Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 21, 2016 - Council THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MUNICIPAL OFFICE 9344 Plank Road, Straffordville, ON Council Chambers Thursday, July 21, 2016 7:00 p.m. 6:30 p.m. — Committee of Adjustment - Murray 7:30 p.m. — Public Meeting — Planning/Zoning — 1162291 Ontario Ltd. (Vantyghem) — 1926662 Ontario Inc. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST & THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF 3. REVIEW OF ITEMS NOT LISTED ON AGENDA 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS 5. DELEGATIONS A. 7:05 p.m. —Jennifer Beauchamp, Museum Curator re Museum Activities 6. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S) A. Regular Meeting of Council held June 16, 2016 B. Special Meeting held July 7, 2016 7. MOTIONS AND NOTICE OF MOTION 8. RECREATION, CULTURE, TOURISM AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8.1 Correspondence 8.1.1 Receive for Information 8.1.2 Requiring Action 8.2 Reports to Council 9. PHYSICAL SERVICES — EMERGENCY SERVICES 9.1 Correspondence 9.1.1 Receive for Information 9.1.2 Requiring Action 9.2 Reports to Council A. Report FR-03/16 by Randy White, Fire Chief/By-Law Officer re iPads 10. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES — SUSTAINABILITY AND CONSERVATION 10.1 Correspondence 2016 Council Agenda July 21, 2016 10.1.1 Receive for Information A. Notice of Public Meeting re Proposed Minor Variance (Murray) B. Notice of Removal of Holding Symbol (M. Szorenyi) C. Notice of Public Meeting re 1162291 Ontario Ltd. (Vantyghem) Zoning By-law amendment D. Notice of Public Meeting re 1926662 Ontario Inc. Zoning By-law amendment 10.1.2 Requiring Action 10.2 Reports to Council A. Report DS-30/16 by Bill Knifton, Chief Building Official, Drainage Superintendent re 2nd Quarter Report B. Report DS-29/16 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator re Consent Application E44/16 C. Report DS-31/16 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator re Subdivision Agreement and Rezoning to Remove Holding D. Report DS-32/16 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator re Rezoning Application — 1162291 Ontario Ltd. E. Report DS-33/16 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator re Rezoning Application — 1926662 Ontario Inc. 11. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 11.1 Correspondence 11.1.1 Receive for Information A. Healthy Communities Partnership minutes of meeting held March 30, 2016 and June 21, 2016 B. Elgin County re Project Screening Report— Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna C. Petition to the Government of Canada re 1501" Anniversary of Confederation D. Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration & International Trade, Ministry of Tourism, Culture & Sport re Ontario 150 Celebration Youth Partnership & Capital Grant Program Information Sessions E. Ministry of Infrastructure correspondence to Jeff Yurek, MPP re Bayham's infrastructure needs and future funding program considerations F. Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Ministry of Housing re Proposed amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 G. Township of Southwold correspondence to Medical Officer of Health re Rural Well Water Sample Drop off Locations 2016 Council Agenda July 21, 2016 H. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Re Changes to MPAC's Notice Mailing Schedule I. Jeff Yurek, MPP, Elgin-Middlesex-London re Clean Water& Wastewater Fund J. Perth County resolution re Climate Change Action Plan K. City or Quinte West re Taxation — Impact on Campgrounds 11.1.2 Requiring Action A. Matthew Chapman re unopened road allowance between 7 Oak Street and 11 Oak Street B. Elgin County re Proposed Woodlands Clearing on Lot 13, Concession 4 C. Bayham Beachfest Notification of Special Event and Application for Outdoor Special Occasion Permit D. Peter Friesen request for street light E. Straffordville Giants request to use Straffordville Ball Park and Pavilion 11.2 Reports to Council A. Report TR-19/16 by Lorne James, Treasurer re 2016 Q2 Variance Report B. Report CAO-44/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Small Craft Harbours (SCH) — Harbour Lands Divestiture C. Report CAO-45/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Unopened Road Allowance — Harmony Acres Line D. Report CAO-46/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Sandytown Road E. Report CAO-47/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Ontario 150 Fund F. Report CAO-48/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Rates & Fees By-Law G. Report CAO-49/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re East Beach Design Consultation Results H. Report CAO-50/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Enabling Accessibility Fund I. Report CAO-51/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Museums Bayham — Edison Museum 12. BY-LAWS A. By-Law Z649-2016 Being a By-law to further amend Zoning By-law Z456-2003 (11622914 Ontario Ltd.) 2016 Council Agenda July 21, 2016 B. By-Law Z650-2016 Being a By-law to further amend Zoning By-law Z456-2003 (1926662 Ontario Inc.) C. By-Law Z651-2016 Being a By-law to further amend Zoning By-law Z456-2003 (Szorenyi) D. By-Law 2016-055 Being a By-law to adopt a Flag Protocol Policy E. By-Law 2016-056 Being a By-law to adopt a Proclamation — Declaration — Donation Policy F. By-Law 2016-057 Being a By-law to adopt Schedules `A' — `H' for the Management, Regulation & Control of Cemeteries G. By-Law 2016-058 Being a By-law to repeal The Corporation of The Municipality of Bayham By-law 2014-082 H. By-Law 2016-060 Being a By-law to assume and establish lands in the Municipality of Bayham as part of the open public highway system (Peters Court) I. By-Law 2016-064 Being a By-law to authorize the execution of a development agreement (Murray) J. By-Law 2016-065 Being a By-law to authorize the signing of a subdivision agreement (Szorenyi) K. By-Law 2016-066 Being a By-law to appoint BluMetric Environmental Inc. Risk Management Official and Risk Management Inspector 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 14. OTHER BUSINESS 14.1 Discussion A. East Beach Washrooms B. Straffordville Community Centre Basement Ceiling Finish Change Order 14.2 Committee of the Whole 14.2.1 In Camera A. Confidential item regarding proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board (Eden community Centre) B. Confidential item regarding proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board (31 Elizabeth Street) 2016 Council Agenda July 21, 2016 14.2.2 Out of Camera 15. BY-LAW TO CONFIRM THE PROCEEDINGS OF COUNCIL A. By-Law 2016-067 Being a By-law to confirm all actions of Council 16. ADJOURNMENT ,,Over Hayha Gateway to Er.ic'a Sban Museums Bayham July 212016 Council Presentation *ever 13ayh, iGaLmay to Eric's 56OTC • Good Evening Members of Council and guests. • My name is Jennifer Beauchamp and I have the privilege of being the curator for the summer at the Port Burwell Marine Museum and the Edison House in Vienna . • When I began in May, there were several key projects that had priority over the others. The first was to prepare an exhibit of Edison material in the Bayham's Family Restaurant back room before the June 4tn Edison Fest. The second was to update the entryway of the Marine Museum, which still advertised last season's activities. The ongoing project was to bring a new look to the Marine Museum's exhibits. Edison House • With the help of Bayham staff and the three summer students, the first two objectives were met. The back room, called "Edison and Bayham History on Display", was transformed from an empty room to one filled with an assortment of gramophones, furniture, exhibit cases, and smaller artifacts. This became the exhibit space now enjoyed by visitors and restaurant patrons. "EDISON & 'BAYHAM KWORY ON DISPLAY u h :i Arrival of the artifacts Readyforset- up ,w _Nlmx� I r y i � 1 I P' 1 fb . �� - �• - � -r - - - - _.r .� � 1� � I _ ,eon — - }.r Mwaft �,I i1 I IF -SAW` _ i_ r � � .... g i • Visitor response has been very favourable. The visitor book, signed by only a percentage, shows over 100 signatures and contains many flattering comments about the exhibit. When I drop into check how the exhibit is standing up to the attention, have been able to speak to people in the room and they are all pleasantly surprised to learn about Edison's connection to Vienna and to find a collection like this in a small town . • While this project was going on, the entryway panel of the Marine Museum was stripped, painted, and staged with a new theme, that of shipwrecks in the Long Point area . It has been well received . 1 r EMT-' � 1 low �A =2 C)I. Job WI-M Ila • Once the initial frenzy of activity was over - Edison Fest came and went, the focus was turned to the Marine Museum . With the entryway panel done, it was time to look more closely at the exhibits and determine how to inject a shot of adrenaline to these displays. • I met with the Museums Bayham Board to discuss what could be done and what ideas they might have. It was decided that change was the order of the day and so it began . • I had already begun to reorganize several areas to make them function better, but now I had a green light to make bigger changes. • To start with, the children's area has been updated to include four hands-on activities with a marine theme. r :d - • The local history area is now in one location . • Shipbuilding artifacts have been clustered together. • On the wharf, the number of artifacts have been reduced so the wharf can be interpreted as a place where people arrived . -.r w rT � 10, • The area exhibiting shipwrecks continues to receive more of the shipwreck material that is scattered throughout the museum . This has been made possible because the shipbuilding material left. • The lighthouse keeper exhibit case now has some of the lighthouse artifacts beside it. Py�9A1 / /{y,T; I r E f; i y 1 w • The Ojibwa information has been cleared away, opening that area for use as the current events board and special activity area . The radar artifacts are grouped together, clearing space around the Ashtabula . • And the Ashtabula . One of the most prominent exhibits in the building deserves to have a more complete story of its impact on the area . That is an ongoing project. • I am looking into several opportunities for the museums. One is to apply for an exhibit case at the Ontario Legislative Building when the next call for applicants comes out in Nov. These calls offer Ontario museums an opportunity to showcase their collection for three months in the public area of the building. ;_ • Another is to look at grant opportunities. One mentioned is through the Canadian Conservation Institute, offering conservation on an artifact. Another is an accessibility grant, which would allow the front entrance to be modified to become an enclosed handicap accessible entryway. • Finally, I would like to develop an educational program to offer to the local schools should we be able to entice them to the Marine Museum . • Thank you for your time this evening. Are there any questions about the museums and the work going on in them ? THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MUNICIPAL OFFICE 9344 Plank Road, Straffordville, ON Council Chambers Thursday, June 16, 2016 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: MAYOR PAULENS DEPUTY MAYOR TOM SOUTHWICK COUNCILLORS WAYNE CASIER RANDY BREYER ED KETCHABAW STAFF PRESENT: CAO PAUL SHIPWAY DEPUTY CLERK/PLANNING COORDINATOR MARGARET UNDERHILL CLERK'S ASSISTANT BRENDA GIBBONS 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Ens called the meeting to order at 7:00. 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST & THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF No disclosures of pecuniary interest were declared. 3. REVIEW OF ITEMS NOT LISTED ON AGENDA A. Report CAO-43/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re PW-3 — Maple Grove Line added as Item 11.2-D 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Mayor Ens announced that the Corinth Pavilion is nearly completed with the exception of signage and cleanup of a dirt pile. B. Mayor Ens announced work on the Straffordville Community Centre is well underway. He and Councillor Casier attended the building last week and noted many changes are evident. 5. DELEGATIONS 6. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S) A. Regular Meeting of Council held June 2, 2016 Moved by: Councillor Ketchabaw Seconded by: Councillor Casier THAT the minutes of the regular meeting held June 2, 2016 be adopted. CARRIED 2016 Council Minutes June 16, 2016 7. MOTIONS AND NOTICE OF MOTION 8. RECREATION, CULTURE, TOURISM AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8.1 Correspondence 8.1.1 Receive for Information 8.1.2 Requiring Action 8.2 Reports to Council 9. PHYSICAL SERVICES — EMERGENCY SERVICES 9.1 Correspondence 9.1.1 Receive for Information 9.1.2 Requiring Action 9.2 Reports to Council A. Report PS-05/16 by Ed Roloson, Water/Wastewater Operations Manager re Source Water Protection Plan Implementation Services Moved by: Deputy Mayor Southwick Seconded by: Councillor Breyer THAT Report PS-05/16 re Source Water Protection Plan Implementation Services be received for information; AND THAT Council direct staff to bring forward a by-law, for Council consideration, to sole- source and enter into an agreement with BluMetric Environmental Inc. in the amount of $26,505+HST for Source Water Protection Plan Implementation Services. CARRIED 10. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES —SUSTAINABILITY AND CONSERVATION 10.1 Correspondence 10.1.1 Receive for Information 10.1.2 Requiring Action 10.2 Reports to Council A. Report DS-25/16 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator re Site Plan Agreement— New Hope Baptist Church Moved by: Councillor Ketchabaw Seconded by: Deputy Mayor Southwick THAT Report DS-25/16 regarding the New Hope Baptist Church site plan agreement be received; AND THAT By-law No. 2016-053 being a By-law to authorize the execution of a Site Plan Agreement between New Hope Baptist Church and the Municipality of Bayham for development at the property known as 57272 Talbot Line be presented for enactment. CARRIED 2016 Council Minutes June 16, 2016 B. Report DS-26/16 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator re Encroachment Agreement— Insurance Liability Moved by: Councillor Breyer Seconded by: Councillor Casier THAT Report DS-26/16 regarding Nikolic Encroachment Agreement is received; AND THAT the liability insurance coverage required as per the Encroachment Agreement passed on May 7, 2015 remains as approved in the amount of 2 million dollars ($2,000,000). CARRIED 11. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 11.1 Correspondence 11.1.1 Receive for Information A. Municipality of Bayham 2017 Budget Consultation Notice B. Port Burwell Master Drainage Study Notice of Public Information Centre C. Elgin County re Periscope Playhouse Approved For Elgincentives Grant D. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing News Release re Municipal Elections E. Long Point Region Conservation Authority Minutes of meeting held May 4, 2016 F. Ontario Provincial Police re 2016 initiatives, Municipal Policing Bureau projects and New Report Related to Current Billable Calls for Service. G. Ministry of Natural Resources re Notification of Environmental Registry Posting of Proposed Wildland Fire Risk Assessment and Mitigation H. Town of Amherstburg re Autism Spectrum Disorder I. Township of South-West Oxford re ROMA/OGRA Conference J. City of Ottawa re Municipal Role in the Siting of Wind Power Projects Moved by: Deputy Mayor Southwick Seconded by: Councillor Casier THAT correspondence items 11.1.1-A— 11.1.1-J be received for information. CARRIED 2016 Council Minutes June 16, 2016 11.1.2 Requiring Action A. Straffordville Hall Committee request re Community Yard Sale Fundraiser Moved by: Councillor Casier Seconded by: Deputy Mayor Southwick THAT correspondence from Straffordville Hall Committee be received for information; AND THAT the Council of the Municipality of Bayham grants permission for; I. use of the Straffordville Community Centre parking lot for a Community Yard Sale Fundraiser on Saturday, August 20, 2016 from approximately 7:30 a.m. —4:00 p.m. subject to proof of liability insurance coverage, naming the Municipality of Bayham as an additional insured in the amount of$2,000,000; II. use of four picnic tables from the pavilion; III. access to the hydro panel, pending a $20.00 refundable key deposit; IV. posting advertising flyer on municipal website; AND THAT it is understood that a portion of the parking lot may be in use for construction purposes; AND THAT cleanup of the area be the responsibility of the users; CARRIED 11.2 Reports to Council A. Report CAO-38/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Straffordville Community Centre Operating Agreement— Draft Moved by: Councilor Ketchabaw Seconded by: Councillor Casier THAT Report CAO-38/16 re Straffordville Community Centre Operating Agreement - Draft be received for information; AND THAT Council direct staff to bring forward a By-law to repeal By-law No. 2014-082 for Council consideration. AND THAT Council provide the draft Straffordville Community Centre Operating Agreement to the Straffordville Community Centre Committee for review and comment; AND THAT Staff comment on proposed revisions and report back to Council for consideration. CARRIED 2016 Council Minutes June 16, 2016 B. Report CAO-41/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re East Beach Design Considerations Moved by: Deputy Mayor Southwick Seconded by: Councillor Breyer THAT Report CAO-41/16 re East Beach Design Considerations be received for information; AND THAT Council direct staff to post an East Beach Consultation as contemplated within Report CAO 41/16 and report back to Council July 21, 2016; AND THAT a Public Information Session be held June 30, 2016 from 7:00—8:00 p.m. at the Port Burwell Fire Hall. CARRIED C. Report CAO-42/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re Procedural Protocals Moved by: Deputy Mayor Southwick Seconded by: Councillor Casier THAT Report CAO-42/16 re Procedural Protocols be received for information; AND THAT staff be directed to bring forward a by-law for Council consideration to adopt a Flag Protocol Policy and a Proclamation, Declaration & Donation Policy. CARRIED D. Report CAO-43/16 by Paul Shipway, CAO re PW-3 — Maple Grove Line Moved by: Councillor Casier Seconded by: Councillor Ketchabaw THAT Report CAO-43/16 re PW-3— Maple Grove Line be received for information; AND THAT Council direct staff to utilize the Gas Tax Reserve to procure and install culverts on Maple Grove Line in 2016; AND THAT the Gas Tax Reserve be refunded with the 2017 Maple Grove Line Capital project allocation. CARRIED 12. BY-LAWS A. By-Law 2016-052 Being a By-law to authorize the execution of an agreement between the Municipality of Bayham and BluMetric Environmental Inc. for provision of Source Water Protection Plan Implementation Services B. By-Law 2016-053 Being a By-law to authorize the execution of a site plan agreement between the Municipality of Bayham and New Hope Baptist Church 2016 Council Minutes June 16, 2016 Moved by: Councillor Ketchabaw Seconded by: Councillor Breyer THAT By-Laws 2016-052 and 2016-053 be read a first, second and third time and finally passed. CARRIED 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 14. OTHER BUSINESS A. Councillor Casier opened discussion regarding the Notice from the Elgin St. Thomas Public Health Unit that water testing samples would no longer being picked up at the Municipal Office. Moved by: Councillor Casier Seconded by: Councillor Ketchabaw WHEREAS Public Health Unit funding formulas are dictated by the Health Protection and Promotion Act. R.S.O. 1990, Chapter H.7 and subsidiary agreements; AND WHEREAS the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care has authority over Public Health Units; AND WHEREAS the Elgin St. Thomas Public Health Unit eliminated rural well water sample drop-off locations as a result of cost cutting measures as the service is not mandated; AND WHEREAS the Province of Ontario, through various legislation, has made access to safe drinking water a matter of critical importance; AND WHEREAS eliminating rural well water sample drop-off locations for rural well water sampling has the possibility to limit or eliminate rural resident's access to truly clean drinking water; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham call upon the Elgin St. Thomas Public Health Unit to reconsider the decision to eliminate rural well water sample drop-off locations; AND THAT the Elgin St. Thomas Public Health Unit conduct a formal Request for Proposals (RFP) process to obtain competitive pricing for the rural well water sample drop- off location courier service; AND THAT the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care re-evaluate its funding formulas to reconsider the funding reduction impact on rural communities; AND THAT a copy of this resolution be circulated to the Councils of Elgin County and all member municipalities for support. 