE RESPONSE IN Performance IN ONTARIO, ONTARIO, An IndependentEvidence-Based Evidence-Based Review Independent

Information Report to Council and Transportation Transportation Services Services — – Medical Emergency and Medical Tiered Tiered Response Response Program Program Agreement - Criteria May 16, 2018

Page 403 of 420 Services Medical Tiered Response P… 2018-065 Emergency and Transportation

Page 3 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #b)

Inc. completed completed a study in September 2011 entitled Evaluating Public Abacus Data Inc. 2011 entitled Opinion on EMS Dispatching, A survey of of 1002 1002 Ontarians. Three specific questions Three specific resulted in in the the following following data: asked resulted Paramedics Argument: Paramedics are much better trained to respond to medical emergencies. Therefore, instead of dispatching firefighters to all medical emergencies, more resources should be given to paramedics so they can respond more quickly to emergencies. Firefighters Argument: Firefighters are trained in advanced first aid including CPR and automatic defibrillation. If they are dispatched to all medical emergencies and they are first on the scene, they maybe able to help patients who need medical attention.

Figure 5.0: Which of the following statements, if either, comes closest to your view? (n=1,001, weighted)

■ Paramedics Argument ■ Firefighters Argument ■ Neither

Figure 2.0: In the unfortunate situation that you require emergency medical attention from an emergency responder, would you prefer help from a firefighter or a paramedic? (n=1,001, weighted)

■Firefighter

2

■ Pa romedic

■ Unsure

23

Coletto, D., and Monk, A. (2011). (2011).Evaluating Evaluating Public Public Opinion Opinion on on EMS EMS Dispatching, AA Survey Coletto, Surveyof of1002 1002Ontarians. Ontarians. 20 Sept Sept 2011 2011

3

(2011).Evaluating Evaluating Public Public Opinion Opinion on on EMS EMS Dispatching, 3 Coletto, D., and Monk, A. (2011). Dispatching, A A Survey Surveyof of1002 1002Ontarians. Ontarians. 20 Sept Sept 2011 2011

Information Report to Council and Transportation Transportation Services Services — – Medical Emergency and Medical Tiered Tiered Response Response Program Program Agreement - Criteria May 16, 2018

Page 404 of 420 Services Medical Tiered Response P… 2018-065 Emergency and Transportation

Page 4 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #b)

All parties to the dialogue should engage in meaningful and respectful discussion and advocate for public policy that achieves the following: We need to get the right resources, to the right patient in the time frame that makes a difference. That means that for patients who need immediate airway management or AED that everyone - dispatch, fire and ambulance

• needs to work together to get get resources resources out out there there as as soon soon as as possible. possible. It also means that there is no point sending tiered response to patients who interventions.4 are in no need of time limited interventions.4 In summary, fire services have a role in medical tiered response for time sensitive medical emergencies that they can make a difference i.e. cardiac arrest, airway Fire services services do do not not have have aa role role in non-life threatening medical compromise. Fire Allemergency emergency services services need need to to work work together together to establish effective and emergencies. All efficient tiered response agreements that make the patient the centre focus. Sustainability Implications Good stewardship stewardship of resources and Good of the the County’s County’s resources and most most appropriate appropriate care care of of our our residents residents and visitors when in need of paramedic services. Financial Implications The agreement addresses addresses the the issue issue of of the the exchange exchange of of disposable disposable equipment equipmentonly. only. All other costs for participation in this program by any fire service will be the responsibility of the individual Township or the City of Kingston. Directions for Our Future, under Capacity Building and Governance on page 36, states: “Strong links relationships between between community community and and municipalities." municipalities.” “Strong links ensure ensure seamless seamless relationships contributes to to the the sustainability sustainability indicator indicator— – number This work also contributes number of collaborative projects developed and implemented with two or more municipalities and many outside stakeholders in the primary health care field. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Ontario Association of Paramedic Chiefs (OAPC) Office of the Fire Marshal and Emergency Management (OFMEM) Kingston Central Ambulance Communications Centre (KCACC) City of Kingston Fire & Rescue Services Township of North Frontenac Fire & Rescue Service Township of Central Frontenac Fire & Rescue Service Township of South Frontenac Fire & Rescue Service Township of Frontenac Islands Fire & Rescue Service