2016 Council Minutes June 16, 2016 AND THAT a copy of this resolution be sent to Dr. Joyce Lock, Medical Officer of Health and the Honourable Mr. Eric Hoskins - Minister of Health and Long-Term Care seeking action on the issue of rural access to safe drinking water. CARRIED B. Councillor Breyer questioned the method of notification regarding the Boil Water Notice recently issued by the Elgin St. Thomas Health Unit. Council recessed for a short break at 7:50 p.m. and reconvened at 8:04 p.m. 14.1 In Camera Moved by: Deputy Mayor Southwick Seconded by: Councillor Breyer THAT the Council do now rise to enter into an "In Camera" Session of Committee of the Whole at 8:04 p.m. to discuss: • proposed or pending acquisitions or dispositions of land by the municipality or local board • litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board CARRIED A. Confidential item regarding proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board (Harbour Lands Divestiture) B. Confidential item regarding proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board (31 Elizabeth Street) C. Confidential item regarding litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board (Project Ojibwa) 14.2 Out of Camera Moved by: Councillor Ketchabaw Seconded by: Councillor Casier THAT the Committee of the Whole do now rise from the "In Camera" session at 9:25 p.m. with progress to report. CARRIED Moved by: Councillor Breyer Seconded by: Deputy Mayor Southwick THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham direct staff to submit a request to the Port Burwell Provincial Park for a permanent easement over Part 1 and Part 2 of Plan 11 R990, as required, to provide access to the West Pier Boardwalk; 2016 Council Minutes June 16, 2016 AND THAT staff be directed to post a historical overview report, and relevant studies, of the federal harbour divestiture process; AND THAT the staff report and relevant studies be posted on the Municipal Website under 'Studies' when prepared; AND THAT the historical overview report be within the July 21, 2016 Council Agenda for information purposes CARRIED 15. BY-LAW TO CONFIRM THE PROCEEDINGS OF COUNCIL A. By-Law 2016-054 Being a By-law to confirm all actions of Council Moved by: Deputy Mayor Southwick Seconded by: Councillor Casier THAT confirming By-Law 2016-054 be read a first, second and third time and finally passed. CARRIED 16 ADJOURNMENT Moved by: Councillor Breyer Seconded by: Deputy Mayor Southwick THAT the Council meeting be adjourned at 9:30 p.m. CARRIED MAYOR CLERK THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES MUNICIPAL OFFICE 9344 Plank Road, Straffordville, ON Council Chambers Thursday, July 7, 2016 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: DEPUTY MAYOR TOM SOUTHWICK COUNCILLORS RANDY BREYER ED KETCHABAW STAFF PRESENT: DEPUTY CLERK/PLANNING COORDINATOR MARGARET UNDERHILL CLERK'S ASSISTANT BRENDA GIBBONS 1. CALLTO ORDER Deputy Mayor Southwick called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST &THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF No disclosures of pecuniary interest were declared. 3. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES —SUSTAINABILITY AND CONSERVATION 3.1 Reports to Council A. Report DS-27/16 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator re Road Use Agreement and Site Plan Agreement— 1926662 Ontario Inc. Moved by: Councillor Ketchabaw Seconded by: Councillor Breyer THAT Report DS-27/16 regarding the 1926662 Ontario Inc. road use agreement and site plan agreement as amended be received; AND THAT By-law No. 2016-061 being a by-law to authorize the execution of a road use agreement as amended between the Municipality of Bayham and 1926662 Ontario Inc. be presented for enactment; AND THAT By-law No. 2016-062 being a By-law to authorize the execution of a Site Plan Agreement as amended between 1926662 Ontario Inc. and the Municipality of Bayham for development at the property known as 57475 Pressey Road (accessing Clearview Drive) be presented for enactment. CARRIED 2016 Council Minutes July 7, 2016 4. BY-LAW A. By-Law 2016-061 Being a By-law to authorize the execution of a road use agreement B. By-Law 2016-062 Being a By-law to authorize the execution of a site plan agreement Moved by: Councillor Breyer Seconded by: Councillor Ketchabaw THAT By-Laws 2016-061 as amended and 2016-062 as amended be read a first, second and third time and finally passed. CARRIED 5. BY-LAW TO CONFIRM THE PROCEEDINGS OF COUNCIL A. By-Law 2016-063 Being a by-law to confirm all actions of Council Moved by: Councillor Ketchabaw Seconded by: Councillor Breyer THAT confirming By-Law 2016-063 be read a first, second and third time and finally passed. CARRIED 6. ADJOURNMENT Moved by: Councillor Breyer Seconded by: Councillor Ketchabaw THAT the Council meeting be adjourned at 6:10 p.m. CARRIED MAYOR CLERK -g,AY REPORT FIRE DEPARTMENT i'tunity Is TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Randy White, Fire Chief/By-law Officer DATE: July 21 2016 REPORT: FR-03/16 FILE NO. C07 SUBJECT: iPads BACKGROUND: Recent advances in wireless technologies has resulted in opportunities for fire and emergency services to utilize innovative methods of information management that can result in improved efficiencies, enhance operational effectiveness, and increase the level of safety of both responders and those living or working in the Municipality of Bayham. One of the prime technologies is in the plethora of applications (apps) capable of running on mobile devices. Apple's iPads are a prime example. This is an inexpensive device with better graphics and more horsepower than desktop computers had a decade ago and are available for a multitude of mobile uses. Traditional mobile installations in fire apparatus utilize ruggedized laptops. They are almost indestructible but cost upward of$10,000. Bayham Fire currently employs an internet based software package called 'iamresponding'. Desktop computers at each station in conjunction with apps on mobile phones are networked with the dispatch centre in Tillsonburg. Emergency pages are texted out to phones and firefighters can indicate they are responding, if they're going direct or to the station, and how long they will be. In addition, calls are mapped in the app and the same map provides information on water sources, hazards, or any other information we add. DISCUSSION: Installing iPads in selected apparatus would allow for the following capabilities: 1) Each iPad would be connected to the `iamresponding' dispatch system. All update information sent by Tillsonburg Fire Dispatch would appear on the iPad. 2) Each fire apparatus would indicate it's responding which would appear on the iamresponding status screen available on mobile apps. This would allow personnel responding to the station to proceed directly to the scene rather than arriving at the fire station to see apparatus have already gone. 3) The iamresponding system now contains full mapping information. Apparatus can map incidents with GPS routing. This especially comes in handy when responding on a mutual aid request into an unfamiliar area. 4) The mapping information also contains hydrant locations, static water sources, hazards such as solar panels, and any other information we'd like to attach to a location 5) Preplans can be loaded in to each iPad allowing for better managed emergency scenes at location where size or specific hazards would generate a non-standard or cautionary response. This is of particular value at industrial complexes or public assembly buildings. 6) Applications such as the hazardous materials Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG) can be downloaded and available on scene. '2012 � 1 7) The iPad camera can be used to document scenes as well as minimizing the time needed to record driver's license and insurance information at MVCs. Photos can be uploaded to the Cloud and retrieved at any other authorized computer. 8) Holmatro (makers of vehicle extrication equipment) publishes a mobile app for referencing vehicle specific information on scene. This is useful for electric and hybrid vehicle cable locating. An errant cut on a high voltage cable in an extrication scenario could mean injury or death. It also details battery and air bag location on all cars. 9) There are also a multitude of incident management and reference tools that include interactive graphics that allow Command to map out apparatus locations, direction of attack, hazards, and even one that retrieves hazardous material safe distance data from the ERG, combines it with the iPad GPS and tells you if you're too close. 10)An app could be installed that is a GPS tracker that logs the location of the apparatus on a continuous basis. The iPad and an internet connection is the basis for a multitude of existing capabilities and the platform for future advancements. Malahide is currently installing iPads in conjunction with the County GIS system that puts property data on scene. We can tie into this system at no charge. Costs of an iPad Air with cellular data is —$850 and an industrial vehicle mount is —$250. Continuing costs is monthly cellular access at $40 per iPad. Initial installations would include Pump 1, Pump 2, and Command 1. Options would include Apple Care. This expense could be covered under the existing operating equipment budget with the running costs allocated to Computer and Software. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report FR-03/16 be received for information; 2. AND THAT Council authorize the expenditure of iPads and mounts as required. Respectfully Submitt by: Reviewed by: Randy Whi auI i w Fire Chief/By-law Officer CAO �,�YH�• NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING CONCERNING A PROPOSED --� MINOR VARIANCE IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ortunity Ise°�{y APPLICANT: MURRAY TAKE NOTICE that the Municipality of Bayham has received a completed application for a proposed Minor Variance. TAKE NOTICE that the Committee of Adjustment of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham will hold a public meeting on Thursday July 21st, 2016 at 6:30 p.m. in the Municipal Council Chambers in Straffordville to consider a proposed minor variance to Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003 under Section 45 of the PLANNING ACT. THE PURPOSE of the variance is to grant relief from Section 5.1 — Permitted Uses in the Agricultural (Al) Zone on a 20.2 hectare (50 acre) parcel of land located in Part Lot 23, Concession 5 on the south side of Jackson Line, west of Owl Cage Road, and known municipally as 56829 Jackson Line. THE EFFECT of this variance will permit one (1) mobile home as a supplementary farm dwelling on an agricultural lot in accordance with Section 2.1.10 of the Official Plan. ANY PERSON may attend the public meeting and/or make a written or verbal representation in support of or in opposition to the proposed minor variance. IF YOU WISH to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment, you must make a written request to the undersigned. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION relating to the proposed minor variance may be obtained at the Municipal Office. DATED at the Municipality of Bayham this 8' day of July 2016. KEY MAP MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Margaret Underhill Planning Coordinator/ Deputy Clerk Municipality of Bayham y 1 I P.O. Box 160, 9344 Plank Rd -,3 �� I Straffordville, ON, NOJ 1YO f ` f T: 519-866-5521 r F: 519-866-3884 LOT 19 y- munderhill@bayham.on.ca o�2? I LOT 21 u LOT 22 gyp: - LO 2 ` Subject lands LOT 2A' co. s.' LO 25` f f < SAY NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF A HOLDING SYMBOL 04X4& IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM {� APPLICANT: M. SZORENYI TAKE NOTICE that the Municipality of Bayham has received a completed application for a proposed rezoning to remove the holding provision. AND TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham will hold a meeting on Thursday July 21st, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Council Chambers in Straffordville to consider the removal of a holding symbol under Section 34&36 of the PLANNING ACT. AND TAKE NOTICE that only the applicant may file an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board of a decision by Council not to remove the holding symbol, or where Council fails to make a decision within 120 days after the application was submitted. THE PURPOSE of the amendment is to change the zoning on an area of land totaling of 3849.35 m2 (0.95 acres) located on Part Lot 124, Concession NTR, Plan 205 Block C, identified as Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4 on Registered Plan 11 R10033, on the east side of Sandytown Road, north of Heritage Line, in the Hamlet of Straffordville from the Village Residential- Holding [R1(h2)] Zone to the Village Residential (R1) Zone in the Zoning By-law of the Municipality of Bayham No. Z456- 2003. THE EFFECT of this By-law will be to permit the development of four (4) residential building lots created by consent (Applications E105/15-E108/15) in accordance with the Village - Residential Uses policies of the Official Plan. The complete By-law is available for inspection at the Municipal office during regular office hours. DATED at the Municipality of Bayham this 6t' day of July 2016. KEY MAP MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Margaret Underhill Village of Straffordville Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator Municipality of Bayham P.O. Box 160, 9344 Plank Rd. - Straffordville, ON, NOJ 1Y0 `4 jt Tel: 519-866-5521 Ext 222 Fax: 519-866-3884 f i munderhill(cD-bavham.on.ca a. C Subject Lands �HERITAI E LINE I i f T ., g,�YH NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING CONCERNING A PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Op�00xtunit is�°Jiy y APPLICANT: 1162291 ONTARIO LTD. (VANTYGHEM) TAKE NOTICE that the Municipality of Bayham has received a complete application for a Zoning By-law amendment. AND TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham will hold a public meeting on Thursday, July 21 , 2016 at 7:30 p.m. in the Municipal Council Chambers in Straffordville to consider a proposed Zoning By-law amendment under Section 34 of the PLANNING ACT. THE PURPOSE of this By-law is to change the zoning for 0.64 hectare (1.5 acres) parcel of land, from Agricultural (Al-A) to Site-Specific Rural Residential (RR-##) with a reduced minimum lot frontage of 39 m instead of 50 m and change the zoning for retained farmland of 58.6 ha (145 acres) from Agricultural (Al-A) to Special Agricultural (A2) in Zoning By-law Z456-2003. The subject lands are located in Part of Lot 8 and Part of Lot 9 Concession 8, on the south side of Eden Line east of Talbot Line and known municipally as 54819 Eden Line. THE EFFECT of this By-law will be to permit a surplus farm dwelling on a reduced lot frontage of 39 m (127 feet) and prohibiting the keeping of livestock and to prohibit new residential dwellings located on the retained farmland abutting the site. ANY PERSON may attend the public meeting and/or make a written or verbal representation in support of or in opposition to the proposed amendment. IF A PERSON OR PUBLIC BODY does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Bayham before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham to the Ontario Municipal Board. IF A PERSON OR PUBLIC BODY does not make oral submissions at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Municipality of Bayham before the by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. IF YOU WISH to be notified of the adoption of the proposed amendment, you must make a written request to the undersigned. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION relating to the proposed amendment may be obtained at the Municipal Office. Dated at the Municipality of Bayham this 24'" day of June 2016. KEY MAP MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Margaret Underhill Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator Municipality of Bayham P.O. Box 160, 9344 Plank Rd. Straffordville, ON, NOJ 1YO T: 519-866-5521 Ext 222 F: 519-866-3884 a EDE'I tiE E: munderhi11(a,,bayham.on.ca W: www.bayham.on.ca SUBJECT LANDS Rfq(Ip ti Y ti O ��RG:t7p:l.•IN8 g,�YH NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING CONCERNING A PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Op�Oxtunity I5�°Jiy APPLICANT: 1926662 ONTARIO INC. TAKE NOTICE that the Municipality of Bayham has received a complete application for a Zoning By-law amendment. AND TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham will hold a public meeting on Thursday July 21, 2016 at 7:30 p.m. in the Municipal Council Chambers in Straffordville to consider a proposed Zoning By-law amendment under Section 34 of the PLANNING ACT. THE PURPOSE of this By-law is to change the zoning on a 17.8 hectare (43.9 acre) parcel of land from a Rural Industrial (M2) Holding Zone to a combined Rural Industrial (M2) Holding and Temporary(T)Zone in Zoning By-law Z456-2003. The subject lands are located at 57475 Pressey Road, south side and west side Bayham Drive, Concession 11 Pt Lot 19. THE EFFECT of this By-law will be to permit the temporary outdoor storage of wind turbine blades not to exceed three years and retain the existing Rural Industrial (M2) Holding zone for future industrial development. ANY PERSON may attend the public meeting and/or make a written or verbal representation in support of or in opposition to the proposed amendment. IF A PERSON OR PUBLIC BODY does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Bayham before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham to the Ontario Municipal Board. IF A PERSON OR PUBLIC BODY does not make oral submissions at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Municipality of Bayham before the by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. IF YOU WISH to be notified of the adoption of the proposed amendment, you must make a written request to the undersigned. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION relating to the proposed amendment may be obtained at the Municipal Office. Dated at the Municipality of Bayham this 29t" day of June 2016. KEY MAP MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Margaret Underhill Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator Municipality of Bayham P.O. Box 160, 9344 Plank Rd. Straffordville, ON, NOJ 1Y0 T: 519-866-5521 Ext 222 SUBJECT LANDS F: 519-866-3884 E: munderhiIl(&bavham.on.ca W: www.bavham.on.ca a A Q1eEFNLlrV@ n G REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES o ��0.�45 l'tunity Is TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Bill Knifton, Chief Building Official, Drainage Superintendent DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: DS-30/16 FILE NO. C-07 SUBJECT: 2ND QUARTER REPORT BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the activities of the Building Services and Drainage department for the second quarter of the year for 2016. DISCUSSION: Building Services: The summary of building permits issued in the second quarter is as listed on the chart below: Year 2016 2015 2014 No. permits issued 54 43 31 Permit fees $51,657 $26,989 $24,489 Construction Value $3,757,420 $1,843,450 $2,118,696 Houses 8 2 6 Farm Buildings 2 2 1 Other 44 39 24 Drainage: Drainage work for the second quarter of 2016 is noted below: New Drains: Drain Name Status Centre Street Drain North Landowner meeting resulted in redesign in works Nova Scotia Drain Survey done, final design in progress Tollgate Drain Survey done, final design in progress Drain Maintenance: Drain Name Status Peters Drain Tile repair Freeman — Storp Drain Tile repair RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Staff Report DS-30-16 regarding the activities of the Building Services & Drainage Department for the second quarter of 2016 be received for information. Respectfully Submitted by: Bi I Knifton S p Chief Building Official CAO Drainage Superintendent �XXH� REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES poI'tunity Is TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: DS-29/16 FILE NO. C-07 / D9.16 Gregory Underhill Roll # 3401-000-002-075/002-07700 SUBJECT: Consent Application E44/16 BACKGROUND: Consent application was received from the Elgin County Land Division Committee submitted by Gregory Underhill Farms Limited proposing to sever a 0.38 ha (1.0 acre) parcel from an existing 28.63 ha (69.7 acre) parcel known municipally as 55970 Chute Line for the purpose of a surplus farm dwelling. The subject lands are designated "Agriculture", Hazard Lands and Existing Petroleum Well on Schedule "A1" Land Use of the Official Plan and zoned Agriculture (Al) on Schedule "A" Map No. 11 in the Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003. Elgin County Land Division Committee will consider the application on July 20, 2016. Staff have requested the LDC defer the application to their August meeting. DISCUSSION: The proposal suggests creating an irregular shaped parcel containing a house and garage on a parcel on Chute Line just east of the utility corridor. The applicant states the severance of a surplus farm dwelling qualifies through farm consolidation with the owner's agricultural farm parcel with a dwelling located at 5634 Brown Road. The planner's memorandum dated July 2, 2016 analyzes the application subject to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law policies. The application meets the criteria for the creation of the surplus farm dwelling parcel subject to the recommended conditions. Conditions of consent would include rezoning of the severed parcel to a site-specific Rural Residential (RR) to restrict the keeping of livestock and rezoning of the retained lands to Special Agriculture (A2) to prohibit residential development as per OP policies, purchase of a civic number sign for the retained parcel, verification of the well and septic field bed location to ensure both are fully located on the severed parcel, planning report fee and a copy of the final Staff Report DS-29/16 2 survey be provided to the municipality. Staff and planner recommend Council's support of the application with the recommendations and comments. ATTACHMENTS 1. Consent Application E44/16 2. IBI Memorandum dated July 2, 2016 RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report DS-29/16 regarding Consent application E44/16 be received for information; 2. AND THAT Council recommend to the Elgin County Land Division Committee that Consent Application E44/16, submitted by Gregory Underhill Farms Limited, be granted subject to the following conditions: 1. Rezoning of both the severed and retained parcels 2. Purchase of civic number sign from the municipality for the retained parcel 3. Verification be provided to confirm location of the well and septic field bed on the severed parcel 4. Planning report fee payable to the municipality 5. Copy of the final survey (paper and digitally) provided to the municipality Respect ully Submitted by: Reviewed by: Margaret Underhill Paul Shipway Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator CAO Gr C,lr _ 7.016 (ANDt E - J�APPLICATION FOR CONSENT 1. Name of approval authority ELGIN COUNTY LAND DIVISION COMMITTEE 2. Name of Owner Address �[i_mha Line aoij barw y NoJ iiu Telephone Number �I°I FS�{'-) u1SS40 Name of owner's solicitor or authorized agent Li`c, Gi lV2Sy Address w- Y�roctd waN S� i;fls�a^11.