4

Jones, Medical Dr. Gordon Jones, Medical Director, Director, Regional Regional Base BaseHospital HospitalProgram Programfor forSoutheastern SoutheasternOntario. Ontario. 2001 2001

Information Report to Council and Transportation Transportation Services Services — – Medical Emergency and Medical Tiered Tiered Response Response Program Program Agreement - Criteria May 16, 2018

Page 405 of 420 Services Medical Tiered Response P… 2018-065 Emergency and Transportation

Page 5 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #c)

FRONTENAC Report 2018-077 Council Information Report To:

Warden and Council

From:

Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer

Prepared by:

Lisa Hirvi, Administrator

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Home — – Quarterly Fairmount Home Quarterly Update Update Activity Activity Report

Recommendation This report is for information purposes only. Background The following information is an update regarding the activities/challenges at Fairmount Home from January 1, 2018 to March 31, 2018 as well as significant updates in April 2018. Comment Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care During the first quarter, there were no complaints logged with the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) and no inspections were conducted. Public Posting of Home Performance Levels MOHLTC developed a comprehensive Long-Term Care Homes Quality Inspection Program Performance Assessment Framework (LPA). Data from multiple sources is compiled to assess the performance of a home in meeting the requirements of the legislation and in providing quality care for residents. The performance levels are as follows: good standing, improvement required, significant improvement required and licence revoked. The performance results will be shared at a point in time and updated “In each quarter. As at December 31, 2017, Fairmount Home has been deemed to be “In Good Standing”, which with Good Standing”, which is is defined defined as as follows: follows: “Acts “Acts to to address address areas areas of of concern concern with provincial standards for resident care and home operations; report incidents and corrects issues issues identified identified in in high high risk risk areas; areas; generally generally manages manages complaints.” complaints.” corrects Outbreaks As previously reported, on January 15, 2018 a respiratory outbreak (Influenza B) was declared, which ended on January 25, 2018. Seven (7) residents and zero (0) staff were

of 420 2018-077 FairmountPage Home 406 Quarterly Update Activity Report

AGENDA ITEM #c)

affected. As these outbreaks were confirmed to be influenza, the staff immunization policy was initiated. Also, a respiratory outbreak was declared on February 17 and declared over on March 9. There were eighteen (18) residents and two (2) staff affected. Thank you to the management and staff who were diligent in managing the outbreak. The legislated reporting was completed to the required Ministries including the Ministry of Health & Long-Term Care (MOHLTC), Ministry of Labour (MOL) as well as Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox & Addington (KFL&A) Public Health. Lighting Replacement As previously reported on May 17, 2017, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Annual Resident Quality Inspection (RQI) included a written notification (WN) and of correction correction (VPC) voluntary plan of (VPC) for for lighting lighting in in the the corridors, corridors, residents’ residents’ ensuite ensuite washrooms and common washrooms. The Manager of Environmental Services, Tom Mercer, has been actively working with Lighting FX to source LED bulbs and fixtures, as well as, with CLEAResult that is contracted by Ontario Hydro to manage and promote energy conservation efforts for rebates (SaveOnEnergy). A request for quotations (RFQ) was issued on May 7, 2018 for the initial phase of the LED retrofit, which includes resident ensuite washrooms and the corridor ceiling lights. The financial implications for the initial phase will be available following the RFQ closing date. The SaveOnEnergy rebate application was approved at $5,400 for the initial phase. The final phase will address the resident rooms, corridor wall lighting and the dining rooms. The financial implications are outstanding at this time. Fairmount’s Fairmount’s 50th Anniversary celebrating its its 50th 50th anniversary this year. The 50th 50th anniversary Fairmount is celebrating anniversary committee has planned a number of events beginning in April for residents, staff and volunteers. On July 26, 2018, there will be a formal event to celebrate the anniversary; details will be shared at a later time. Key Performance Indicators (KPI) The KPIs for 2018 were updated based on the the Frontenac Frontenac County’s County’s KPI KPI data. data. The following are the results for the first quarter ending March 31, 2018: Indicator