�e ; 1 oi" NAG ?,P5 Telephone Number 5101 15,A l v a I Please specify to whom all communications should be sent: Owners (\/) Solicitor ( ) Agent ( ) 3. (a) Type and purpose of proposed transaction:.(check appropriate space) Transfer: creation of a new lot Other: mortgage/charge addition to a lot lease surplus farm dwelling easement/R.O.W. technical severance correction of title other(specify (b) Name of person(s), if known,to whom land or interest in land is to be transferred, leased or charged: (c) If a lot addition, identify the assessment roll number and property owner of the lands to which the parcel will be added: 4. (a) Location of land: Municipality 61,In Concession No. 3 fJ Lot(s) No. Registered Plan No. Name of Street C,aVe Line Street No.and/or 911 No. 55ct-10 Assessment Roll No. a-10 f Wo oo )'T )Lt C 3yp1 0c,c, Uo 0'7-7 00 (b) Are there any easements or restrictive covenants affecting the subject land? Yes ( ) No (✓) If Yes,describe the easement or covenant and its effect: 5. Description of land intended to be severed: (Accurate Measurements in Metric) Frontage 1,1.E 4 Depth .53.1 Area 0 .3'S Hed-a,eS Existing Use re.Si(APv\4ia( SiV&S dw' 114oposed Use re's -aell/L_ Ctl Number and use of buildings and structures on the land to be severed: Existing I 11fws l Qavau Proposed I (i I r.Vcn C, -Sb n✓i 6. Description of land intended to be retained: (Accurate Measurements in Metric) Frontage ;0 M Depth gV i rn Area 3, i.�G H-ec+av-es Existing Use -fa6w\0Lv4 aaric.µl Itu'2 Proposed Use -fa(m Lad 1-1-(-L,l fu Number and use of buildings and structures on the land to be retained: Existing I buo\ Proposed n3)n county of Elgin Engineering Services 450 Sunset Drive St.Thomas,0n N5R 5V1 Phone:513 631-1460 —v.eigin-county.on.ca e' a E`•, -2- 7. Number of new lots proposed (including retained lots) B. Type of access for proposed and retained lot: (check appropriate space) TYPE PROPOSED LOT RETAINED LOT _Provincial Highway ( ) ( ) Municipal road, maintained all year (✓) (0 Municipal road, seasonally maintained ( ) ( ) Other public road ( ) ( ) Right Of Way ( ) ( ) Water access ( ) ( ) If proposed access is by water, what boat docking and parking facilities are available on the mainland? (specify) 9. What type of water supply is proposed: (check appropriate space) TYPE PROPOSED LOT RETAINED LOT Publicly owned and operated piped water system ( ) ( ) Privately owned and operated individual well Privately owned and operated communal well ( ) Lake or other water body ( ) ( ) Other means (specify) a/iA(a Kd 10. What type of sewage disposal is proposed: (check appropriate space) TYPE PROPOSED LOT RETAINED LOT Publicly owned and operated sanitary sewage system ( ) ( ) Privately owned and operated individual septic tank Privately owned and operated communal septic system ( ) Privy ( ) ( ) Other means (specify) bo dweilln _ 11. When will water supply and sewage disposal services be available? facav,+ (!tIff&t q eeyra,'laWe, `b voposed sevev'ed 12. What is the existing Official Plan designations)of the subject land? �I�r�cu lure Nca_a.ra Lads / F1Kv-ctinu &HV IeL&M Wei( 13. What is the existing Zoning designation(s)of the/subject land? / -- gci'c l /*AVr /"I I I Ff"C4 /Ce�aLL�2/�G� �/VleY 14. Has the subject land ever been the subject of an application for approval of a plan of subdivision under the Planning Act? Yes ( ) No ( ) Unknown (0 If Yes, and known, provide the application file number and the decision made on the application 15. If this application is a re-submission of a previous consent application, describe how it has been changed from the original application J\J{A 16. (a) Has there been any previous severances of land from this holding? Yes .( ) No -3- (b) If the answer to (a) is Yes, please indicate previous severances on the required sketch and supply the following information for each lot severed: Grantee's name Use of parcel Date parcel created Severance File No. 17. if this application is for a lot addition, has the lot to be enlarged ever been the subject of a previous severance? Yes ( ) No (V//) If Yes, provide the previous severance File No. 18. If this application involves the severance of a surplus farmhouse (through farm consolidation), please explain how it qualifies as surplus in the municipality which it is situated. Gr�U°l (,mIeWildt 6irm<, �in,;fed ftweo44�j owns house ,t+ i�' �,aysr, d �dv�►adv► L'�,c S 1 0 % HIM 3'101 000 Ob i 0 100 00a 19. Is the owner,solicitor, or agent applying for additional consents on this holding simultaneously with this application, or considering applying for additional consents in the future? Yes ( ) No (✓) 20. Is the subject land currently the subject of a proposed official plan or official plan amendment that has been submitted to the County for approval? Yes ( ) No (V/ If Yes, and known, specify the County file number and status of the application 21. Is the subject land currently the subject of an application for a zoning by-law amendment, Minister's zoning order amendment, minor variance, or approval of a plan of subdivision? Yes ( ) No (L4 If Yes, and known, specify the appropriate file number and status of the application 22. Is the application consistent with policy statements issued under subsection 3(1)of the Planning Act? Yes ( No ( ) 23. Is the subject land within an area designated under any provincial plan or plans? Yes ( ) No ( ✓� If yes, does the application conform to or conflict with the applicable provincial plan or plans 24. The Owner/Applicant/Agent hereby authorizes Land Division Committee members and the Corporation of the County of Elgin staff to enter onto the subject property for the purpose of Site inspections with respect to this application. 25. The Owner/Applicant/Agent hereby consents to disclosure of the information contained in this Application pursuant to Section 32(b)of Bill 49, Chapter 63, S.O. 1989, being an Act to provide for Freedom of Information and Protection of Individual Privacy in Municipalities and Local Boards. -4- 26. SKETCH: The application shall be accompanied by a sketch showing the following: - the boundaries and dimensions of the subject land,the part that is to be severed and the part that is to be retained; - the boundaries and dimensions of any land owned by the owner of the subject land and that abuts the subject land; - the distance between the subject land and the nearest township lot line or landmark, such as a railway crossing or bridge; - the location of all land previously severed from the parcel originally acquired by the current owner of the subject land; - the approximate location of all natural and artificial features on the subject land and adjacent lands that in the opinion of the applicant may affect the application, such as buildings, railways, roads,watercourses, drainage ditches, river or stream banks, wetlands,wooded areas,well and septic tanks; - the existing use(s)on adjacent lands; - the location,width and name of any roads within or abutting the subject land, indicating whether it is an unopened road allowance, a public travelled road, a private road or a right of way; - if access to the subject land is by water only,the location of the parking and boat docking facilities to be used; - the location and nature of any easement affecting the subject land. Dated at the �I c� e of :..,,-(re T d 1 I '�Z this day of 20 SIG ATURE OF APPLICANT(S), SOLICITOR OR AUTHORIZED AGENT AFFIDAVIT OR SWORN DECLARATION I/We of the of \, 0 k a Uy" in the County of k,v\ solemnly declare that all the information contained in this application is true, and I/We make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true, and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under Oath and by virtue of the CANADA EVIDENCE ACT. DECLARED before me at the of in the coGrr� Q L� e� - �. �.,? Sigriature this 7 day of Ccvr-� 20 Signature / A Comgiissi er, etc. If this application is signed by an agent or solicitor on behalf of an applicant(s),the owner's authorization must accompany the application. If the applicant is a corporation acting without agent or solicitor, the application must be signed by an officer of the corporation and the seal, if any, must be affixed. It is required that one copy of this application be filed,together with one copy of the sketch described, with the responsible person, accompanied by a fee of- $1,000.00 in cash or by cheque made payable to TREASURER, COUNTY OF ELGIN An additional fee of$250.00 will be charged for affixing the consent stamp. Revised December 2014 APPENDIX"A" The County of Elgin Land Division Committee requires that, in addition to the"Application for Consent",the following information be completed for all applications: 1. Are there y barns located within 300 metres of the subject of this application? Yes ( No ( ) If the answer is"YES"are these barns: i) Now used for livestock? Yes No ii) Capable of being used for livestock? Yes ( ) No NOTE: If you answered"YES"to#1. PLEASE COMPLETE THE DATA SHEET BELOW TO BE COMPLETED AGRICULTURAL CODE OF PRACTICE FORMULA ONE DATA SHEET TO CALCULATE THE MINIMUM DISTANCE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-FARM USES ESTABLISHING OR EXPANDING IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO EXISTING LIVESTOCK BUILDINGS In order to calculate the minimum distance separation,the following information is required for each livestock facility within 300 metres of the proposed severance and located on a separate lot: NAME TELEPHONE TOWNSHIP LOT CONC. TILLABLE HECTARES(where livestock facility located) Type of Livestock Maximum Housing Capacity Mail Are 8 Housing System Number per Year Liquid Semi- Dry check type Solid DAIRY Tie Free Loose 0 Cows Stall Stall 0 Heifers 0 Calves BEEF Open Lot Total 0 Cows &Barn Confine- 0 Calves ment 0 Feeders 0 400-750lb. 0 400-1100lb. 0 750-1100lb. SWINE 0 Sows 0 Boars 0 Weanlings 0 Feeders POULTRY Caged On Floor 0 Laying Hens 0 Breeder Flock 0 Pullets 0 Chicken Broilers 0 Turkey Broilers 0 Turkey Hens 0 Turkey Toms Roasters MINK-Females HORSES SHEEP-Rams&Ewes RABBITS VEAL CALVES OTHER MANURE STORAGE: DRY Open Pile Covered Pile SEMI-SOLID Open Pile Storage with Buck Walls LIQUID Covered Tank Open Earth Sided Pit Above Ground Uncovered Tank Below Ground Uncovered Tank �/ ►Fe Fa;recA I C1v�G� s mAp 27 souse N� /65 3 a 6+-byb. v 309,�3 o2'0-10 77�6 WIOEUtHCn fllj 83.69 AG v�rt 4 010-10 9 � ,n I /t'R-4085 N za, ��`vc��pS I vGt p 07 5 N p 5.9Z ;o ,qY• VIM - y'G5' M o = 02-O 8l sasr�v,�fG 10L•" a T� N d 00 p0 a 32e O MAP 32 J N u / 1 3d C {�6 R~y 4 BARN PSKETCH FOR ART OF LOT PROPOSED $ED SEVERANCE E41 v6 CONCESSION 3 GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF BA YHAM Via;;-• ,3 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM 13 roxc J SION COUNTY OF ELGIN »Br Z �_� ` i p�RCRETAINED NOT TO SCALE (METRIC) I TO BE AREA OF PARCEL "A" rt9 AGRICULVol: TO BE SEVERED 05 . 0.38 HECTARES (0.93 ACRES) r, APPOF HOLDING TANK J JJJr�r 'r�lr LOCAAND WEEPING BED 74,13 (243.21') r� CEO rB�' F- < APPROXIMATE �» p AR WELL pWELLING p AIR 11.so LOCATION OF 0 1j TO BE RETAINED A» o -f0 gE RETAINED „AGRICULTURAL"moo N p ARGEE RED" `fl "AGRICULTURAL" o a "TO gE CV l 1 1�2 STOREY l� w DWELLING INS) o 38.74 Lo 23.13Lo (238.64') (,C HJ Q SEE TOWNSHIP OF BAYHAM BYLAW 99-16 r�J r\� ROAD) 1` ND ROAD PS-NSTRp1hEN1191371) O S 1 KIM RUSTED SURVEYING LTD. KIRKREGISTERED ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR (FORMERLY 1460 „ �sEE BYLAW HARVEY STREET, TILLSONBURG ONTARIO, N4G 3J8 "AGRICULTURAL 30 PHONE:519-842-3638 FAX: 519-842-3639 PROJECT: 16-11993/16-12213 REFERENCE FILE r� IBI GROUP ' 203-350 Oxford Street West' London ON N6H 1T3 Canada tel 519 472 7328 fax 519 472 9354 1 1 ibigroup.com Memorandum To/Attention Municipality of Bayham Date July 2, 2016 From William Pol, MCIP, RPP Project No 3404-623 cc Subject Gregory Underhill Farms Limited - 55970 Chute Line Application for Consent E44/16-Concession 3N Lot 18, Municipality of Bayham 1. We have completed our review of an Application for Consent, submitted on behalf of Gregory Underhill Farms Limited for a property located at 55970 Chute Line, Concession 3N Lot 18. It is located on the north side of Chute Line, east of the former railway line. The applicant is requesting the severance of a 0.38ha (I acre) parcel of land from a 28.63ha (70 acre) parcel of farm land for the purpose of disposing of a surplus farm dwelling. The lands are designated Agriculture, Hazard Lands and Existing Petroleum Well on Schedule "Al" Land Use of the Official Plan of the Municipality of Bayham. The lands are zoned Agriculture(Al)on Schedule "A" Map No.11 in Zoning By-law Z456-2003. 2. The proposed severed land contains a single detached dwelling and a garage with private well and septic system. The severed lands would have a lot frontage of 72.7 m and depth of 53.7 m and meet the minimum requirements of the Rural Residential(RR)Zone. The retained lands include a barn and agricultural fields. The intent is to retain the existing barn. The lot frontage of the farmlands to be retained is approximately 230m and a depth of 801 m. The lot shape is irregular. 3. Section 2.1.7.3 of the Official Plan sets out consent policies for the surplus farm dwelling. Accessory buildings previously used for farming purposes should be removed and limited in size to that needed for the rural residential land use and as permitted in the zoning by-law. The property shall be rezoned to prohibit the keeping of livestock. 4. Section 2.1.7.2 of the Official Plan sets out the requirements for the retained agricultural lands. The minimum lot area of 20 ha in the Agricultural Al Zone will be fulfilled. It will meet the minimum zoning regulations of the Al Zone. A zoning by-law amendment will be adopted to prohibit any new residential dwellings on the property. The owner has confirmed they reside in the municipality on another farm property. 5. Based on the above review we have no objection to the proposed consent application E44/16 with the following conditions: a. That the retained farmlands with approximately 230m of lot frontage on Chute Line and an area of 28 ha and a severed surplus farm dwelling with 72 m of lot frontage and an area of 0.38 ha be approved; 1131 Group is a group of firms providing professional services and is affiliated with 1131 Group Architects IBI GROUP MEMORANDUM 2 Municipality of Bayham—July 2,2016 b. That a registered land surveyor undertake a survey of the lands and the location of the private well and septic system to confirm the location of the private well and septic system is entirely on the ret�lands; and c. That the severed lands be subject to Subsection 3 of Section 50 Subdivision of the Planning Act to prohibit future conveyance of these lands. d. Removal of accessory buildings used for agricultural purposes and not accessory to the residential land use on the severed parcel. e. That the severed lands as described above be rezoned to a Rural Residential zone. f. That the retained lands as described above be rezoned to a Special Agriculture A2 zone to prohibit new dwellings. Wiffiam Yd IBI GROUP William Pol, MCIP, RPP Affiliate Consulting Planner to the Municipality of Bayham REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES oj'tunity Is TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: DS-31/16 FILE NO. C-07 / D11.SZOR16/D13.SZOR Roll # 3401-000-004-09500 split SUBJECT: Subdivision Agreement and Rezoning to Remove Holding BACKGROUND: Michele Szorenyi is in process of severing four (4) building lots on Sandytown Road, north of Heritage Line, in the Village of Straffordville. A condition of the consents E105/15-E108/15 granted by the Elgin County Land Division Committee on December 16, 2015 is to rezone to Remove the Holding provision, which is subject to a Mutual Drain Agreement and Subdivision Agreement with the municipality to permit the construction and installation of specific municipal services. A Subdivision Agreement obligates the Subdivider to carry out the installation of sanitary sewers, storm sewers, driveway access, and road reconstruction/restoration and holds security against the services to reduce the risk to the municipality and ensure proper and timely completion. All conditions for the consents, except for the Subdivision Agreement and Rezoning to Remove Holding, have been completed. This report includes both the Subdivision Agreement approval and Rezoning to Remove the Holding provision. DISCUSSION: The subdivision agreement has been reviewed and agreed to by the applicant and includes the time limits and cost estimates and securities required for the completion of the require works for the four (4) building lots. The rezoning to remove the holding is subject to a storm water management plan, being a Mutual Drain Agreement between the land owners already executed between the affected parties, and the subdivision agreement for services included with this report. Staff and planner are satisfied that the owner meets the requirements to remove the holding provision and recommend to Council the attached by-laws and agreement. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft By-law 2016-065 — Subdivision Agreement Staff Report DS-31/16 2 2. Rezoning Application dated January 29/16 —deemed complete July 6/16 3. Draft Zoning By-law Z651-2016 RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report DS-31/16 regarding the Subdivision Agreement and Rezoning To Remove the Holding Provision Application submitted by Michele Szorenyi be received for information; 2. AND THAT By-law 2016-065 being a By-law to authorize a subdivision agreement between Michele Szorenyi and the Municipality of Bayham be presented for enactment; 3. AND THAT Zoning By-law Z651-2016 being a by-law to further amend Zoning By- law Z456-2003 by changing the zoning on the lands owned by Michele Szorenyi described as Parts 1- 4 on Registered Plan 11 R1 0033 from Village Residential — Holding [R1(h)] to Village Residential (R1) be presented for enactment. Respectfully Submitted by: Reviewed by: C� Margaret Underhill Paul Shipway Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator CAO 'YHA�l MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM P.O.Box 160 1 Straffordville,Ontario o s� NOJ 1YO AAo `ni�Ia�oo Phone(519)866-5521 Fax(519)866-3884 APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING BY-LAW OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM This application must be filed with the Planning Coordinator/Deputy Clerk or designate of the Municipality of Bayham along with a cheque for the required amount. The applicant should retain one copy for their records. The information in this form must be completed in full. This mandatory information must be provided with a fee of 2 0.00(Zoning By-law Amg�tt-.("' emporary Use Zoning By-law)or 1500 (Temporary Use Zoning By-law Renewal) ning Amendment to Remove Holding Provision). If the application is not compl application will be returned. I/WE, Michele Szorenyi shall assume responsibility for any additional costs exceeding the deposited amount related to the said application and understand and agree that for payment of said additional costs shall be a condition of this signed application. I also agree to accept all costs as rendered. Property Owner_,_Mq zorenyi per: Michael G. Szorenyi, POA Property Owner FOR OFFICE USE ONLY DATE ttECEI!VED �a n �9�/(v . , aMou�vT 1tECEIVED D EMEll4 6MPl Ll ., T, h " FILIv NOt}ATE AUi;iP f ED BY G(?UN(IL Revised February 2015 Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 2 1. Registered Owner's Name: Michele Szorenyi Address: c/o Michael G. Szorenyi, 36 Broadway, Tillsonburg, ON N4G 3P1 Phone No.(Home): Business: 519-842-3658 Fax: (519) 842-5001 Email: mszorenyi tillsonburglawyers.com Lot and Concession(if applicable): Are there any other holders of mortgages,charges or other encumbrances of the Subject Lands? If so provide the names and addresses of such persons. N/A 2. Applicant/Authorized Agent: Michael G. Szorenyi Address: 36 Broadway, Tillsonburg, ON N4G 3P1 Telephone No.: (519) 842-3658 Fax: (519) 842-5001 Please specify to whom all communications should be sent: Registered Owner ( ) Applicant/Authorized Agent (X) 3. Legal Description of the land for which the amendment is requested:Roll# 3401-000-004-09500 Concession: Block C Lot: 3, 4 & 5 Reference Plan No: 205 Part Lot: 2, 8, 11, 12 & 13 Street and Municipal Address No.: Sandytovm Road What is the size of property which is subject to this Application? Area: 3849.35 m2 Frontage: 80.45 m Depth: 52.166 m When were the subject lands acquired by the current owner? 16 April 1984 4. Existing Official Plan Designation: DRpsident-lal How does the application conform to the Official Plan? It is a Residential Development Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 3 5. Existing Zoning By-law Classification: Rl,(h)2 What are the current uses of the subject lands? Farmland — Agricultural If known,provide the length of time these uses have continued on this property. If there are any existing buildings or structures on the subject lands provide the following information: Type Front Lot Side Lot Line Rear Lot Line Height Dimensions Line Setback Setbacks Setback N/A If known,provide the dates in which each of these buildings were constructed. 6. What is the Nature and Extent of the Rezoning? To remove holding provision_to allow,residentia1 1 ot,9. 7. Why is the rezoning being requested? To allow 4 single family dwellings- Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 4 8. Does the proposed Zoning By-law amendment implement a growth boundary adjustment of a settlement area? No If so,attach separately justification or information for the request based on the current Official Plan policies or associated Official Plan amendment. 9. Does the proposed amendment remove land from an area of employment? NO If so,attach separately justification or information for the request based on the current Official Plan policies or associated Official Plan amendment. 10. Description of proposed development for which this amendment is requested(i.e.permitted uses, buildings or structures to be erected.