Goal

2018 Results

Comment

Customer (Resident) % of Residents Fallen

Below provincial average 15.2% (2017)

2018 Q1 Q1— –N 2018 (2017— – N; (2017 2016 N) 2016 — – N)

Initiatives Initiatives to to improve improveresults results— – gap analysis created; falls prevention brochure; education on hip protectors; identifying medications that increase falls risks

% of Residents Using Restraints

Below provincial average 6% (2017)

2018 Q1 Q1— –N 2018

Initiatives Initiatives to to improve improveresults results— – gap analysis created; developed new guidelines and brochure; brochure in new

Information Report to Council Fairmount Home Home — – Quarterly Fairmount Quarterly Update Update Report Report May 16, 2018

of 420 2018-077 FairmountPage Home 407 Quarterly Update Activity Report

(2017— – N; (2017 2016 N) 2016 — – N)

Page 2 of 3

AGENDA ITEM #c)

Indicator

Goal

2018 Results

Comment admission package; education to residents and families

Resident/Family Satisfaction Survey

95% satisfaction level

2018 — – XX% 2018 XX% (2017 (2017 — – 88%; 88%; 2016 — – 90%) 2016 90%)

2018 survey will be released in Nov-18

Financial Reduce sick time costs

80% of employees meeting the target for absenteeism

Reported by Corporate Services along with other departments’ results results departments'

Process 2018 2018 Q1 Q1— –X (2017 Q4 Q4— – 1; (2017 1' 2016 — – n/a) 2016 n/a)

Long-Term Care Homes Quality Inspection Program Performance Assessment (LPA)

Achieve

Ministry Annual Resident Quality Inspection (RQI)

No Compliance Orders

2018— –0 2018 (2017 (2017— – 0; 2016 — – 0) 2016 0)

RQI conducted in Jan-18

Accreditation Level Awarded

Maintain “Exemplary” level “Exemplary”

No change

Next Accreditation survey Jan19

Level 1 - Good Standing or

Results for 2018 Q1 outstanding

Level 2 Improvement Required

Learning Mandatory training per LTCHA

100% staff trained

2018 — – XX% 2018 )0(% Mandatory training scheduled (2017 — – 100%; (2017 100%; during 2018 2016 — – 97%) 2016 97%)

Sustainability Implications Not applicable Financial Implications For the lighting replacement, the financial implications are outstanding. Organizations, Departments and Individuals Consulted and/or Affected Fairmount Home Management Team Fairmount Staff Frontenac County Staff Residents Volunteers

Information Report to Council Fairmount Home Home — – Quarterly Fairmount Quarterly Update Update Report Report May 16, 2018

of 420 2018-077 FairmountPage Home 408 Quarterly Update Activity Report

Page 3 of 3

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Committee Report To:

Warden and Council Members of the County of Frontenac

From:

Jannette Amini, Manager of Legislative Services/Clerk

Date of meeting:

May 16, 2018

Re:

Community Development Advisory Committee – Report to Council

All items listed on the Community Development Advisory Committee Report shall be the subject of one motion. Any member of County Council may ask for any item(s) included in the Community Development Advisory Committee Report to be separated from that motion and considered separately, whereupon the Community Development Advisory Committee Report without the separated item(s) shall be put to the vote and the separated item(s) shall be considered immediately thereafter. The Community Development Advisory Committee reports and recommends as follows: 1.

2018-073 Community Development Advisory Committee Motorized Vehicles on K&P Trail Be It Resolved That motorized off-road vehicles not be permitted access to the K&P Trail from Bellrock Road to Craig Road as per current policy, And Further That ATV detour signage be established from the Trailhead location through the village of Verona along Road 38 to the K&P Trail intersection at Craig Road; And Further That the County of Frontenac remain open to options for future access from the Verona Street portion of the K&P Trail to Road 38.