(Be Specific) 4 residential houses. For any proposed buildings or structures on the subject lands provide the following information: Type Front Lot Side Lot Line Rear Lot Line Height Dimensions Line Setback Setbacks Setback single family house 7m. 1..2m 1'Om 2 storey 141E SW. single family house 7m 1.2m l'Om. 2 storey 140 seen single family house 7m 1.2m. 10m. 2 storey 140 sqm, single family house 7m 1.2m 10M 2 storey 140 sqm. 11. Services existing or proposed for the subject lands:Please indicate with a Water Supply Existing Proposed Municipal Piped Water Supply ( ) ( ) Private Drilled Well ( ) (V ) Private Dug Well ( ) ( ) Communal Well ( ) ( ) Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 5 Lake or other Surface Water Body ( ) ( ) Other ( ) ( ) Sewage Disposal Existing Proposed Municipal Sanitary Sewers (V ) ( ) Individual Septic System ( ) ( ) Communal System ( ) ( ) Privy ( ) ( ) Other ( ) ( ) Note: If the proposed development is on a private or communal system and generate more than 4500 litres of effluent per day,the applicant must include a servicing options report and a hydrogeological report. Are these reports attached? If not,where can they be found? Storm Drainage Provisions: Proposed Outlet: Direct drainage on lands owned by applicant to the East and North. 12. How will the property be accessed? Provincial Highway( ) County Road( ) Municipal Road—maintained all year( x) Municipal Road—seasonally maintained( ) Right-of-way( ) Water( ) If access is by water,do the parking and docking facilities exist,and what is the nearest public road? Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 6 13. Has the subject land ever been the subject of an application under the Planning Act for: Plan of Subdivision( ) Consent(V) Zoning By-law Amendment( ) Ministers Zoning Order( ) If yes to any of the above,indicate the file number and status of the application. E50/11, E51/11, E52/11 and E53/11. ��Lr✓✓h�� �cf �imm S�n�� L :5 4/ - _ � 14. How is the proposed amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2014? Complies as Mirror DeyelQp ent to the lands on the west side of 'andhrCxm Rnnrl 15. Are the subject lands within area designated under any Provincial Plan(s)? If the answer is yes,does the proposed amendment conform to the Provincial Plan(s)? No. 17. The Owner is required to attach the following information with the application and it will form part of the application. Applications will not be accepted without the following. (a) A sketch based on an Ontario Land Surveyor description of the subject lands showing o the boundaries and dimension of the subject lands; ® the location,size and type of all existing and proposed buildings and structures,indicating their setbacks from all lot lines,the location of driveways,parking or loading spaces, landscaping areas,planting strips,and other uses; Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 7 • the approximate location of all natural and artificial features(buildings,railways,roads, watercourses,drainage ditches,banks of rivers or streams,wetlands,wooded areas,wells and septic tanks)that are on the subject lands,adjacent to the subject lands,or in the opinion of the applicant may affect the application; • the current uses of the land that is adjacent to the subject land; • the location,width,and name of any roads within or abutting the subject land,indicating where it is an unopened road allowance,a public traveled road,a private road,or a right- of-way; • the location of the parking and docking facilities to be used(if access will be by water only); • the location and nature of any easement affecting the subject land. (b) Written comments from the Elgin St.Thomas Health Unit,Long Point Region Conservation Authority and Ministry of Transportation(if applicable). (c) If a private sewage system is necessary,pre-consultation with the Chief Building Official is required about the approval process 18. If this application is signed by an agent or solicitor on behalf of an applicant(s),the owner's written authorization must accompany the application. If the applicant is a corporation acting without an agent or solicitor the application must be signed by an officer of the corporation and the seal if any must be affixed. 19. Additional Information as required by Council 20. If this application is to accommodate the consent of a surplus farm dwelling,please provide the following information: Date surplus farm dwelling was erected: Please provide the assessment roll number,location,and zoning of the farm parcel with which the subject lands is being consolidated. Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 8 I/We, Michele Szorenyi ,of the Municipality flame Towel;PnvrushipiCaNNilla@e ctc. Of Thames Centre ,in the county of Middlesex ,do solemnly declare: h{unici Pill t}Name Co"nIp Name (i) that I/We am/are the owner(s)of the lands described above (ii) that to the best of my/our knowledge and belief,all of the information and statements given in this application and in all exhibits transmitted are true. (iii) that I/we hereby appoint Michael G. Szorenyi to act as an Agent on my/our behalf in all aspects of this application. And I/We make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true,and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath,and by virtue of the "Canada Evidence Act". DECLARED BEFORE ME at the: Michele Szoren Town of Tillsonburg pwner/AgentMichG. Szorenyi, ]? f Attorney in the County/Region of Oxford this day of January 20 16 Owner/Agent A Commissioner,etc. Trisha Renee Voth,a Commissioner,etc., Province of omario,for Gibson Bennett Groom&Szorenyi, Banisters and Solicitors.Ey#res July 8,2017. SKEW ACRICUL NRAL WELLINGTON STREET NOT TRAVELED) ACRICUI TURAI 0 LOT e LOT 9 �O LOT yp --- ----- LOT 12 I AGRICUL AGRICULTURA AL LOT yo ACRICULTURA _ LOT 7 ~ ,� L07 q , LOT wO Qv LOT 73 4 yy w LOT yy =' q LOT 8 o LOT a a Q. LOT y4 LOT 12 LOT 7 ,k. - Nr Nr N LOT 5 ® L07 y3 LOT y5 Q L07 8 AGRICULTURAL w LOT ye N '- © -- U) LOT 4 rLOT 3 ' i ��-- V 1 1 Q Q LOT 2 I LOT y �y I Pay{ LUNG w C, OCi / AGRICULTURAL LOT 5 4 4 o w N �v o L07 4 I LOT 3 Q z LOT 2 LOT y ww AGRICULTURAL ' F w DONNELLY DRIVE Z AGRICULTURAL (FORMERLY OUT TO uaj : ACRicuLTURAL N STREET) (NOT TRAVELED) O o � AGRICUITURgi Q q I A FpS ER I I LOTS y TO I 14 I 1iR-gggd I PART 1 PART 2I I I + �$ W 17R-y08$I PART y SLO K Y1R 5D84 11"904 PART g I 4 1iR-5064 11R-0DB4 I PART 7 N GM'ELUNO I I .. IO I SLoCK 'S I owrwNo iiR JDBd I REG157 RED pLA I I 205 w 4 PART ' I r, U 11R•'7279 PART z PART 9 I I 11R-7279 P RT 4 4 7AL 11R-7279 11R-7279 PART 5 SOT ROAD (H 11R-7279 PART ER/TASE e LINE) CD 11R-7279 PART 7 UN7Y ROAD 36 11 _721 S&MOY MJbT7RA71M0 PD4QPOSM .S1<{ WAAAXS LOTS 3. 4 AND a PART OF LOTS 2. 6. 11. 12 AND 13 AMAOF Pip ANCES BLOCK C REOIS I PLAN =5 'A' - 901.2 SQUARE METRES ('SnWFOR1DVILLE) W - 942-0 SQUARE METRES ANAWCPAU7Y OF 'C' - 98W SQUARE METRES KY HUSH SURVEYWOO LID. BA* M 'D' - 1023.5 SQUARE METRES ONTANO LAND SURVEM sc"..•MOT ro SQLc" (A/mic) w MW-in,Ms 0 m a°mi-�a° -nJ" K1M HUSTED SURVEYING LTD. PROMIJ 11—ow NSFEM CC FLE C:\INCAD2M5\'I1-9397.dwq, 0/3/2015 2:29:55 Phi, KIP 7-M.oc:3 Qy�Lt1�tG pv�11!NG � W DVODJING SANDYTOW.N ROAD 4 ,LLOWANCt BETWEEN LOTS 123 AND 124) _ 20.113 20.113 20.113 20.113 IA4t wt O '+5o{,I 45 �aIsgfil 1 w150hl ' ® O tq mat � 0! of utnw�GlNl 'MnWiuiUu �YIUA�U(LM UAnWIUIUWA _ CR ......... � i ITi i © 'd -44 b 1v11LL STREET (101 T I� RAVELED) � -4 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. Z651-2016 SZORENYI BEING A BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW No. Z456-2003, AS AMENDED WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it necessary to amend Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended; THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham enacts as follows: 1) THAT By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended, is hereby further amended by amending Schedule "A", Straffordville "F" by changing the zoning from Village Residential Holding (R1(h2)) Zone to a Village Residential (R1) Zone, which lands are outlined in heavy solid lines and marked R1 on Schedule "A" to this By-law, which schedule is attached to and forms part of this By-law. 2) THIS By-law comes into force: a) Where no notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the expiration of the prescribed time; or b) Where notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2016. READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK SEE SsHEDL LEA-hRAF No.i SEE SCHEDULE A.-tAAP No.6 ` 4 7 1 if 5 q 9 _ 4TRBET r - R1 Lj ��racrrr�e _ .. a - a nze,:r _ I , '' This is Schedule"A"to By-law No.Z651-2016,passed the St day of j,/ 2016 — ....-..— SEE SCHEGLI L.EA-Mt--aP No.8 S Mayor Clerk MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Legend SCHEDULE F O ZOLA MORr� STRAFFORDVILLE i? L P RCA Reg I Wb I L In It :m ma •r:e 20NING BY-LAW Z4562003 CON&OLI DATE O JAM 8,2016 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. 2016 - 065 BEING A BY-LAW TO AUTHORIZE THE SIGNING OF A SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT BETWEEN MICHELE SZORENYI AND THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM, TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PLAN OF SUBDIVISION, SANDYTOWN ROAD, HAMLET OF STRAFFORDVILLE, MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the agreement affixed hereto as Schedule "A", being a subdivision agreement with Michele Szorenyi, is hereby approved and the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the same. 2. THAT the agreement is to be registered at the Land Registry Office. READ A First and Second time this 21st day of July, 2016. READ A Third time and finally passed this 21st day of July, 2016. MAYOR CLERK SCHEDULE "A" TO BY-LAW 2016 - 065 THIS SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT made in duplicate this 21ST day of July 2016. BETWEEN : MICHELE SZORENYI of the Municipality of Bayham, in the County of Elgin, Hereinafter called the "Subdivider" OF THE FIRST PART - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Hereinafter called the "Municipality" OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Subdivider proposes to subdivide property described as Lots 3, 4 and 5, Part of Lots 2, 8, 11, 12 and 13, Block c. Reference Plan 205, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin; the said Lands as more particularly set out on a plot plan marked as Attachment "A" attached hereto showing the lots to be created; AND WHEREAS Consents to Sever were granted by the County of Elgin Land Division Committee on December 18, 2015 for applications E105/15, E106/15, E107/15 and E108/15, conditional upon (inter alia) the entering into of an agreement dealing with services for the lots to be created; AND WHEREAS, the Subdivider, has agreed with the Corporation to comply with their requirements with respect to the providing of services for the lands proposed to be subdivided and other matters hereinafter set forth; NOW THEREFORE, the Parties herein, in consideration of other good and valuable consideration and the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00), of lawful money of Canada, by each to the other paid (the receipt whereof is hereby by each acknowledged), covenant and agree with the other as follows: Municipal Engineer 1. Wherever the phrase "Municipal Engineer" is used throughout this Agreement, it shall mean the Municipality's Chief Building Official, the Municipality's Water/Wastewater Operations Manager, or the Municipality's Public Works Operations Supervisor or such other person as the Council of the Municipality may from time to time appoint to deal with the administration of this Agreement. List of Attachments 2.The following Attachments are hereby declared to form part of the Agreement between the parties: Attachment Description "A" Legal description of the said Lands. "B" Registered Plan 11 R10033 Parts 1-4, showing the proposed lot pattern "C" Grading Plan and Servicing Plan showing the facilities, works and services to be provided on the said Lands. "D" Time Limits "E" Cost Estimate and Security Schedule Zoning 3. The Subdivider shalI apply for a Zoning By-law amendment (removal of holding symbol) as required by the Notice of Decision for Consent and is subject to a Subdivision Agreement. The arrangements contemplated in this Agreement are conditional upon removal of the holding provision. The Municipality agrees to consider the proposed application in the context of these arrangements. Access 4. Access to the lots to be created shall be at the location applied for and approved by the Municipal Engineer. The maximum width of a driveway measured along Sandytown Road to serve a residential use shall be nine (9.0) metres (30 feet). As-Constructed Drawings 5. The Subdivider shall provide for the Municipality records "as-constructed" drawings to the satisfaction of the Municipality for municipal services installed by the Subdivider. These drawings shall be submitted in a satisfactory form prior to the release of any performance bond or security required by this Agreement. Plans and Specifications 6. Plans and specifications for all works and services herein required to be done by the Subdivider shall be first submitted to the Municipal Engineer in a form satisfactory to him and such work shall not be commenced until the Municipal Engineer has received such plans and specifications and has expressly authorized, in writing, such work to commence. All works and services shall be constructed and installed strictly in accordance with the said plans and specifications, all to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer. The Subdivider agrees to construct all services and provide other requirements that will be known only after the details of the engineering design are submitted to the Municipality. The Municipal Engineer may require, in writing, such variance from such plans and specifications as may be required by conditions which may be disclosed as the work progresses, and by sound engineering practice. The works and services required to be done by the Subdivider, including but not limited to engineering and restoration works, shall be wholly at the expense of the Subdivider except as may be otherwise herein expressly provided. Sanitary Sewers 7. a. Sanitary sewers shall be constructed of such size, type, position and extent as are shown on the plans and specifications provided in Attachment "C" that have been certified approved by the Ministry of the Environment & Climate Change (MOECC), if applicable, and the Municipal Engineer. Any material changes to be made to these plans and specifications shall require approval by the MOECC, if applicable, and the Municipal Engineer in writing, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. Storm sewers, if required by the Municipality-;shall be constructed of such size, type, position and extent as are shown on the plans and specifications approved by the Municipal Engineer or otherwise required by him in writing. The Municipal Engineer may require this work to be done by a contractor whose competence is approved jointly by the Municipal Engineer and the Subdivider, at the expense of the Subdivider. It shall be the responsibility of the Subdivider to provide a satisfactory outlet for said storm sewers, if required, and sanitary sewers (which for the purpose of this Agreement, shall mean the nearest approved Municipal sewer outlet). b. Sanitary sewers, with sanitary private drain connections shall be constructed to the lot line of the subject lands. c. Storm sewers including catch basins and connections, if required by the Municipality, shall be provided and connected as shown on the approved plans and specifications. d. If the works lead to the installation of storm or sanitary sewers, to be assumed by the Municipality, located on easements over private property (including land owned by the Municipality that is not a road allowance), all sanitary sewer manholes shall be located in a location acceptable to the Municipal Engineer in order to facilitate maintenance of the sanitary sewer system by the Subdivider, and all storm sewer manholes shall be placed in easily accessible areas if not placed in paved parking lots or driveways. e. The Subdivider agrees to notify their consulting engineer in the event that any existing sewer or drain is encountered during the progress of construction. The Subdivider further agree to have its consulting engineer investigate the matter and comply with the recommendations of its consulting engineer as approved by the Municipal Engineer's Department with respect to the sewer or drain encountered, such as connecting the existing sewer to a new sewer being constructed or into another existing sewer, at no cost to the Municipality. Adequate sewer easements are to be provided to the Municipality if necessary. The Subdivider shall also ensure that there is no interruption to any subsurface drainage flow because of construction on the site that would have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties. Should such an interruption occur, the Subdivider shall carry out any necessary remedial work to correct the problem as recommended by its consulting engineer and to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer, at no cost to the Municipality. f. Frontage and Connection charges are payable before any dwelling unit is connected to the public (sanitary) sewer system. Such charges are payable at the time of issuance of a building permit, in accordance with the fees and charges in force and effect at the time of application for such building permit. Sewer Subdividership 8. The Subdivider acknowledges and agrees that the Municipality will not accept Subdividership nor allow connections of any type until the works are completed to its full satisfaction, as-constructed drawings are provided, and such determination is at the sole discretion of the Municipality. Grading, Drainage and Storm Water Management Plans 9. The Subdivider shall prepare and deposit with the Municipality grading and storm water drainage plans approved by the Municipal Engineer showing the final grades of all lots and roadways. Any lands designated for drainage works and all drainage facilities shall be indicated on such plans to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer. The Subdivider shall agree to carry out or cause to be carried out the recommendations of the grading and drainage plans, which shall form part of this Agreement as Attachment "C". The drainage plan requires the Owner enter into a Mutual Drain Agreement with the abutting landowner for drainage. Roads 10. a. The Subdivider, or their consulting engineer, shall ensure that any proposed excavation, construction, entrance or exit installation, demolition, etc. will not interfere with or be in conflict with location and/or depth of any existing underground facilities, including sewers, pipelines, mains on street allowances or private rights-of-way, services, meter and regulator installations, valve boxes, cathodic protection test points, etc. In instances of apparent conflict, the Subdivider, or their consultant, shall obtain field locates from the appropriate commission, utility or agency. b. All streets and walkways, if any, shall be graded, including fill or excavation as required by the Municipal Engineer to their full width of the allowance before any building permit will be issued and the approved road allowance grades from street line to street line shall be maintained at all times to the grades and levels and to the specifications and requirements and to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer until the date of passing of the by-law assuming the said streets and walkways. Sidewalks 11. Not required Streetlights 12. Not required Notification 13. The lots are being created without electrical and telephone services and the costs of providing electrical and telephone services will be at the expense of the Subdivider or its Successors in title. Time Limit for Work and Guarantee for Workmanship and Material 14. Save as herein otherwise provided the Subdivider agrees to complete the work required under this Agreement within the Time Limits specified in the Attachment hereto as Attachment "D", and to guarantee the workmanship and materials for a period of Two (2) years from the date that the said works are approved, in writing, by the Corporation. Any work other than that specifically provided for in Attachment "D" shall be completed within the time limit provided for herein, for sidewalks, curbs and gutters and roads, as applicable. The Subdivider shall, in the period prior to final acceptance of the services or utilities to be constructed under this Agreement as soon as it is practicable after receiving written notice from the Corporation repair any damage caused to existing services or utilities by the implementation or performance of this Agreement or caused during the construction of dwelling units or other buildings on any part of the development. Should the Subdivider fail or neglect to carry out repairs or any other work required of this Agreement the Corporation may, in addition to any other rights or remedies it may perform the work and assess a charge or lien to the property. Inspection and Completion of Works 15. Upon the completion of required off-site works, the Subdivider shall cause a Certificate of Completion to be delivered to the Municipality in the following form: Certificate of Completion of Works To: The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham For good and valuable consideration now paid by the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham (hereinafter called the "Municipality'), the receipt and sufficiency of which 1/we hereby acknowledge, 1/we hereby certify that the municipal services constructed pursuant to the Agreement between the Municipality and Subdivider, Registered as Instrument No. and pertaining to the property known municipally as have been: inspected during construction in accordance with standard engineering practice; and constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Municipal Engineer. Dated and sealed at Ontario, this day of 20 Registered Professional Engineer(Ontario) Building Permits 16. No applications shall be made for building permits and no building permit will be issued until the following materials have been received by the Municipality's Engineer: a. A survey prepared by a qualified Ontario Land Surveyor showing all necessary setbacks in compliance with Zoning By-laws; b. a grading and drainage plan approved by the Municipal Engineer showing the final grades of all lands and roadways. c. all permits and authorizations have been obtained by the Subdivider at its expense d. Certificate of Approval from the Ministry of Environment & Climate Change, if applicable, for the installation of sanitary sewer service and an Engineer's Certificate of Completion with as-constructed drawings for the completed installation of the sanitary sewer service to service lots identified as Parts 1, 2, 3 & 4 on Registered Plan 11 R10033; e. the Security has been lodged with the Municipality; Security 17. Before applying for any building permit, or commencing any works on Municipal lands including road allowances, the Subdivider shall provide the Municipality with performance security as described in Attachment "E" to be held by the Municipality until all of the obligations of the Subdivider have been discharged. The security may be in the form of cash or an irrevocable letter of credit from a chartered bank. In the case of cash, the Municipality shall hold funds in a non-interest bearing account. In the case of a letter of credit, the form and content of it shall be satisfactory to the Municipality. Default 18. In the event of Subdivider's default (as determined by the Municipal Engineer), it is specifically anticipated by the parties that the Municipality will, at its sole discretion, contract for completion of all required works, services and other obligations, such that all expenses including administration shall be conducted without cost to the Municipality. In the event that the funds available by means of the security are insufficient to permit the completion of all remaining works and services, these shall be completed according to priorities identified by the Municipality. In the event that the Municipality determines that all works and services cannot be completed with available funds, the Municipality may, in the alternative, defer completion at its discretion, pending more favourable proposals, tenders or completion arrangements. The Municipality has no obligation to complete works for which funds are not available and the Subdivider on their behalf and on behalf of their heirs, successors and assigns, releases the Municipality from any liability in connection with arrangements for completion. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board Coverage 19. The Subdivider agree that they shall at their own expense procure and carry or cause to be procured and carried and paid for, full Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) coverage for all workers, employees, servants and others engaged in or upon any work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement for which such coverage is required by law. Insurance 20. (a) The Subdivider agrees to maintain insurance or require their contractors to maintain insurance in sufficient amount and description as will protect the Subdivider and the Municipality from claims for damages, personal injury including death, and for claims from property damage which may arise from the Subdivider's operations pursuant to this Agreement, including any act or omission of the Subdivider's agents or employees while engaged in any activity pursuant to this Agreement and such coverage shall include all costs, charges and expenses reasonably incurred for any injury or damage. (b) In addition to the foregoing, the Subdivider covenant and agree that: (i) The limits of liability for Personal Injury, Bodily Injury and Property Damage combined shall be for not less than Two Million ($2,000,000.00) Dollars for each occurrence. (ii) All policies shall provide that they cannot be cancelled, allowed to lapse or be materially changed (to the detriment of the Municipality) without at least thirty (30) day's notice to the Municipality by registered mail. (iii) The Municipality shall be named as an added insured and the policy shall include a provision for cross liability. Construction Liens 21. (a) The Subdivider shall comply with all of the provisions of the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, as amended from time to time and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, shall hold in its possession all the statutory holdbacks and any additional funds required to be held by the said Act. These holdbacks and funds shall not be disbursed except in accordance with the Act. (b) The Subdivider shall, at their own expense, within ten (10) days of receiving written notice from the Municipality to do so, pay, discharge, vacate, and obtain and register a release of all charges, claims, liens and all preserved or perfected liens, made, brought or registered pursuant to the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, which affect any lands of the Municipality, including public highways and road allowances, and which arise out of the performance of this Agreement by the Subdivider and their servants, employees, agents, contractors and subcontractors. (c) The Subdivider shall indemnify and hold harmless the Municipality from all losses, damages, expenses, actions, causes of actions, suits, claims, demands and costs whatsoever which may arise either directly or indirectly by reason of any failure, neglect or refusal by the Subdivider to comply with the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, and arising out of the performance of this Agreement by the Subdivider and their servants, employees, agents, contractors and subcontractors. (d) The Public Works Operations Supervisor for the Municipality may at any time, authorize the use of all or part of the securities required pursuant to this Agreement, including cash deposit or letters of credit: i. to pay, discharge, vacate, and obtain and register a release of all charges, claims, liens, and all preserved or perfected liens, made, brought or registered pursuant to the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, which affect any lands, including public highways and road allowances of the Municipality in the event the Subdivider default on the performance of this section; and ii. to pay to the Municipality any amounts owing to it pursuant to this section. Unsold Lots 22. The Subdivider is to plant unsold lots with suitable ground cover and to keep grass and weeds cut. Failure to do so will result in the Corporation performing the work and assessing a charge or lien to the property. Indemnification 23. The Subdivider shall indemnify and save harmless the Municipality against all losses, damages, claims, actions, demands, suits, costs and interest incurred which arise directly or indirectly from anything done in connection with this Agreement, whether in performance of, outside of or contrary to this Agreement. Other 24. Entry into this Agreement with the Subdivider shall in no way fetter legislative or administrative discretion of the Municipality or of any of its officers or staff with regard to the approval or administration of any matters in connection with any development on the said Lands. 25. The Subdivider understands and agrees that there shall be no work performed except in conformity with all applicable by-laws and Provincial and Federal legislation and regulations, and this Agreement does not exempt the Subdivider from any applicable statute, regulation, or code of any legislative, administrative, or governmental authority, and the Subdivider shall obtain and pay for all permits. Notice to Subsequent Subdivider 26. The Subdivider agrees that any payments made or works installed pursuant to this agreement shall not be deemed to be development charges of any sort whether under the provisions of the Development Charges Act or a by-law thereunder, or pursuant to any front-ending provisions of that Act. It is further agreed that the Subdivider shall not make any claims whatsoever against the Municipality or any other land Subdivider of any lands for a contribution or reimbursement in any way for any monies expended by the Subdivider to effect the works. Registration 27. The Subdivider, at his expense, shall register this Agreement on title to the Lands. The Subdivider shall cause a duplicate registered copy and a Solicitor's Certificate to be delivered to the Municipality in the following form: Certificate of Solicitor TO: The Corporation of the Municipality FROM:"Company Name" RE: street address type of agreement (site plan, condominium, subdivision) Agreement between "Subdivider name"and The Corporation of the Municipality For the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00) and other good and valuable consideration, I hereby certify that "Subdivider name"is the registered Subdivider of the lands described in the type of agreement between Subdivider and The Corporation of the Municipality which was registered on date as Instrument Number at the Land Registry/Land Titles Office Number at I further certify that the lands described in the said agreement are the lands intended to be subject to the agreement and that the agreement binds the Subdivider and its successors in title. l further certify that at the time of registration, the Subdivider's title was subject to a mortgage in favour of(list any mortgages, liens and assignments- if none, leave paragraph out). Dated in the Village of County of this day of , 20 "Company" By its solicitor Name: Firm: Binding 28. The covenants, agreements, conditions and undertakings herein contained on the part of the Subdivider shall run with the Land and shall be binding upon the Subdivider and upon the Subdivider's heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, as Subdivider and occupiers of the Land from time to time and shall be appurtenant to the adjoining highways in the Subdividership of the Municipality and this Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the appropriate authority and its successors and assigns. Assignment 29. Neither party is permitted to assign rights and obligations under the Agreement without the permission from the other, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Ex it 30. In the event that no construction of the primary services has commenced within two 2) years from the date of registration of this Agreement the Municipality may, at its option, on one month's notice to the Subdivider, declare this Agreement to be subject to re-negotiation, whereupon the Subdivider agrees that it will not undertake any construction on the said lands until this Agreement has been re- negotiated. Separate Covenants 31. All of the provisions of this Agreement are intended to be construed as covenants and agreements as though the words importing such covenants and agreements were used in each separate clause hereof. Should any provision of this Agreement be adjudged unlawful or not enforceable, it shall be considered separate and severable from the Agreement and its remaining provisions as though the unlawful or unenforceable provision had not been included. Municipality's Expense 32. The Subdivider shall reimburse the Municipality for expenses incurred in the preparation of the Subdivision Agreement upon execution of the agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have hereunto affixed their signatures and corporate seal attested to by the hands of their proper officers, duly authorized in that behalf. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED ) In the presence of ) Michele Szorenyi Per Michael G. Szorenyi, POA Witness ) Date THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Per: Mayor Date: ) Per: Clerk We have authority to bind the Corporation. Attachment "A" DESCRIPTION OF LANDS Lands in the Village of Straffordville, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin more particularly described as: Registered Plan 11 R-10033 Parts 1-4, being described as Lots 3, 4 and 5, Part of Lots 2, 8, 11, 12 and 13, Block C, Reference Plan 205, Village of Straffordville, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin Attachment "B" Proposed Lot Pattern COO(ORATE SCHWULE PlAll 11R-1on55 POINT NDRTFiR7G FASTING PART SCHEDULE .z x LOB 4 AND S --! BLOCK C LOTS 16,1L 12 AND 13 .: .......:_ � REdSTEREb PLAN?AS — ! r S�l AYN UN AM W CN1Y OF ELGW 7 METRIC I ART i PART PART' 3 ._. .... j WRYEYDWS CERTIFICATE - e t z`� I PART, r ` b 4 I 1 x .. NOTES LEGEND t 1 PF 1 KIM RUSTED SURVElWO LTO, ONTAM LAA0 9jRW'hi x1fpNG ph{IY�vaPb�A a�f.JMaK-gym ' YM(Cl:it-9XAP#TEAM£: W� GENERAL NOTES zo i o; o II a a / ® s awEnc RDA,m ro onxR ARU WDtoww°a _eucw.ao sNDWN w � t� r' �a �� � N� � a I ANDMm I.Aaav�wm�e�A»uw vmrrwnws•.vnTr,m swr,w.A uMim. - � I g mAOWux LJ_I Pwnm wn TO°° 5 D n,xax,�TMswRAm mevATE DRNN mlRrcnas s,ALL TENNWIIE vO,x-T TIE PRroDm 1 J a •- a¢ p LLJ �mrmli•elm n P110ARE.vrs la'1OwM.un.w rni'Wasu,�,x.loam Wa°D nux I /� anz 11 9Z i <<z o �»gam e a j s�s� a n"rte L0O1�k6 1Uxn"aanBls�rvmmlArz am uo mlann eE�r�Ixm Rr cwwLrwo J �1-I�\ wwCP w � tt�cwPmN�YEA sxw.P�.c zolm",w.•..x a /LL_l�(n a Lamm,a vn�Drav,sw.0 ff Rrvwaac raR m sa.0 rRarz�m.*DM«unwo ; I m" � .f' ` , o a- ',::' � u°'nnis ix¢w�nc amTxD sLxRs Ew cWwE DRcxs tWFale uWNc Arrc arcs ! l pp 'Cl c �a 'j +-01i .T \�'�i g u oimrmz mR w'munw e6mL'� awmxnmNslmxcnw wMG =«"".M. I de _u' f �� cn,rm,xE«Rn,,D u.oW.x�suss o,NmwscrosmtD mux°wcaM,van wcMQ , 12 a. i li � ��'__�E�'�! '• '""']`, � 8 I� �` ^ •, ��� - :�• - ` s wsnx�D u�Auro'AD Rv mrsM'cax"iRA�. __ e w,wW,.,,�, wN FN�-Aw awrAm .xoDWAtLmw A �Lau,c uTam°wA"r Wwa�Liw vvn rrexw�"D"s _ $ _ Da�..•o.drn a NOEBAN. eoxo nADzn ewo TERA4Jiixst ff TFD�wM'�WOi-DowxAei'm J smc%oiRxarc ro w v. eas. x a zo _ y $ / / ia16 Lawn Rrc 9EDpNa.awDiLD wM B¢MMa¢aRf— roRD 3zz �-- u�i$ _r��` SUWD0.IS wsT BE SuwoRim N ACWim�xa wM ww srtaRGnaxs M GS uNE zze.n va o � wL fled E °A Sz➢pL W CLEW NAME BAIXRLL b ACC@TABI£N ACCA O A wM xmdxG NaTES —... .... •-. _,,.. •N $ - �`^'—... ... DEEP BADWILL SHALL 6E UxidM.r CDVPACIFD iX AammAH¢wM wmfIGTIPS WAxHL AND G1D0ASN3 SIMIL MANE axwAAw BAD(RLL RAtm Fpt Sapnn wNMUII a w.eDES (� PRIVATE DRAIN CONNECTION R. Tro�,p�°E °°�°•*�TMa TMD r T ] .« :. NAN'TAW S A. 5TM snu"�,mGuss �i A ow+,°ri s' r�'s"A: cna w WLr y^ >o _ MWwx, zaa,w a•Aa'A•Ore.) —-^ ' $ $ $A PRIVATE GRAIN CONNECl10N NOTES y �y,,�uAr rµN./n cp s wLc uxn ma cr a AcaPrtn. 4 �w boa y 'a sd e w m OnWA x Grow a x o Wxm ANY 9 i a w D"m as g6 swl aE w D IDAixo Amra ro Hai } Z " __'°t I z1 :1 I,9 a w10'" •y I �r '0 fro M;W_e[slwvrm mw Au AN_TO a aSlumm uo sTaCwam As aiWcttD FOR m �. g� LL_rc 790rtD fRG ME —FT.TMR£W MIFAS TE N1 5 MDT rIW APwww oc nE Lx°•rJn Mo REwuTSN c a' a� a, ro A `M01w""ix i c aisflm`w` a .•ocs°�:'W.Y E x BAN-1 wr.swu BE um AT D�OP"'e,Anw`�s r�wxiwA�i alrRun Dorms urc oc�mm [p�f l A a. _ 0 ro xorow,x �:Law1�D"o ca "`°° :rPM1RwL°RDo ADcuvMwrs e ' rrcErslR�r f o �Wn oN kAV BLE mrA'xs r�i=D'Er'auim eauirlsnr N"�Dr eL f...••.xifp BNtLo. N �y a• MINIMUM TRENCH WIDTHS ` D M ' . GRADING NOTES �, ������ Q��oo���o� a n, NEMs m� oua µD�Ru a Haw Rs wroM a m aM RNs sxan a¢� �anXnMFa� �MDMroPwfl�Rra�LaDwE,�DM,m �xNWx NEAR rA� s Haw LLr BE,.a Mw M aRAaE DG PT AS NOTED - _sNwe saEs RNLL°E.1 MANMw(v-BormM ADaD>rAeq ALL K I x A r RrsB LL aR D 0 AT WNWUM TO sWME,AND/OR aw. - =CLWAVe SDXwMr�w SWAI£5 SILT FENCES!SnMW BNFS UxR OroWM rs 6MMnNm. ( 230 230 ROOF uAmrs Mun x tw0tm TO RmDNo s,IxErs waa _ _ Nw EDM m z xICIaA4D[/.m,w wW#1bm1 1IF11 a uSm. - \\� _ [ADDING NOTES° -�tw sro BANS MIOND��°T�FOR iNE Awxovw a TxE mxsuLmo 229 229 t.Dvm a a a smW wnD.w d",s wWc.Wn x vDG WxE mNunws As A a>W,»,w waNnWAr aLSMnr,nam Luw sDss xa°D xorE N RDXnwn Eon Au ors TO n%m:A s.Ni angxa ttILYOzfl SHALL BE SET ro SDD PAOPDvn 9WALE MMAR DRM`/AYS SNNL xANE xS x.Au RmawR.R.oaxa MA,wNs Wore a eaMAaTm ro oss nAwwm•.acme M N wM Fw.rwus°s RaNX 228 - 228 N°"Awa"CFDAaN"nw'0°�W:oaiL N°"n°::$Da,,.me wc°"6XLwG w - - A � LASS B BEDDING R D TE:_ N TOP OF FOUNDATIONS AND LOT GRADING SHOWN ARE - - - -- _ 227 DESIGN ELEVATIONS ONLY NOT AS 227 226 _.._ 1 1 __._._ ....__ _.._- _._. 226 225 225 "°"-`AFAOI 224 _ 224 x mnM.Aw "" I-,�•An e A €€ ._ Emiwa wo _ 228 a,•aa Mc „ 223 _- _.... _._..__. ___._..._ _.__. .. ..___ 223 227 — MS _. mom•°..x•A• -Z wl�l�"'"8vaos 22s umw�wE/ �a ma+ro Ez 222 _ - _ .. ._ a - 222 225 MWxr 225 224 ro tint a0W TYPICAL CROSS SECTION nAna X nnnON LOOKING NORTH-SCALE: 1:100 S LEGEND METRIC SCALE. HORIZ. 1:500,VERT. 1:50 nz MUNICIPAL ROLL NUMBER E 1 POSSIBLE FUTURE ROAD GRADE MUNICIPALITY OF B A Y H A M - S T R A F F O R D V I L L E PROPOSED SANITARY SEVER B11 NUMBER Tx TOP OF FDUNDARON •,yz.., EXISTING STORM SEWER w ADJUST.REMOVE.FUNRE �___._ PROPOSED SURFACE ORNNAGE °ARr °•'. O O PROPOSED MANHOLE,EXISTING --w EXISUNG GONTWRS-J.D.BARNES UNITED EXISTING D SZORENYI SEVERANCES CATCHBA9N $0 SWALE(EXISTING,PROPOSED) ill PROPOSED DRIVEWAY T A CILVESY S 7 PJ.PENNER.. STATION 0+690 TO STATION 0+842 • •- CASMNN EXISTING EtEVAMWS-CJDL 2005 7 C BURIED HYDRO E STING DECIDUOUS TREE•CDINFEROUS TREE ® ASPHALT TO BE REMOVED AND �.��.•� yore. *— BURIED TELEPHONE O•'T� REPLACED , ICWgy CIAD•la Pa MwDAAe CaNMDIfl IT Aa DESIGN BY: AG DRAWN BY: Sfl CHECKED BY: AG SANDY TOWN ROAD —c— BURIED T/V CABLE UNIT OF BRUSH/WIDODED AREA MUNICIPAL No. PROPOSED RNISWED ELEVATIONS N.. REVISION DATE10 BY PR0.ECT NO.12T0 SURVEY BY: iPM DALE:i3 MAY PO1B DRAWING Na Attachment "D" Time Limits All primary services to be completed within two (2) years of agreement registration, including: a. Storm Sewers b. Sanitary Sewers c. Roadworks & Driveway Access Attachment "E" Cost Estimate and Security Schedule COST ESTIMATE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM-STRAFFORDVILLE C JDL Consulting Engineers Sandytown Road Severances 1210 STS 8-1ul-16 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL, Work within Sandytown Road ROW Part I-Storm Sewers 1.1 375mmO CSP Culverts rn 36.0 $200.00 $7,200.00 Subtotal-Part 1 $7,200.00 Part 2-Sanitary Sewers 2.1 125mmo PDC Saddle or Cut-In Tee EA 4.0 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 2.2 125mmo Sanitary PDC m 60.4 $125.00 $7,550.00 Subtotal-Part 2 $13,550.00 Part 3-Roadworks&Driveway Access To Sandytown Road 3.1 Removals,Excavation and Grading L/S 1.0 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 3.2 HL3(60mm/75mm) tonne 44.4 $135.00 $5,994.00 3.3 Granular'A'(250mm) M3 52.1 $40.00 $2,084.00 14 Restoration-100mm Topsoil and Seed M2 454.6 $5.00 $2,273.00 Subtotal-Part 3 $12,851.00 Total Work Within ROW $33,601.00 The Above Excludes: • Land Aquisition • Legal&Survey Cost's • Development Charges • Future Work Municipality of Bayharn Site Plan Security Requirements 100%Work within ROW $33,601.00 1.76%Effective HST $591.38 Total Security Required $34,192.38 THIS SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT made in duplicate this 21IT day of July 2016. BETWEEN : MICHELE SZORENYI of the Municipality of Bayham, in the County of Elgin, Hereinafter called the "Subdivider" OF THE FIRST PART - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Hereinafter called the "Municipality" OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Subdivider proposes to subdivide property described as Lots 3, 4 and 5, Part of Lots 2, 8, 11, 12 and 13, Block c. Reference Plan 205, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin; the said Lands as more particularly set out on a plot plan marked as Attachment "A" attached hereto showing the lots to be created; AND WHEREAS Consents to Sever were granted by the County of Elgin Land Division Committee on December 18, 2015 for applications E105/15, E106/15, E107/15 and E108/15, conditional upon (inter alia) the entering into of an agreement dealing with services for the lots to be created; AND WHEREAS, the Subdivider, has agreed with the Corporation to comply with their requirements with respect to the providing of services for the lands proposed to be subdivided and other matters hereinafter set forth; NOW THEREFORE, the Parties herein, in consideration of other good and valuable consideration and the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00), of lawful money of Canada, by each to the other paid (the receipt whereof is hereby by each acknowledged), covenant and agree with the other as follows: Municipal Engineer 1. Wherever the phrase "Municipal Engineer" is used throughout this Agreement, it shall mean the Municipality's Chief Building Official, the Municipality's Water/Wastewater Operations Manager, or the Municipality's Public Works Operations Supervisor or such other person as the Council of the Municipality may from time to time appoint to deal with the administration of this Agreement. List of Attachments 2.The following Attachments are hereby declared to form part of the Agreement between the parties: Attachment Description "A" Legal description of the said Lands. "B" Registered Plan 11R10033 Parts 1-4, showing the proposed lot pattern "C" Grading Plan and Servicing Plan showing the facilities, works and services to be provided on the said Lands. "D" Time Limits "F Cost Estimate and Security Schedule Zoning 3. The Subdivider shall apply for a Zoning By-law amendment (removal of holding symbol) as required by the Notice of Decision for Consent and is subject to a Subdivision Agreement. The arrangements contemplated in this Agreement are conditional upon removal of the holding provision. The Municipality agrees to consider the proposed application in the context of these arrangements. Access 4. Access to the lots to be created shall be at the location applied for and approved by the Municipal Engineer. The maximum width of a driveway measured along Sandytown Road to serve a residential use shall be nine (9.0) metres (30 feet). As-Constructed Drawings 5. The Subdivider shall provide for the Municipality records "as-constructed" drawings to the satisfaction of the Municipality for municipal services installed by the Subdivider. These drawings shall be submitted in a satisfactory form prior to the release of any performance bond or security required by this Agreement. Plans and Specifications 6. Plans and specifications for all works and services herein required to be done by the Subdivider shall be first submitted to the Municipal Engineer in a form satisfactory to him and such work shall not be commenced until the Municipal Engineer has received such plans and specifications and has expressly authorized, in writing, such work to commence. All works and services shall be constructed and installed strictly in accordance with the said plans and specifications, all to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer. The Subdivider agrees to construct all services and provide other requirements that will be known only after the details of the engineering design are submitted to the Municipality. The Municipal Engineer may require, in writing, such variance from such plans and specifications as may be required by conditions which may be disclosed as the work progresses, and by sound engineering practice. The works and services required to be done by the Subdivider, including but not limited to engineering and restoration works, shall be wholly at the expense of the Subdivider except as may be otherwise herein expressly provided. Sanitary Sewers 7. a. Sanitary sewers shall be constructed of such size, type, position and extent as are shown on the plans and specifications provided in Attachment "C" that have been certified approved by the Ministry of the Environment& Climate Change (MOECC), if applicable, and the Municipal Engineer. Any material changes to be made to these plans and specifications shall require approval by the MOECC, if applicable, and the Municipal Engineer in writing, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. Storm sewers, if required by the Municipality;shall be constructed of such size, type, position and extent as are shown on the plans and specifications approved by the Municipal Engineer or otherwise required by him in writing. The Municipal Engineer may require this work to be done by a contractor whose competence is approved jointly by the Municipal Engineer and the Subdivider, at the expense of the Subdivider. It shall be the responsibility of the Subdivider to provide a satisfactory outlet for said storm sewers, if required, and sanitary sewers (which for the purpose of this Agreement, shall mean the nearest approved Municipal sewer outlet). b. Sanitary sewers, with sanitary private drain connections shall be constructed to the lot line of the subject lands. c. Storm sewers including catch basins and connections, if required by the Municipality, shall be provided and connected as shown on the approved plans and specifications. d. If the works lead to the installation of storm or sanitary sewers, to be assumed by the Municipality, located on easements over private property (including land owned by the Municipality that is not a road allowance), all sanitary sewer manholes shall be located in a location acceptable to the Municipal Engineer in order to facilitate maintenance of the sanitary sewer system by the Subdivider, and all storm sewer manholes shall be placed in easily accessible areas if not placed in paved parking lots or driveways. e. The Subdivider agrees to notify their consulting engineer in the event that any existing sewer or drain is encountered during the progress of construction. The Subdivider further agree to have its consulting engineer investigate the matter and comply with the recommendations of its consulting engineer as approved by the Municipal Engineer's Department with respect to the sewer or drain encountered, such as connecting the existing sewer to a new sewer being constructed or into another existing sewer, at no cost to the Municipality. Adequate sewer easements are to be provided to the Municipality if necessary. The Subdivider shall also ensure that there is no interruption to any subsurface drainage flow because of construction on the site that would have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties. Should such an interruption occur, the Subdivider shall carry out any necessary remedial work to correct the problem as recommended by its consulting engineer and to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer, at no cost to the Municipality. f. Frontage and Connection charges are payable before any dwelling unit is connected to the public (sanitary) sewer system. Such charges are payable at the time of issuance of a building permit, in accordance with the fees and charges in force and effect at the time of application for such building permit. Sewer Subdividership 8. The Subdivider acknowledges and agrees that the Municipality will not accept Subdividership nor allow connections of any type until the works are completed to its full satisfaction, as-constructed drawings are provided, and such determination is at the sole discretion of the Municipality. Grading, Drainage and Storm Water Management Plans 9. The Subdivider shall prepare and deposit with the Municipality grading and storm water drainage plans approved by the Municipal Engineer showing the final grades of all lots and roadways. Any lands designated for drainage works and all drainage facilities shall be indicated on such plans to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer. The Subdivider shall agree to carry out or cause to be carried out the recommendations of the grading and drainage plans, which shall form part of this Agreement as Attachment "C". The drainage plan requires the Owner enter into a Mutual Drain Agreement with the abutting landowner for drainage. Roads 10. a. The Subdivider, or their consulting engineer, shall ensure that any proposed excavation, construction, entrance or exit installation, demolition, etc. will not interfere with or be in conflict with location and/or depth of any existing underground facilities, including sewers, pipelines, mains on street allowances or private rights-of-way, services, meter and regulator installations, valve boxes, cathodic protection test points, etc. In instances of apparent conflict, the Subdivider, or their consultant, shall obtain field locates from the appropriate commission, utility or agency. b. All streets and walkways, if any, shall be graded, including fill or excavation as required by the Municipal Engineer to their full width of the allowance before any building permit will be issued and the approved road allowance grades from street line to street line shall be maintained at all times to the grades and levels and to the specifications and requirements and to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer until the date of passing of the by-law assuming the said streets and walkways. Sidewalks 11. Not required Streetlights 12. Not required Notification 13, The lots are being created without electrical and telephone services and the costs of providing electrical and telephone services will be at the expense of the Subdivider or its Successors in title. Time Limit for Work and Guarantee for Workmanship and Material 14. Save as herein otherwise provided the Subdivider agrees to complete the work required under this Agreement within the Time Limits specified in the Attachment hereto as Attachment "D", and to guarantee the workmanship and materials for a period of Two (2) years from the date that the said works are approved, in writing, by the Corporation. Any work other than that specifically provided for in Attachment "D" shall be completed within the time limit provided for herein, for sidewalks, curbs and gutters and roads, as applicable. The Subdivider shall, in the period prior to final acceptance of the services or utilities to be constructed under this Agreement as soon as it is practicable after receiving written notice from the Corporation repair any damage caused to existing services or utilities by the implementation or performance of this Agreement or caused during the construction of dwelling units or other buildings on any part of the development. Should the Subdivider fail or neglect to carry out repairs or any other work required of this Agreement the Corporation may, in addition to any other rights or remedies it may perform the work and assess a charge or lien to the property. Inspection and Completion of Works 15. Upon the completion of required off-site works, the Subdivider shall cause a Certificate of Completion to be delivered to the Municipality in the following form: Certificate of Completion of Works To: The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham For good and valuable consideration now paid by the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham (hereinafter called the "Municipality'), the receipt and sufficiency of which 1/we hereby acknowledge, I/we hereby certify that the municipal services constructed pursuant to the Agreement between the Municipality and Subdivider, Registered as Instrument No. and pertaining to the property known municipally as have been: inspected during construction in accordance with standard engineering practice; and constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Municipal Engineer. Dated and sealed at Ontario, this day of , 20 Registered Professional Engineer(Ontario) Building Permits 16. No applications shall be made for building permits and no building permit will be issued until the following materials have been received by the Municipality's Engineer: a. A survey prepared by a qualified Ontario Land Surveyor showing all necessary setbacks in compliance with Zoning By-laws; b. a grading and drainage plan approved by the Municipal Engineer showing the final grades of all lands and roadways. c. all permits and authorizations have been obtained by the Subdivider at its expense d. Certificate of Approval from the Ministry of Environment & Climate Change, if applicable, for the installation of sanitary sewer service and an Engineer's Certificate of Completion with as-constructed drawings for the completed installation of the sanitary sewer service to service lots identified as Parts 1, 2, 3 &4 on Registered Plan 11 R10033; e. the Security has been lodged with the Municipality; Security 17. Before applying for any building permit, or commencing any works on Municipal lands including road allowances, the Subdivider shall provide the Municipality with performance security as described in Attachment "E" to be held by the Municipality until all of the obligations of the Subdivider have been discharged. The security may be in the form of cash or an irrevocable letter of credit from a chartered bank. In the case of cash, the Municipality shall hold funds in a non-interest bearing account. In the case of a letter of credit, the form and content of it shall be satisfactory to the Municipality. Default 18. In the event of Subdivider's default (as determined by the Municipal Engineer), it is specifically anticipated by the parties that the Municipality will, at its sole discretion, contract for completion of all required works, services and other obligations, such that all expenses including administration shall be conducted without cost to the Municipality. In the event that the funds available by means of the security are insufficient to permit the completion of all remaining works and services, these shall be completed according to priorities identified by the Municipality. In the event that the Municipality determines that all works and services cannot be completed with available funds, the Municipality may, in the alternative, defer completion at its discretion, pending more favourable proposals, tenders or completion arrangements. The Municipality has no obligation to complete works for which funds are not available and the Subdivider on their behalf and on behalf of their heirs, successors and assigns, releases the Municipality from any liability in connection with arrangements for completion. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board Coverage 19. The Subdivider agree that they shall at their own expense procure and carry or cause to be procured and carried and paid for, full Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) coverage for all workers, employees, servants and others engaged in or upon any work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement for which such coverage is required by law. Insurance 20. (a) The Subdivider agrees to maintain insurance or require their contractors to maintain insurance in sufficient amount and description as will protect the Subdivider and the Municipality from claims for damages, personal injury including death, and for claims from property damage which may arise from the Subdivider's operations pursuant to this Agreement, including any act or omission of the Subdivider's agents or employees while engaged in any activity pursuant to this Agreement and such coverage shall include all costs, charges and expenses reasonably incurred for any injury or damage. (b) In addition to the foregoing, the Subdivider covenant and agree that: (i) The limits of liability for Personal Injury, Bodily Injury and Property Damage combined shall be for not less than Two Million ($2,000,000.00) Dollars for each occurrence. (ii) All policies shall provide that they cannot be cancelled, allowed to lapse or be materially changed (to the detriment of the Municipality) without at least thirty (30) day's notice to the Municipality by registered mail. (iii) The Municipality shall be named as an added insured and the policy shall include a provision for cross liability. Construction Liens 21. (a) The Subdivider shall comply with all of the provisions of the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, as amended from time to time and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, shall hold in its possession all the statutory holdbacks and any additional funds required to be held by the said Act. These holdbacks and funds shall not be disbursed except in accordance with the Act. (b) The Subdivider shall, at their own expense, within ten (10) days of receiving written notice from the Municipality to do so, pay, discharge, vacate, and obtain and register a release of all charges, claims, liens and all preserved or perfected liens, made, brought or registered pursuant to the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, which affect any lands of the Municipality, including public highways and road allowances, and which arise out of the performance of this Agreement by the Subdivider and their servants, employees, agents, contractors and subcontractors. (c) The Subdivider shall indemnify and hold harmless the Municipality from all losses, damages, expenses, actions, causes of actions, suits, claims, demands and costs whatsoever which may arise either directly or indirectly by reason of any failure, neglect or refusal by the Subdivider to comply with the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, and arising out of the performance of this Agreement by the Subdivider and their servants, employees, agents, contractors and subcontractors. (d) The Public Works Operations Supervisor for the Municipality may at any time, authorize the use of all or part of the securities required pursuant to this Agreement, including cash deposit or letters of credit: i. to pay, discharge, vacate, and obtain and register a release of all charges, claims, liens, and all preserved or perfected liens, made, brought or registered pursuant to the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, which affect any lands, including public highways and road allowances of the Municipality in the event the Subdivider default on the performance of this section; and ii. to pay to the Municipality any amounts owing to it pursuant to this section. Unsold Lots 22. The Subdivider is to plant unsold lots with suitable ground cover and to keep grass and weeds cut. Failure to do so will result in the Corporation performing the work and assessing a charge or lien to the property. Indemnification 23. The Subdivider shall indemnify and save harmless the Municipality against all losses, damages, claims, actions, demands, suits, costs and interest incurred which arise directly or indirectly from anything done in connection with this Agreement, whether in performance of, outside of or contrary to this Agreement. Other 24. Entry into this Agreement with the Subdivider shall in no way fetter legislative or administrative discretion of the Municipality or of any of its officers or staff with regard to the approval or administration of any matters in connection with any development on the said Lands. 25. The Subdivider understands and agrees that there shall be no work performed except in conformity with all applicable by-laws and Provincial and Federal legislation and regulations, and this Agreement does not exempt the Subdivider from any applicable statute, regulation, or code of any legislative, administrative, or governmental authority, and the Subdivider shall obtain and pay for all permits. Notice to Subsequent Subdivider 26. The Subdivider agrees that any payments made or works installed pursuant to this agreement shall not be deemed to be development charges of any sort whether under the provisions of the Development Charges Act or a by-law thereunder, or pursuant to any front-ending provisions of that Act. It is further agreed that the Subdivider shall not make any claims whatsoever against the Municipality or any other land Subdivider of any lands for a contribution or reimbursement in any way for any monies expended by the Subdivider to effect the works. Registration 27. The Subdivider, at his expense, shall register this Agreement on title to the Lands. The Subdivider shall cause a duplicate registered copy and a Solicitor's Certificate to be delivered to the Municipality in the following form: Certificate of Solicitor TO: The Corporation of the Municipality FROM:"Company Name" RE: street address type of agreement(site plan, condominium, subdivision) Agreement between "Subdivider name"and The Corporation of the Municipality For the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00) and other good and valuable consideration, I hereby certify that "Subdivider name"is the registered Subdivider of the lands described in the type of agreement between Subdivider and The Corporation of the Municipality which was registered on date as Instrument Number at the Land Registry/Land Titles Office Number at 1 further certify that the lands described in the said agreement are the lands intended to be subject to the agreement and that the agreement binds the Subdivider and its successors in title. 1 further certify that at the time of registration, the Subdivider's title was subject to a mortgage in favour of(list any mortgages, liens and assignments-if none, leave paragraph out). Dated in the Village of County of this day of 20 "Company" By its solicitor Name: Firm: Binding 28. The covenants, agreements, conditions and undertakings herein contained on the part of the Subdivider shall run with the Land and shall be binding upon the Subdivider and upon the Subdivider's heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, as Subdivider and occupiers of the Land from time to time and shall be appurtenant to the adjoining highways in the Subdividership of the Municipality and this Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the appropriate authority and its successors and assigns. Assignment 29. Neither party is permitted to assign rights and obligations under the Agreement without the permission from the other, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Expiry 30. In the event that no construction of the primary services has commenced within two �2) years from the date of registration of this Agreement the Municipality may, at its option, on one month's notice to the Subdivider, declare this Agreement to be subject to re-negotiation, whereupon the Subdivider agrees that it will not undertake any construction on the said lands until this Agreement has been re- negotiated. Separate Covenants 31. All of the provisions of this Agreement are intended to be construed as covenants and agreements as though the words importing such covenants and agreements were used in each separate clause hereof. Should any provision of this Agreement be adjudged unlawful or not enforceable, it shall be considered separate and severable from the Agreement and its remaining provisions as though the unlawful or unenforceable provision had not been included. Municipality's Expense 32. The Subdivider shall reimburse the Municipality for expenses incurred in the preparation of the Subdivision Agreement upon execution of the agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have hereunto affixed their signatures and corporate seal attested to by the hands of their proper officers, duly authorized in that behalf. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED ) In the presence of ) Michele Szorenyi Per Michael G. Szorenyi, POA Witness ) Date THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Per: Mayor Date: ) Per: Clerk We have authority to bind the Corporation. Attachment "A" DESCRIPTION OF LANDS Lands in the Village of Straffordville, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin more particularly described as: Registered Plan 11R-10033 Parts 1-4, being described as Lots 3, 4 and 5, Part of Lots 2, 8, 11, 12 and 13, Block C, Reference Plan 205, Village of Straffordville, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin Attachment "B" Proposed Lot Pattern S.v ATE SdEUE PLAN IRR to 5 POINT NORMNO EA571NO PART 9dIFDUI£ i r _ -[, t� � �AND . � PART OF LOTS 2 S 17 6,it, AND 13 f �...-.� BLOCK CED PLAN 206� REOSTE 0 5 TOYMSWP OL'@AWAY T 13 � COUNTY OF EICN V: k xw"us"SuRn-to LID ' PART -_.- 2 t f PART - J �. CATS -.. VfYWY CER S SUR 5 Tlii 011 ` t SPA" 4 _ f ! .—._.. Y ..i IT w 'FAv S— ' " _ x NOTES >yq-7a3'4 rca:; s.. K� LEGEND ZT •.• •:`• - .-•, KIN O�NUM�O Vdq 9 D LTO. . ward:n-aaxrP�� rn.:..;;,,•= - i / i saY I t5 GENERAL NOTES Z I I O i , N I / ® 1.eAllxl 13 ROOEOG MA10]m O1NFR AG eDR1Wxr6 M1Fw1N.rlA]YNan alfMi W I r� ^� o I a J/ j ME MlAwxa ME NOT aNfNll®SY MC MLNGPN)tt w!er C131L,t aay.191E{y113, '1 n / N� a~ xowxr'°N10vecMAawAurr v aAYxxx svmrrwnaa A•nr wx SAwrAxr axElet Aw � I /A `\1 �•- �/ �� I-"W � ` nratm Am W00° ��••.svarAm PNVATE ones mxrccnaxe a«uL rDewArz va.PAn nc PBaPDnr r a F pmTm mmA wM MiDr G Ox PWO as YAw IDG1wN rM aDan.i0amn W000 SDIE Tm AIE waRao ra Ycr xNas I �I cn, , { r a � e �,'Er + �" a rTE LauWa DP umlrEa n APvxDnlAa arav uo aaun r:oETDwxm w canuaea 1 ~\ INCaDILLe�il'U1Me'lQ.WHOYCOYPAxE3 mxmfAa.TE ooxMAGIm MraA PROrE .L .