PageDevelopment 409 of 420Advisory Committee All items listed … Report of the Community

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee Meeting May 10, 2018 A meeting of the Community Development Advisory Committee was held in the Bud Clayton Memorial Room, County Administrative Office, 2069 Battersea Road, Glenburnie on Thursday, May 10, 2018 at 10:30 a.m. Present: Robert Clinton, Chair Betty Hunter, Vice Chair Barrie Gilbert Tracy John Wilma Kenny Councillor John McDougall, Council Liaison Warden Ron Higgins Regrets: Ella Vanderburgt Staff Present: Richard Allen, Manager of Economic Development Kelly Pender, Chief Administrative Officer Alison Vandervelde, Communications Officer Jannette Amini, Manager of Legislative Services/Clerk (Recording Secretary) 1.

Call to Order

The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m. 2.

Adoption of the Agenda

Moved By: Seconded By:

Warden Higgins Ms. John

That the agenda for the May 10, 2018 meeting of the Community Development Advisory Committee be adopted. Carried 3.

Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof

There were none.

PageDevelopment 410 of 420Advisory Committee All items listed … Report of the Community

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Adoption of Minutes a)

Minutes of Meeting held February 8, 2018

Moved By: Seconded By:

Ms. Kenny Ms. John

That the minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee meeting held February 8, 2018 be adopted. Carried 5.

Deputations and/or Presentations 

Reports to the Community Development Advisory a)

2018-070 Community Development Advisory Committee Ferry by Foot 2018 Implementation Update Report This report is for information purposes only.

Ms. Vandervelde provided an overview of the report and accepted questions from the Committee. With respect to categorizing Big Sandy Bay, it was suggested that the message be that this is a “conservation area” as opposed to a management area however a conservation areas does not permit hunting and hunting is permitted in this area. The wording conservation management was also suggested. It was questioned if the entrance to the beach is being made accessible and are the mobi mats still used to which Mr. Gilbert advised that these mats are not stable and often covered by sand so alternative accessible solutions are being investigated. There is an accessible beach wheelchair available. Ms. Vandervelde advised that, as noted in the report, staff are looking at this as a pilot project to determine demand and this may be reflected next year if there is demand for an accessible bus. Other suggestions were provided to Mr. Gilbert to take back to the Township. Ms. Vandervelde overviewed the cost of this program and where the funds will be coming from, including an $11,000 grant from RTO 9. It was noted that the financials should be reflected in the report. Ms. Vandervelde advised that parking is not being promoted at the ferry dock and the intent is to steer users of the program to one of the many downtown Kingston municipal parking lots.

Community Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes May 10, 2018

PageDevelopment 411 of 420Advisory Committee All items listed … Report of the Community

Page 2 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Ms. Vandervelde also provided a draft of a visitor guide that they are working on for Wolfe Island. b)

2018-071 Community Development Advisory Committee Highway 7 Area Profile Signage This report is for information purposes only.

Ms. Vandervelde provided an overview of the report and accepted questions from the Committee. c)

2018-072 Community Development Advisory Committee Ignite Program Recap and Next Steps This report is for information purposes only.

Ms. Vandervelde provided an overview of the report and accepted questions from the Committee. It was noted that there was a combination of participants at this event including accommodations, festivals, theatre groups, and food services. Regarding the question of if the County is looking to formally partner with this program, Mr. Allen noted that there is accountability built into the program and Ontario Highlands will work directly with the operators. Some initiatives will be from the County and some from Ontario Highlands. This is the fourth time that Ontario Highlands has offered this and they will continue to support this product development. Last week they had a stake holder session which focused on additional training and finding community champions that could act as a train the trainer type idea. They are working with the international organization Destination Think that works on developing these networks in Tourism Destinations worldwide. This information will be provided to Township Economic Development Committees. d)

2018-073 Community Development Advisory Committee Motorized Vehicles on K&P Trail Moved By: Warden Higgins Seconded By: Ms. John Be It Resolved That motorized off-road vehicles not be permitted access to the K&P Trail from Bellrock Road to Craig Road as per current policy, And Further That ATV detour signage be established from the Trailhead location through the village of Verona along Road 38 to the K&P Trail intersection at Craig Road; And Further That the County of Frontenac remain open to options for future access from the Verona Street portion of the K&P Trail to Road 38. Carried Community Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes May 10, 2018

PageDevelopment 412 of 420Advisory Committee All items listed … Report of the Community

Page 3 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Mr. Allen provided an overview of the report noting that many local residents did not want to see ATV’s on the trail so the compromise that is being proposed in the future would be the noted option of Highway 38. This addresses safety concerns expressed by the ATV clubs. Most comments/concerns expressed were around Prince Charles Public School and area homes. The proposed compromise is acceptable by Trans Canada Trail who that provided support via an email earlier today. It was also noted that this is acceptable and supported by the Township of South Frontenac. Future reports and budgeting will need to address the financial implications need to increase security and additional costs for the gates. Mr. Allen will be working on this and this will be dependent on how accessible we make the gates as this is a sloped area. 7.

Communications a)

From Karen A. Fischer, OMAFRA advising of this year’s Teeny Tiny Summit Other Business

Ms. Kenny requested follow up regarding the arts funding request by Jonas Bonnetta. Staff will be bringing this back to the Committee when finalized as it has taken time to coordinate meetings that include the Kingston Arts Council. Mr. Bonnetta and Mr. Allen have discussed options of the Kingston Arts Council playing a role in such a program so once all options are identified, this will come back to the Committee. Staff have also had discussions regarding the Peterborough model and how that works. Ms. Vandervelde provided the committee a quick overview on the success of the Ambassador Networking event that was held recently. Mr. Clinton noted that Cabinscape site recently launched at Frontenac Outfitters. This is the third tiny home accommodation the company has launched in Frontenac. Ms. Vandervelde noted the Frontenac Five initiative by the County that focuses on five events each month that may draw people from outside the region. She suggested to Committee members that if they are aware of anything happening that may fall into this, to please let her know. 9.

Next Meeting The next meeting of the Community Development Advisory Committee is scheduled for August 9, 2018 at 10:30 a.m. at the County Administrative Building.

Community Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes May 10, 2018

PageDevelopment 413 of 420Advisory Committee All items listed … Report of the Community

Page 4 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Adjournment

Moved By: Seconded By:

Mr. Gilbert Mr. Kenny

That the meeting hereby adjourn at 11:27 a.m. Carried

Community Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes May 10, 2018

PageDevelopment 414 of 420Advisory Committee All items listed … Report of the Community

Page 5 of 5

AGENDA ITEM #a)

The Corporation of the County of Frontenac By-Law Number 2018-0020 A By-Law to approve the expropriation of land

Whereas on February 21, 2018, the Corporation of the County of Frontenac as the Expropriating Authority filed with Council as the Approving Authority Applications to Expropriate the following lands located in the County of Frontenac: (a) Part of Lot 9, Concession 11, being Part 1, 13R-21599 in the geographic Township of Olden, now the Township of Central Frontenac, County of Frontenac; and Part of the Road Allowance lying between the Geographic Townships of Oso and Olden (closed by By-laws 1991-12-R5 and 1105- 91), being Part 2, 13R-21599, Township of Central Frontenac, County of Frontenac being part of PIN 36225-0340 (LT) more particularly described as Parts 1 & 2 as illustrated on the draft Expropriation Plan attached as Appendix “A” hereto; (b) Part Lot 30, Concession 1, geographic Township of Bedford, now the Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac; being part of PIN 36238- 0293 (R), more particularly described as Parts 1, 2 & 3 as illustrated on the draft Expropriation Plan attached as Appendix “B” hereto; and (c) Lot 3, Concession 1, being Parts 2 & 3, 13R-21594 in the geographic Township of Oso, now the Township of Central Frontenac, County of Frontenac; being part of PIN 36237-0158 (LT) ), more particularly described as Parts 1 & 2 as illustrated on the draft Expropriation Plan attached as Appendix “C” hereto. (the “Lands”) And Whereas Notices of Application for Approval to Expropriate Land were served by registered mail on the registered owners of the Lands and published on April 19, 2018; April 26, 2018; and May 3, 2018, in The Frontenac News, being a newspaper with general circulation in the vicinity of the lands, all of which was in accordance with the requirement of the Expropriations Act; And Whereas, no request for hearing of necessity has been filed; And Whereas Council has determined that it is necessary and appropriate to approve the Applications to Expropriate the Lands for the purpose of linking two sections of the Frontenac K&P Trail and thereby ensuring its continued long-term viability as a public trail within the Frontenac County Trail System in accordance with the County of Frontenac Trails Master Plan Now Therefore Be It Resolved That:

1. For those reasons hereinbefore set out, Council hereby approves without modification the expropriation by The Corporation of the County of Frontenac of the following lands located in the County of Frontenac:

Page 415 of 420 To a pprove the expropriation of lands [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0020]

AGENDA ITEM #a)

(a) Part of Lot 9, Concession 11, being Part 1, 13R-21599 in the geographic Township of Olden, now the Township of Central Frontenac, County of Frontenac; and Part of the Road Allowance lying between the Geographic Townships of Oso and Olden (closed by By-laws 1991-12-R5 and 1105- 91), being Part 2, 13R-21599, Township of Central Frontenac, County of Frontenac being part of PIN 36225-0340 (LT) more particularly described as Parts 1 & 2 as illustrated on the draft Expropriation Plan attached as Appendix “A” hereto; (b) Part Lot 30, Concession 1, geographic Township of Bedford, now the Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac; being part of PIN 36238- 0293 (R), more particularly described as Parts 1, 2 & 3 as illustrated on the draft Expropriation Plan attached as Appendix “B” hereto; and (c) Lot 3, Concession 1, being Parts 2 & 3, 13R-21594 in the geographic Township of Oso, now the Township of Central Frontenac, County of Frontenac; being part of PIN 36237-0158 (LT) ), more particularly described as Parts 1 & 2 as illustrated on the draft Expropriation Plan attached as Appendix “C” hereto. (the “Lands”) 2. The County Clerk is hereby directed to cause a certified copy of this by-law setting out this decision of Council and the reasons therefor to be served on all the parties in accordance with section 8(2) of the Expropriations Act. 3. The Warden and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the Certificate(s) of Approval and the Expropriation Certificate(s) set out on the draft Expropriation Plan(s) attached as Appendices A, B & C hereto. 4. The County Clerk is hereby directed to cause the Expropriation Plan(s) to be registered in the proper Land Registry Office within three (3) months after the granting of this approval and thereby effect the expropriation of the Lands, which shall then vest in The Corporation of the County of Frontenac. 5. The County Clerk is hereby further authorized to deliver Notices of Possession, Notices of Expropriation, Notices of Election and Offers and Appraisal Reports in accordance with Section 25 of the Expropriations Act, as amended, and to do all other things and give all other notices as may be required by the said Act. 6. The Corporation of the County of Frontenac is hereby authorized to enter and take possession of the Lands on the day permitted under the Expropriations Act, as amended, or pursuant to any court order thereunder, or pursuant to any agreement entered into between the relevant owners and the municipality. 7. This By-Law shall come into force and take effect on the day it is passed.

By-Law Number 2018-0020 - to approve the expropriation of land May 16, 2018

Page 416 of 420 To a pprove the expropriation of lands [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0020]

Page 2 of 3

AGENDA ITEM #a)

Read a First and Second Time this 16th day of May, 2018. Read a Third Time, Signed, Sealed and Finally Passed this 16th day of May, 2018.