�.,�>• °^"'ip, a /(L'(n ` a a wmaurX sox aoWIM1C moecllox rwx oaui x cexmAGIDII awl.a noalrrE rcI DPDwa Au romnrur mwlX.Txo i i a'r' � f r• � lKQ •,p• a �\ � ® uTena+.xclaea maTND sWDw Pm auoe OEOO erFonE awes ANr Pars aj� xijn\ is A TNe mxmmR aeuE wsv.0 wA�T�n wa Svur.xr macr.xan m I ; '"__.._�`1 � V:.�a �j'I �'t�' j� a v+wam am NmMnoN asaz srARmG oorxmuena.,u.oumAOEa ua Auxe '; ,Ol \ mnauxc a waD waafAxLCA 1xAas onm�xmEn - o. �i•� •I'�w xfbniMwxe amp air ,s^ N �'�� a M.ma ax.0 Muxrux Mc ramp ar,u emna wao Daaxmay.wcMm a ALL sWms Aw vaDNl/AJa wGU0u10 GTOeA91 nAOa a0 PItlVA1E ORAp 001aEalalC:. "�� xx r LL-axe axes x wEwM oesww oR ws x ao a Ne oA M T,ru Axe DPDrO e A nmwA a NORMAL ovAVArm rax A PPE soma ro a xmwJm Ar A IGrm mME a uxmeNm fax Mr_____ \ � an- � - ufxx A+M apx OTfN xFiSML 91ALL tE rNPORiro RIM YELL-WIxAC1N)IL a SIDE iDCNO FXIFNgNO m _ O THE IDAEx RPE wnxxq cow®WM BLDe010 6DIEX1eE roxolLPa —y N� - _�� _ r. uxn war s aAsarm x Aaamtx¢xM wm aEvrwtnxa sox ws uxE .._... � � a cEAN xAmc uuufL n ACcvrAaE w AxamNxoE wIN Brpoea xolEs ALL TImIDI DE'Fp � BAOSLL 9NNLElwillaLY WYPAORO IN A4OpmNOE YFM SPFCfaAlgla xAteIMFB Aw urarAme auLL xAVE awAAAA BM10EL nAcm tart aoomm waxes art ALL aoEa PRIVATE DRAIN CONNECTION SDAfRT aMwG war eE MxYmD AT ALL efa GawwAGax rMLL P Aa Aw yY: x ,Ow.ax aIAM3 as xaTALL Ar >m�a .cm".i r 1(� - " '" , a tw"ix1°'sm.OD1Nr aAus s�ai�>A�oauuwE axNu.c oxcutm..xouo PRIVATE DRAIN CONNECTION NOTES TwrJnYw Aw OAAEms iwD/at��o tea¢ smaea,r axlnn3 rm R !('T��4�,� 0 -0f f '� �a ....,,.w ew a uxrm oaaMeE axxx ox ra ow,wm �i'�ai11DAu aYrwa ME at rDxaa Aw/Ox�awAW wo uP�o-,.o:v�rAxa. w'-W t aqua S Y 1pam. 9,T pIT0M0 afONl aE,On awl aC MIOYID Anna®NO ATO�MSM� Z�O V. Mk ` Ar owt wtt m ME Pawmrc uc tI.n"ci. 1E]dT.ETD.C91PLE1E 'riM'LL9exF0 AOEA43 FlNSI ME M C0�'NMILIOx�`..� ` � � .. + arm. Avm oevucr oce w�rFx: w�"m�"¢rut ME sra xm na w=rxova.rc nc xwrEn ua Ismnnxo IV LLJ �� a- ` b,`D; a"' e ro Pxowmrrr,Ja Mx xuwwewlw m vas ovow,eavww "`O1°'m' tz RMr Pz.sINJ.s EAm A%M°mwlw°a mwimaAx M°�wer z°R'rom O 1, _ aaLL.YID ux.GE m E,o:,wa rw�.,,,aa3,xa P.wA>,T'`,I �_ �� __ •r��` �a �J �.°�e __ 'a Pvai���uss Axr mswa 1RAoua s calm EwwlaNr awawnwu xor a -•" �' p x rAao .f o�•�a) �� :� MINIMUM TRENCH WIDTHS �\ \,� ,�°` �. �a �a @a fie„ �'.• '�a .,40 .y.,••0� �' .. �a_ _.ara�.�,uut GRADING NOTES ` a. • " � walDoaa r.Na t wIw M mcnw aEurm ro oaen Nvr.ecnaw.mn wmew eonrexo aarr w lM4MG3C �C �OD�I A ��ro �� PAM a. ao �ro rwa scAns auu xoaAur ec taX Ireleul wAtt D�Pr Ax xorEn -s1rE acPas a1a1a K a:t uAmllx(r-eortw AocvrAa4 _.._ .__._ ... t•T oxa0eo Ar a MxYaM ro SAWn AxN �.�:,� w axA1Ea aLr mc3 a swAf BNE6 __. ___ _— _- SED NOTES ro s[xarAvn n.m..xm¢rmw uu a um. _ MrE N.va aaun B[Slaaitm rox tK AwxOVAt O M CaxMatxo 229 229 ._-... _ .__.___ __ _ _ I.uenr a w a alwe®wro ruu s woEAm x wm Em axma,e M -A—owwNAr aE,AR1 rnam tnlo-em aom rw+e r eerleWD mx Au cols '•it\ _ _. .__—. _ __. ._____ _— ._.._ _.____ ..____ wea®m PivaE A aMM wnoea OANDai awL BE 4T ro PAr PIMPOsrn aIIE eATMa oxnEYaw aNN1 NAVE a � - - a.wa emmn,amu x.m.xs auu s cox,nm m as swaum xmemE xww raE twntm xora Mr mwN awA w m.Anm exec una P.c Nx x am,.rr xax.urn m 228 228 nAca Ammw vaau "�� x.Oaw waM sxo Amman ra mimiex rmxe x xxr rwwr capax0 E NOTE:TOP OF FOUNDATi0N5 AND LOT GRADING SHOWN ARE 227 -- - - - - - -' - --- - - - 227 CLASS 'BY BEDDING 226 225 ... 225 ar'�ow- 224 - _ __ _ .. __ 224 I� a F- Ax a wo RPac axe y '"'AE 223 -_- ___.._._... __. _____._. _ _ .._ _-_ ______ __-..-____.____ _.__�__. ._. _ .. 223 227 x -_-- - 226 em..aces A md0 no _. _. _ _ �xyo E,smo mourn u wi _ _ 222 _:- -:.. -.__ -- _ ..___- _ _ - ___ .___ 222 225 _ >h TiT 224 rio ME NC f a PeU TYPICAL CROSS SECTION maw k E SrATIw LOOKING NORTH-SCALE:1:100 LEGEND E MUNICIPAL ROLL NUMBER [maI POSSIBLE FUTURE ROAD GRADE METRIC SCALE HORIZ. 1:5DD,VERT. 1:50 MUNICIPALITY OF BA Y H A M- S T R A F F O R D V I L L E x11 NUMBER oYw. TOP OF FOUNDATION I—SANITARY SEVER "a yY � _ __ — EXISTING STORM SEVER art IT AO.EIST,REMOVE,NNRE �__- PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINAGE D SZORENYI SEVERANCES O O PROPOSED MANHOLE,OUSTING -'-"- ETMNG CONTOURS-J.D.BARNES LIMITED EXISTING r�S ■ CATWBASIN �- (LNG PROPOSED) PROPOSED OTIVE'NAY A aLVEsx °s r P.1 vENNER STATION 0+690 TO STATION 0+842 EXISTING ELEVATIONS-CJDL 20Ds CeroWMNIC3L0Y1w�s —.— BUPoED TELEPHONE O,AMC EaSTNG OECIDLIOITS TREE.CONIFEROUS TREE ® ASPHALT TO 6E REMOVED AND —.— BUPoEO T/V OARLE LIMIT OF BRUSH/WOODED AREA x x a, 1 Rfl1rD cMoelo Prx MAeOPw onDoln 1)aaa M M DESIGN BY: AO DRAWN BY: 53 GNECKED BY:.� SANDYTOWN ROAD MUNICIPAL Na PROPOSED RMSHED ELEVATIONS Na REVISION DATE BY PROJECT NO.100 1 SURVEY BM TPw DATE:13 MAY 2Me DRAWNG No. Attachment"D" Time Limits All primary services to be completed within two (2) years of agreement registration, including: a. Storm Sewers b. Sanitary Sewers c. Roadworks & Driveway Access Attachment"E" Cost Estimate and Security Schedule COST ESTIMATE CJDL �:] , C r: y , -�J s ct_t cr �r, r 3 �. r €5'( r , rrp N t a31. t rnx, MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM-STRAFFORDVILLE Consulting Engineers n tr-+ Sandytown Road Severances 1210 STS _ 8-Jul-16 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL Work within Sandytown Road ROW Part 1-Storm Sewers 1.1 375mmo CSP Culverts m 36.0 $200.00 $7,200.00 Subtotal-Part 1 $7,200.00 Part 2-Sanitary Sewers 2.1 125mmO PDC Saddle or Cut-in Tee EA 4.0 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 2.2 125mm¢Sanitary PDC m 60.4 $125.00 $7,550.00 Subtotal-Part 2 $13,550.00 Part 3-Roadworks&Driveway Access To Sandytown Road 3.1 Removals,Excavation and Grading US 1.0 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 3.2 HL3(60mm/75mm) tonne 44.4 $135.00 $5,994.00 3.3 Granular`A'(250mm) m3 52.1 $40.00 $2,084.00 3.4 Restoration-100mm Topsoil and Seed mz 454.6 $5.00 $2,273.00 Subtotal-Part 3 $12,851.00 Total Work within ROW $33,601.00 The Above Excludes: • Land Aquisition • Legal&Survey Cost's • Development Charges • Future Work Municipality of Bayham Site Plan Security Requirements 1009.Work within ROW $33,601.00 1.76%Effective HST $591.38 Total Security Required $34,192.38 ' s REPORT t ��y DEVELOPMENT SERVICES pojtunity Is1L0 TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: DS-32/16 FILE NO. C-07 / D13.1162291 Roll # 3401-000-005-03100 split SUBJECT: Rezoning Application — 1162291 Ontario Ltd. BACKGROUND: 1162291 Ontario Ltd. submitted a rezoning to application to rezone their property at 54819 Eden Line. The property is subject to Consent Application E35/16 granted June 15, 2016 for the purpose of a surplus farm dwelling severance. A public meeting is scheduled for July 21, 2016 at 7:30 pm. At the time writing this report no additional applicant or public comments were received. The purpose of this By-law is to change the zoning for 0.64 hectare (1.5 acres) parcel of land, from Agricultural (Al-A) to Site-Specific Rural Residential (RR-30) with a reduced minimum lot frontage of 39 m instead of 50 m and change the zoning for retained farmland of 58.6 ha (145 acres) from Agricultural (All-A) to Special Agricultural (A2) in Zoning By-law Z456-2003. The subject lands are located in Part of Lot 8 and Part of Lot 9 Concession 8, on the south side of Eden Line east of Talbot Line and known municipally as 54819 Eden Line. The effect of this By-law will be to permit a surplus farm dwelling on a reduced lot frontage of 39 m (127 feet) and prohibiting the keeping of livestock and to prohibit new residential dwellings located on the retained farmland abutting the site. DISCUSSION The planner's memorandum is attached to this report providing the analysis of the application. Staff and planner are supportive of the purpose and effect of the zoning amendments as per the recommendation in this report to satisfy the condition of consent. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Rezoning Application June 22, 2016 Staff Report DS-32/16 1162291 Ontario Ltd. 2 2. IBI Memorandum dated July 2, 2016 3. Draft Zoning By-law Z649-2016 RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report DS-32/16 regarding the 1162291 Ontario Ltd. rezoning application be received for information; 2. AND THAT Zoning By-law Z456-2003, as amended, be further amended by changing the zoning on the lands owned by 1162291 Ontario Ltd., described as Concession 8 North Part Lot 8 and North Part Lot 9 from Agriculture (Al-A) to site- specific Special Agriculture (A2) on the retained lands and from Agriculture (Al-A) to Rural Residential (RR-30) on the severed surplus farm dwelling portion; 3. AND THAT Zoning By-law Z649-2016 be presented to Council for enactment. Respectfully Submitted by: Reviewed by: Margaret Underhill Paul Shipway Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator CAO MUNICIPALITY OF BAYRAM P.O. Box 160 Str°affordville, Ontario �ppo ®� NOJ 1Y0 �`unittg�is Phone (519) 866-5521 Fax (519) 866-3884 APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING BY-LAW OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM This application must be filed with the Planning Coordinator/Deputy Clerk or designate of the Municipality of Bayham along with a cheque for the required amount. The applicant should retain one copy for their records. The information in this form must be completed in full. This mandatory information must be provided with a fee of$2,000 (Zoning By-law Amendment or'Temporary Use Zoning By-law) or$1 S00 (Temporary Use Zoning By-law Renewal)or$1500(Zoning Amendment to Remove Holding Provision). If the 1application is not completed in full,the application will be returned. i'2 2c G c , � c�;�, �����{reiSd assume responsibility for any additional costs exceeding the deposited amount related to the said application and understand and agree that for payment of said additional costs shall be a condition of this signed application. Y also agree to accept all costs as rendered. Property ®caner 1 Property Owner FOR OFFICE USE ONLY D A��•+�y "� n � DEEMEID COMW. e Revised February 2015 Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 2 1. Registered Owner's lame: !/6 d ! 0/l"7v//o Z1 • !✓I'lew e4fi C14 ?r7 Address: Phone No. (Home): "----) 19 UiY '-Sqd�5p Business: -S-f 9 "S 3- ) 9LI c ca f Fax: S l c� c r., 1 La t1 t) 5 q,�25 Email: — k,\!ct r1 C) (� r 0 ci�i� C,C, "Y"-A .1 Lot and Concession(if applicable): Are there any other holders of mortgages,charges or other encumbrances of the Subject Lands? If so provide the names and addresses of such persons. /"L9 /f`q 2. Applicant/Authorized Agent: Address: �h (G>r'? Zat`rf/0r7 Owl 167C /C6 Telephone No.: !'%96 a3 1 OV4 Fax: Please specify to whom all communications should be sent: Registered Owner ( ) Applicant/Authorized Agent 3. Legal Description of the land for which the amendment is requested:Roll# 36161066 00`59 6 3106 Concession: Lot: /0 / /v)/- A) /,0/ � Reference Plan No: // Part Lot: // Street and Municipal Address No.: - Z1-rY ? Cr'C�f'i'J (lr'✓f✓ What is the size of property which is subject to this Application? 6 (f Dl..rh Area: =� � ram- Fronta e: `m (� ept m When were the subject lands acquired by the current owner? �(!� 4. Existing Official Plan Designation: A-L/1/. C IL/7C s How does the application conform to the Official Plan? Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 3 5. Existing Zoning By-law Classification: r Z Gk cGO - f- What are the current uses of the subject lands? RV R Ar`-- ��,��►.�T t/k� +_ A &- If known,provide the length of time these uses have continued on this property. If there are any existing buildings or structures on the subject lands provide the following information: Type Front Lot Side Lot Line Rear Lot Line Height Dimensions Line Setback Setbacks Setback RAP_Q If known,provide the dates in which each of these buildings were constructed. 19Ga 6. What is the Nature and Extent of the Rezoning? Q �® ez� N C �� �T -rz:> 404-:)" + A L(-btu CY tS i A Nf. A A AO l p R=m Aai w i`T M- x)6 L.,l l..o-r. iQL. b -Cb Cltc-`vad /•#oy�M�c.. r f���n �,4-�.n1• `.�EM.�c TS JS� �'"tA,Nc.r� Awe- /+(r- NLy. 7. Why is the rezoning being requested? p� (r- (gr p AAt )C.E 0 _o Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 4 8. Does the proposed Zoning By-law amendment implement a growth boundary adjustment of a settlement area? If so, attach separately justification or information for the request based on the current Official Plan policies or associated Official Plan amendment. 9. Does the proposed amendment remove land from an area of employment? }� If so, attach separately justification or information for the request based on the current Official Plan policies or associated Official Plan amendment. 10. Description of proposed development for which this amendment is requested(i.e.permitted uses, buildings or structures to be erected. (Be Specific) For any proposed buildings or structures on the subject lands provide the following information: Type Front Lot Side Lot Line Rear Lot Line Height Dimensions Line Setback Setbacks Setback 11. Services existing or proposed for the subject lands: Please indicate with a ✓ Water Supply Existing Proposed Municipal Piped Water Supply ( ) ) Private Drilled Well Private Dug Well ( ) ( ) Communal Well ( ) -- - Page 5 Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application g Lake or other Surface Water Body ( ) ( ) Other ( ) ( ) Sewage Disposal Existing Proposed Municipal Sanitary Sewers ( ) ( ) Individual Septic System Communal System ( ) ( ) Privy ( ) ( ) Other ( ) ( ) Note: If the proposed development is on a private or communal system and generate more than 4500 litres of effluent per day,the applicant must include a servicing options report and a hydrogeological report. Are these reports attached? If not,where can they be found? Storm Drainage Provisions: c°f IS i 0 Proposed Outlet: 12. How will the property be accessed? Provincial Highway( ) County Road Municipal Road—maintained all year( ) Municipal Road—seasonally maintained( ) Right-of-way( ) Water( ) If access is by water, do the parking and docking facilities exist, and what is the nearest public road? Municipality of Bayham Page Zoning By-law Amendment Application g 13. Has the subject land ever been the subject of an application under the Planning Act for: Plan of Subdivision( ) Consent( J Zoning By-law Amendment( ) Ministers Zoning Order( ) If yes to any of the above,indicate the file number and status of the application. 14. How is the proposed amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2014? 15. Are the subject lands within area designated under any Provincial Plan(s)? If the answer is yes,does the proposed amendment conform to the Provincial Plau(s)? 17. The Owner is required to attach the following information with the application and it will form part of the application. Applications will not be accepted without the following. (a) A sketch based on an Ontario Land Surveyor description of the subject lands showing • the boundaries and dimension of the subject lands; • the location, size and type of all existing and proposed buildings and structures, indicating their setbacks from all lot lines,the location of driveways,parking or loading spaces, landscaping areas,planting strips, and other uses; xl"LIB` VL�(' Page 7 Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application • the approximate location of all natural and artificial features(buildings,railways,roads, watercourses, drainage ditches,banks of rivers or streams,wetlands, wooded areas,wells and septic tanks)that are on the subject lands,adjacent to the subject lands,or in the opinion of the applicant may affect the application; • the current uses of the land that is adjacent to the subject land; • the location,width, and name of any roads within or abutting the subject land,indicating where it is an unopened road allowance,a public traveled road, a private road, or a right- of-way; • the location of the parking and docking facilities to be used(if access will be by water only); • the location and nature of any easement affecting the subject land. (b) Written comments from the Elgin St.Thomas Health Unit, Long Point Region Conservation Authority and Ministry of Transportation(if applicable). (c) If a private sewage system is necessary,pre-consultation with the Chief Building Official is required about the approval process 18. If this application is signed by an agent or solicitor on behalf of an applicant(s),the owner's written authorization must accompany the application. If the applicant is a corporation acting without an agent or solicitor the application must be signed by an officer of the corporation and the seal if any must be affixed. 19. Additional Information as required by Council 20. If this application is to accommodate the consent of a surplus farm dwelling,please provide the following information: Date surplus farm dwelling was erected: Please provide the assessment roll number, location, and zoning of the farm parcel with which the subject lands is being consolidated. Municipality of Bayham Zo-nMg By-law Anje---went-App ication on I/We, IJI &. kE V of the kk N k C t eir-N(, (—(q Name Town/Township/City/Village etc. do solemnly declare: of in the county of E Municipality Name County Name (i) that I*�W In/Calre4he owner(s)of the lands described above (ii) that to the best of my/our knowledge and belief,all of the information and statements given in this application and in all exhibits transmitted are true. (ii!) that I kw �i ereby Moint A SDIJ,)AA52- to act as an Agent on my/our behalf in h all aspects of this application. And I We make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true,and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath,and by virtue of the "Canada Evidence Act". DECLARED BEFORE ME at the: (%A N I C 0(—t—L of t-I I)I Y — Owner/Agent in the County/Region of I Ij this (0 day of 20 Owner Agent A Commissioner,etc. AIARGARET UNDERHILL,i Commissioner, etc, Depi,ty C1,-r!j of flhe Co:-poralloa of the Of P 0 20 40 80 METRES SCALE — 1: 1000 DISANCES SHOWNMETRIC BET CONVERTED TO OF ET"BY DIVIDING BY 3048IS PLAN ARE IN ES AND CAN AGRICULTURAL T 2 RT —`---__ `\ (CO J1\j r r 39, p -� 9 � � o PART 4 AGRICULTURAL Lo ,p op 1p m � kq 54.38 7 ]Q ' eRipc d J / AQU 'SQUARE Q U / 46.5 SUN00 Ta NSQUAW AW 1.2 SKETCH FOR SEVERANCE / m g AREA 6410.5 SAARE I METRES U I PART OF LOT 9 / (1,58 ACRES) 0 amolma CONCESSION 8 GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF BAYHAM -� AM COUNTY OF ELGI N Fall LOT 95.51 g KIM RUSTED SURVEYING LTD. CdNCJ✓SS1nN GEt7CRAPHIC 7O�1>\1SH1P OF BAYHA�LJ ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR 30 HARVEY STREET, TILLSONBURG ONTARIO, N413 3J8 AGRICULTURAL PHONE:519-842-3638 FAX: 519-842-3639 (, - PROJECT: 16-12124 REFERENCE: FILE 1:\OSOFT14i\WORK' 1��— " ' .Cna, �0':„—^�-04 2:�!. _ =�I, �l� FCF.p�3 IBI GROUP 203-350 Oxford Street West' London ON N6H 1T3 Canada tel 519 472 7328 fax 519 472 9354 ibigroup.com Memorandum To/Attention Municipality of Bayham Date July 2, 2016 From William Pol, MCIP, RPP Project No 3404 -622 cc file Subject 1162291 Ontario Limited -Application for Zoning By-law Amendment for a Special Rural Residential and Special Agricultural Zone for lands on Part Lot 9, Con 8, south side of Eden Line, east of Talbot Road, 54819 Eden Line 1. We have completed our review of zoning by-law amendment application submitted by 1162291 Ontario Limited for lands located at 54819 Eden Line, south side, east of Talbot Road. The applicant is requesting two zone changes in fulfillment of the approved consent B35/16 to permit the severance of a surplus farm dwelling and retain the farmlands. The surplus farm dwelling lot has frontage of 39.5 m a depth of 88.36 m and an area of 6,410.5 sq. m. on an irregularly shaped lot. The retained farm lands will have a lot frontage of 297 m a depth of 986 m an area of 58.6 ha. 2. The subject lands are designated Agriculture in the Official Plan Schedule Al Land Use. Section 2.1.7.2; 2.1.7.3 and 2.1.7.4 of the Plan sets out the policies applicable to the application: 2.1.7.2—Severed Lot and Surplus Dwelling Shall a) No larger than necessary to support a private water and sewage system. The survey indicates the location of a well and septic system on the severed lands. b) Meet the provisions of the MDS1- the applicant indicates there are no barns within 300 m of the site. c) Be zoned Rural Residential —A zoning amendment application has been made to the Municipality. 2.1.7.3—Severed Surplus Dwelling may a) May include accessory buildings. An existing barn is intended to be retained and is acceptable. b) Prohibit the keeping of livestock. The zoning amendment should limit the keeping of livestock in accordance with MDS. The application for zoning amendment conforms to the required Official Plan policies. 1131 Group is a group of firms providing professional services and is affiliated with IBI Group Architects r= IBI GROUP MEMORANDUM 2 IBI L Municipality of Bayham—May 26,2016 2.1.7.4—Retained Farm Lands shall a) Comprise a minimum of 40 ha. The retained farm land exceeds this minimum. b) Meet the provisions of the Al-A Zone. The retained lands meets the minimum requirements for the Al-A zone. c) Be rezoned to prohibit new residential uses. A zoning amendment has been accepted to prohibit new dwellings on the property. The application for zoning by-law amendment conforms to the required Official Plan polices. 