The Corporation of the County of Frontenac

Ron Higgins, Warden

Jannette Amini, Clerk

By-Law Number 2018-0020 - to approve the expropriation of land May 16, 2018

Page 417 of 420 To a pprove the expropriation of lands [Proposed By-law No. 2018-0020]

Page 3 of 3

AGENDA ITEM #b)

By-Law Number 2018-0021 of The Corporation of the County of Frontenac being a by-law to Authorize the Execution of an Agreement with the Township of Central Frontenac to transfer the 2018 Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund allocation in the amount of $50,000 for the purposes of completing infrastructure improvements on Hampton and Tryon Roads.

Whereas the Province of Ontario provides grants through the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund; and, Whereas the County of Frontenac received an Allocation Notice showing the Ontario Community Infrastructure funding for three years; and, Whereas the Ontario Community Infrastructure Funding permits the recipient to transfer its yearly allocation to another recipient in the furtherance of a joint project, provided the Recipient and other recipients have an agreement in place governing the joint project, including how the joint project is being funded. Now Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the Corporation of the County of Frontenac enacts as follows: 1.

That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to enter into an agreement with the Township of Central Frontenac to transfer the 2018 Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund allocation in the amount of $50,000 for the purposes of completing infrastructure improvements on Hampton and Tryon Roads.

That this By-law shall come into force and take effect upon the date of final passing.

Read a First and Second Time this 16th day of May, 2018. Read a Third Time, Signed, Sealed and Finally Passed this 16th day of May, 2018. The Corporation of the County of Frontenac

Ron Higgins, Warden

Jannette Amini, Clerk

Page of 418 420 To Authorize the Execution an of Agreement with the Township of Central …

AGENDA ITEM #c)

By-Law No. 2018-0022 of The Corporation of the County OF Frontenac being a by-law to confirm all actions and proceedings of County Council on May 16, 2018

Whereas Section 8 of the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c.25 and amendments thereto provides that a municipality has the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person for the purpose of exercising its authority under the Municipal Act or any other Act; and; Whereas Subsection 2 of Section 11 of the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c.25 and amendments thereto provides that a lower-tier municipality and an upper-tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting matters within the spheres of jurisdiction described in the Table to Subsection 2 subject to certain provisions, and; Whereas Section 5 of the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c. 25 and amendments thereto provides that a municipal power, including a municipality’s capacity, rights, powers and privileges under Section 8 shall be exercised by its council and by by-law unless the municipality is specifically authorized to do otherwise; and; Whereas the Council of the County of Frontenac deems it expedient to confirm its actions and proceedings; Now Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the Corporation of the County of Frontenac hereby enacts as follows:

1. That all actions and proceedings of the Council of the County of Frontenac taken at its regular meeting held on May 16, 2018 be confirmed as actions for which the municipality has the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person.
2. That all actions and proceedings of the Council of the County of Frontenac taken at its regular meeting held on May 16, 2018 be confirmed as being matters within the spheres of jurisdiction described in Subsection 2 of Section 11 of the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c.25 and amendments thereto.
3. That all actions and proceedings of the Council of the Corporation of the County of Frontenac taken at its regular meeting held on May 16, 2018 except those taken by by-law and those required by by-law to be done by resolution are hereby sanctioned, ratified and confirmed as though set out within and forming part of this by-law.

Page 419 of 420 Confirmation of Proceedings

AGENDA ITEM #c)

4. That this by-law shall come into force and take effect as of the final passing thereof. Read a First and Second Time this 16th day of May 2018. Read a Third Time and Finally Passed, Signed and Sealed this 16th day of May 2018.

The Corporation of the County Of Frontenac

Ron Higgins, Warden

Jannette Amini, Clerk

By-Law No. 2018-0022 – To Confirm all Actions and Proceedings of County Council May 16, 2018

Page 420 of 420 Confirmation of Proceedings

Page 2 of 2

Help support independent journalism

If NFNM’s reporting matters to you, Buy Me a Coffee is a simple way to help keep local watchdog coverage going.