3. The subject lands are appropriate for the zoning amendment with sufficient lot frontage and area to accommodate the surplus farm dwelling and efficient function of the farmlands. The subject surplus dwelling has a reduced lot frontage of 39m instead minimum lot frontage of 50m. The lot frontage is sufficient to provide safe access to and from the site. The applicant wishes to retain a frame barn on the surplus farm dwelling. The applicable zoning should prohibit the keeping of livestock on the property. Based on our review of the zoning by-law amendment applications we have no objection to the zoning change to a Rural Residential Special (RR- )zone for the surplus farm dwelling with a minimum lot frontage of 39m and prohibition of the keeping of livestock. We have no objection to a Special Agricultural (A2) Zone to allow the continued agricultural uses with no new residential dwellings on the retained farmlands. William Pol. IBI GROUP William Pol, MCIP, RPP Affiliate IBI Group Consulting Planner to the Municipality of Bayham THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. Z649-2016 1162291 Ontario Ltd. BEING A BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW No. Z456-2003, AS AMENDED WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it necessary to amend Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended; THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham enacts as follows: 1) THAT By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended, is hereby further amended by amending Schedule"A", Map No. 4 by changing the zoning from Agriculture(A1-1)to Rural Residential Defined Area (RR-30) and Special Agriculture(A2), which lands are outlined in heavy solid lines and marked RR-30 and A2 on Schedule"A"to this By-law,which schedule is attached to and forms part of this By-law. 2) THAT Section 7 Rural Residential (RR) Zone, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding the following section to Exceptions— Rural Residential (RR)Zone: 7.13.30.1 Defined Area RR-30 as shown on Schedule "A" Map 4 to this By-law 7.13.30.2 Minimum Lot Frontage 39.0 meters 7.13.30.3 Prohibited Uses The keeping, raising, and propagation of livestock 3) THIS By-law comes into force: a) Where no notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the expiration of the prescribed time; or b) Where notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21st DAY OF JULY 2016. READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21st DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK SEE SCHEDULE A-MAP No.1 r � SEE SCHEDULE C- a MAP NORTH HALL �n x�E A; LOT 1 LOT z �`�c� RR-30 LOT 3 ,._I E3 80 y - LOT 4y AZ -' LOT 5 LOT 6 ' LOT 7 LO S ' LOT 9 _r f 1 a eaxarovracn�cyN�-_ .- ' � ° I ` w ! a i fl y 7 LOT 109r� .1 1 J, , - l: l i LOT,110 LOT III LOT 112 r LOT 113 LOT 114 r LOT 115 LOT 116 LOT 117 Vv, This is Schedule "A"to By-law '"EDUCE E- RICHMoraD No.Z649-2016,passed the ,)/sr day of�r��! 2016 OITA Mayor Clerk SEE SCHEDULE A-MAP No.7 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Lenend - SCHEDULE A O ZOLA, NORTH MAP No.4 LPRCA Regulation Limit o goo 400 800 ZONING BY-LAW Z456-2003 CONSOLIDATED JAN 8,206 $AYH�g� REPORT ...............---- DEVELOPMENT SERVICES oz*tunity Is TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: DS-33/16 FILE NO. C-07 / D13.1926662 Ontario Inc. Roll # 3401-000-006-17950 SUBJECT: Rezoning Application — 1926662 Ontario Inc. BACKGROUND: 1926662 Ontario Inc. (Kirwin & Oatman) submitted a rezoning to application to temporarily rezone their property at 57475 Pressey Road for the purpose of the temporary storage of turbine blades by Siemens Canada. The property is also subject to a Site Plan Agreement and Road Use Agreement approved by Council on July 7, 2016. A public meeting is scheduled for July 21, 2016 at 7:30 pm. At the time writing this report no additional applicant or public comments were received. The purpose of this By-law is to change the zoning on a 17.8 hectare (43.9 acre) parcel of land from a Rural Industrial (M2) Holding Zone to a combined Rural Industrial (M2) Holding and Temporary (T)Zone in Zoning By-law Z456-2003. The subject lands are located at 57475 Pressey Road, south side and west side Bayham Drive, Concession 11 Pt Lot 19, accessing Clearview Drive. The effect of this By-law will be to permit the temporary outdoor storage of wind turbine blades not to exceed three years and retain the existing Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding zone for future industrial development. There are no municipal services, buildings or structures proposed for the subject lands. DISCUSSION Council will recall the road use agreement and site plan agreement include the improvements to be made to the municipal portion of Clearview Drive as this will be the access point for the proposed use by Siemens Canada for blade transport and outside storage. The planner's memorandum is attached to this report providing the analysis of the application. Staff and planner are supportive of the purpose and effect of the zoning amendments and recommend a three (3) year temporary zoning to permit the proposed use. Staff Report DS-33/16 1926662 Ontario Inc. 2 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Rezoning Application June 29, 2016 2. IBI Memorandum dated July 2, 2016 3. Draft Zoning By-law Z650-2016 RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report DS-33/16 regarding the 1926662 Ontario Inc. rezoning application be received for information; 2. AND THAT Zoning By-law Z456-2003, as amended, be further amended by changing the zoning on the lands owned by 1926662 Ontario Inc., described as Concession 11 Part Lot 19 from Rural Industrial Holding (M2(h)) to Rural Industrial Holding and Temporary M2(h)/T5 Zone for a maximum of three (3) years to July 21, 2019; 3. AND THAT Zoning By-law Z650-2016 be presented to Council for enactment. Respectfully Submitted by: Reviewed by: Marga et Underhill Paul Shipway Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator CAO MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM P.O. Box 160 Straffordville, Ontario { '^` a NOJ 1YO 0 'Dho Yoe`{� Phone 519 866-5521 Fax 519 866-3884 i f rtunity Is ( ) ( ) J 1)N L. 9 2016 NICIPALI-`y HAVIA APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING BY-LAW OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM This application must be filed with the Deputy Clerk/Planning Coordinator or designate of the Municipality of Bayham along with a cheque for the required amount. The applicant should retain one copy for their records. The information in this form must be completed in full. This mandatory information must be provided with a fee of$2,000(Zoning By-law Amendment or Temporary Use Zoning By-law) or 1500(Temporary Use Zoning By-law Renewal) or 1500(Zoning Amendment to Remove Holding Provision). If the application is not completed in full, the application will be returned. 1/WE, 1926662 ONTARIO INC. shall assume responsibility for any additional costs exceeding the deposited amount related to the said application and understand and agree that for payment of said additional costs shall be a condition of this signed application. I also agree to accept all costs as rendered. 196662 ONTARIO INC. Property Owner Property Owner FOR OFFICE USE ONLY DATE RECEIVED:: v,-; j AMOUNT Rki [VED: ca < DENiFD COMPLETE: ,) _ / RECEIPT,#: }le'; r.4 .. " FILE NO: 3 , 4 `'� DATE ADOPTED EY COUNCIL Revised February 2015 Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 2 1. Registered Owner's 1926662 ONTARIO INC. Name: Address: 14851 BAYHAM DRIVE, P.O. BOX 98, TILLSONBURG, ON N4G 4H3 Phone No. Business: 519-688-0350 (Home): Fax: 519-688-0570 Email: sales@kirwinoatman.com Lot and Concession (if applicable): Are there any other holders of mortgages, charges or other encumbrances of the Subject Lands? If so provide the names and addresses of such persons. BRIAN GRAYDON, 57547 TALBOT LINE, R.R. #3, TILLSONBURG, ON N4G 4G8 2. Applicant/Authorized 1926662 ONTARIO INC. Agent: Address: 14851 BAYHAM DRIVE, P.O. BOX 98, TILLSONBURG, ON N4G 4H3 Phone No.: 519-688-0350 Fax:519-688-0570 Email sales@kirwinoatman.com Please specify to whom all communications should be sent: Registered Owner ( X ) Applicant/Authorized Agent ( ) 3. Legal Description of the land for which the amendment is requested Roll#_34 01 000 006 17950 0000 Concession: 11 Lot: PT LOT 19 Reference Plan No: 11 R6183 Part Lot: PART 3 RE 11 R8151 6 7 9 AND 10 Street and Municipal Address No.: 57475 PRESSEY ROAD What is the size of property which is subject to this Application? 15 + OR -ACRES Area: 178,000 m2 Frontage: 165.1 Depth: N/A m When were the subject lands purchased by the current FEBRUARY 09, 2015 owner? Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 3 4. Existing Official Plan Designation: RURAL INDUSTRIAL HOLDING How does the application conform to the Official Plan? CONFORMS 5. Existing Zoning By-law r, l Classification: r (I') am° What are the current uses of the subject lands? AGRICULTURE If known, provide the length of time these uses have continued on this property. 100 YEARS + If there are any existing buildings or structures on the subject lands provide the following information: Type Front Lot Side Lot Rear Lot Height Dimension Line Line Line Setback s Setback Setbacks If known, provide the dates in which each of these buildings were constructed. 6. What is the Nature and Extent of the Rezoning? Quote Section of Zoning By-law to be amended "i-Wh r` i l ivy DC i a I k r`�� A f�S Fz:f Tge Fy F'� Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 4 (�Fv ACLq3 ELI,i �L� , ���► �v1� I�(�rcl�� A,n 0 L4,v St�►''��i �L &i� 7. Why is the rezoning being requested? TEMPORARY STORAGE OF WIND BLADES NEEDED FOR 1 TO 2 YEARS 8. Does the proposed Zoning By-law amendment implement a growth boundary NO adjustment of a settlement area? If so, attach separately justification or information for the request based on the current Official Plan policies or associated Official Plan amendment. 9. Does the proposed amendment remove land from an area of employment? NO If so, attach separately justification or information for the request based on the current Official Plan policies or associated Official Plan amendment. 10. Description of proposed development for which this amendment is requested (i.e. permitted uses, buildings or structures to be erected. (Be Specific) TEMPORARY BLADE STORAGE YARD For any proposed buildings or structures on the subject lands provide the following information: Type Front Lot Side Lot Rear Lot Height Dimensions Line Line Line Setback Setback Setbacks Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 5 11. Services existing or proposed for the subject lands: Please indicate with a ✓ Water Supply Existing Proposed Municipal Piped Water Supply ( ) ( ) Private Drilled Well ( ) ( ) Private Dug Well ( ) ( } Communal Well ( ) ( } Lake or other Surface Water Body ( } ( ) Other ( ) ( ) Sewage Disposal Existing Proposed Municipal Sanitary Sewers ( ) ( ) Individual Septic System ( ) ( ) Communal System ( ) ( ) Privy ( ) ( ) Other Note: If the proposed development is on a private or communal system and generate more than 4500 litres of effluent per day, the applicant must include a servicing options report and a hydrogeological report. Are these reports attached? If not, where can they be found? Storm Drainage Provisions: Proposed Outlet: Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 6 12. How will the property be accessed? Provincial Highway ( ) County Road ( ) Municipal Road — maintained all year (X ) Municipal Road —seasonally maintained ( ) Right-of-way ( X ) Water ( ) If access is by water, do the parking and docking facilities exist, and what is the nearest public road? 13. Has the subject land ever been the subject of an application under the Planning Act for:NO Plan of Subdivision ( ) Consent ( ) Zoning By-law Amendment ( ) Ministers Zoning Order ( ) If yes to any of the above, indicate the file number and status of the application. 14. How is the proposed amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2014? 15. Are the subject lands within area designated under any Provincial Plan(s)? If the answer is yes, does the proposed amendment conform to the Provincial Plan(s)? NO Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 7 17. The Owner is required to attach the following information with the application and it will form part of the application. Applications will not be accepted without the following. (a) A sketch based on an Ontario Land Surveyor description of the subject lands showing �I rE Puo 1�0I, k UCi�r'I • the boundaries and dimension of the subject lands; • the location, size and type of all existing and proposed buildings and structures, indicating their setbacks from all lot lines, the location of driveways, parking or loading spaces, landscaping areas, planting strips, and other uses; • the approximate location of all natural and artificial features (buildings, railways, roads, watercourses, drainage ditches, banks of rivers or streams, wetlands, wooded areas, wells and septic tanks) that are on the subject lands, adjacent to the subject lands, or in the opinion of the applicant may affect the application; • the current uses of the land that is adjacent to the subject land; • the location, width, and name of any roads within or abutting the subject land, indicating where it is an unopened road allowance, a public traveled road, a private road, or a right-of-way; • the location of the parking and docking facilities to be used (if access will be by water only); • the location and nature of any easement affecting the subject land. (b) Written comments from the Elgin St. Thomas Health Unit, Long Point Region Conservation Authority and Ministry of Transportation (if applicable). (c) If a private sewage system is necessary, pre-consultation with the Chief Building Official is required about the approval process 18. If this application is signed by an agent or solicitor on behalf of an applicant(s), the owner's written authorization must accompany the application. If the applicant is a corporation acting without an agent or solicitor the application must be signed by an officer of the corporation and the seal if any must be affixed. 19. Additional Information as required by Council Municipality of Bayham Zoning By-law Amendment Application Page 8 20. If this application is to accommodate the consent of a surplus farm dwelling, please provide the following information: Date surplus farm dwelling was erected: Please provide the assessment roll number, location, and zoning of the farm parcel with which the subject lands are being consolidated. Roll # 3401- 911 Address: Zoning Classification: /We, DAVID OATMAN, PRESIDENT , of the Na -(��>wri;'-Fr�w;ishipl'City/Village- etc: of , in the county of OXFORD , do solemnly declare: Municipality Narre County Narne (i) that I /We am / are the owner(s) of the lands described above (ii) that to the best of my/ our knowledge and belief, all of the information and statements given in this application and in all exhibits transmitted are true. (iii) that I /we hereby appoint to act as an Agent on my/our behalf in all aspects of this application. Owners) Signature: And I /We make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true, and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath, and by virtue of the "Canada Evidence Act". DECLARED BEFORE ME at the: 1-1)w0 of Owner/Agent in the County/Req6en of OX-Pord this 2-7 day of JUk-le- 20 i(v . mwyz / Owner/Agent A Commissioner, etc. Jennifer Marie Bennett,a commissioner,etc., county of oxford,for Jenkins&Gilvesy, Barristers and solicitors. Expires June 30,2017. / KIRWIN k OATMAN / CAVATING LIMITED I^nav v,N y EX.WOODLOT /�nl J` J� 6�l^..LJ �-'� N a o•' { .W UBJECT tN • ®t. .. ...._................ .......... xA � a \\\\ 1 I KEY PLAN 1:1� 5 000VA � GENUINE ANSPORT e t• ®''� 041 � � --- AGRICULTURAL ..j. i -•.,... ... : .1� ___ _ �Ya vau•.Y ......w ^ E 1 .,. — .w..... ROW 3 / A .... .......... \�'�'�11IFF��.. TILTRAN • I g' _ 47.. ..........:.........:1. _ / e'• 1 "STAGE 3 STACE 1 •'/ at A. el at Ae %'• 1 / e Y ROW 2 �. .:«.m :'saw— w.a.—.�,ifo_. a�,i.--• -- —. _. .s .wxxn—. ms- --' ---].w>t---fix°--- r, •� 1 BAYHAM BY—LAW _ - - / :• REQUIREMENTS b --- -- nA; ROt�1 , --x'0----it.,e./_�a�a.�_'�"a- -- �`=�'°---.zax _ m - $---- ----�O-I"' :-�--- °"�. n r"•. 'n�oNw Nw. Ni N v a .t I .-_.-• CNR (LEASED TO ONTARIO SOUTHLANDS R ILWAY) iar mnrsauq ^ vlatswm oa Yva ].1Y�.• aeo Nn. _ N/1 LEGEND Nemec sc- How, t:�so MUNICIPALITY OF BAYh•IAY101 iwu to . tNYW umoeYl was® .a ee.,w, s,eN.n... C t®� TEMPORARY BLADEYARD 1Nina 9.rteu taa wam .D.1 p[wtQIC AQLV6Y Y�Ia Y91va � u,�� N r :"""100 KIRMN&OATMAN SITE _ a 9 COMd161pYa�11aRY 1w: aY-]01�N96 ' Os90 9YYY.11IV9® QI �. 1 tnM11I N6 aM1ww Y,Y.N9Y IINI Y.I.'Y N tlaKkNMtan _ aYNNs,N.a.wautm s9natau9nw90 �''4wI'� �•"ar,a� t na.0 N RmOxal: PP Immor. MR ORdfm9Y:Aa SITE PLAN __________ tt4 attua 1 nNrep nVf.9im1 u 9o99.Y Nu N AENSIW 011E a1' PRO:E'CT M0.faaa wINYF/9Y:1PY OAIE:AIN[sma MiW10 Na 1 IBI GROUP 203-350 Oxford Street West London ON N6H T3 Canada I B ' tel 519 4472 328 1 fax 519 472 9354 1 I ibigroup.com Memorandum To/Attention Municipality of Bayham Date July 2, 2016 From William Pol, MCIP, RPP Project No 3404-626 cc Subject 1926662 Ontario Inc. - Application for Zoning By-law Amendment Temporary Use- Pressey Road south side west of Bayham Drive 1. We have completed our review of an Application for a Zoning By-law amendment, submitted by 1926662 Ontario Inc., for a property located at Pressey Road south side, west of Bayham Drive, Concession 11 Pt Lot 19. The applicant is requesting a zoning by-law amendment to change the zoning on a 17.8 hectare (43.9 acre) parcel of.land from a Rural Industrial (M2) Holding Zone to a combined Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding and Temporary (T) Zone to permit the temporary outdoor storage of wind turbine blades not to exceed three years and retain the existing Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding zone for future industrial development. There are no municipal services, buildings or structures proposed as part of the temporary land use. The subject lands are designated Rural Industrial on Schedule"Al" Land Use. Pressey Road is a local road. The lands are zoned Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding in Zoning By-law Z456-2003. 2. The property has 165.1 m of lot frontage on Pressey Road, lot depth of approximately 620m and a total lot area of 17.8 hectare (43.9 acre). The property comprises part of the Clearview Drive Industrial Park in the Municipality of Bayham. The lands are currently used for agricultural purposes and have no buildings or improvements. Surrounding land uses are: west agricultural; east contractor's yard; south existing railway and agriculture; and north agriculture. 3. Section 8.15 of the Official Plan sets out the policies for Temporary Use By-laws. The permitted uses allow any use which is appropriate for the lands but which would otherwise be prohibited. The proposed use is an industrial storage use of wind turbine blades without buildings. The existing zoning M2 permits the storage use but restricted by a holding provision requiring improvements for municipal access, buildings and servicing. The use is appropriate because there are no significant improvements required. The activity will be the movement of manufactured wind turbine blades from a manufacturing plant located approximately 500 m west of the subject lands and temporary storage until they are transported by to the intended destination. The completed blades would travel along Clearview Drive from the manufacturing plant directly onto the storage area. The reduced distance will be more convenient for the manufacturer who does not have sufficient onsite storage area. Furthermore it will have less public impact because the blades are travelling along public roads for a relatively short distance. Improvements to the site may include the creation of temporary roadways, temporary supports for the blades, the selection and movement of the blades from the yard onto trucks or the abutting railway and drainage to IBI Group is a group of firms providing professional services and is affiliated with 81 Group Architects IBI GROUP MEMORANDUM 2 Municipality of Bayham—July 2,2016 allow access to the blades during rain events. No permanent structures are required and there is no day to day employees on the site. Any improvements should be removed upon cessation of the outdoor storage. This location appropriate due to its location in proximity to the manufacturing plant. 4. Section 8.15.3 sets out the criteria for considering Temporary Use By-laws: a) The use is temporary in nature: The proposed outdoor storage will be temporary in nature in response to short term demand for wind turbine blades in Ontario and North America. The necessary grading and on site road improvements will not preclude the future development of industrial uses at this location. b) The temporary use is compatible: The temporary blade storage use is compatible with surrounding agricultural and industrial uses because the low levels of activity and limited off site impacts. c) Parking is not an impact related to the use because there are no daily employees on the property. d) There are no servicing requirements for water and sanitary sewage for the property and therefore will not impact the servicing requirements for the site. With regards to the location of the blade storage area, setbacks for the blade storage should be the same as the setbacks for the Rural Industrial M2 zone to ensure the potential impacts are the same or less than future industrial buildings. Front yard 12.2m; side yard 7.5m; and rear yard 10.Om setbacks. 5. The Municipality will enter into a site plan agreement to address storm water management of the property; vehicular access to the site; and grading to ensure there is no off site impacts. Storage of topsoil should not exceed the permitted building height in the M2 Zone. 6. Based on our review of the application, and understanding of the intent of the amendment to allow the temporary outdoor storage of wind turbine blades for a maximum of 3 years to July 21, 2019, we have no objection to the requested Temporary Zoning By-law amendment from Rural Industrial (M2(h))Zone to Rural Industrial Holding (M2(h)) and Temporary (T5) Zone for lands at Pressy Road Concession 11 Part Lot 19. Wdliam V of IBI GROUP William Pol, MCIP, RPP Affiliate Consulting Planner to the Municipality of Bayham THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. Z650-2016 1926662 ONTARIO INC. BEING A BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW No. Z456-2003, AS AMENDED WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it necessary to amend Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended; THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham enacts as follows: THAT By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended, is hereby further amended by amending Schedule "A", Map No. 3 by changing the zoning from Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding to Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding and Temporary (T) Zone, which lands are outlined in heavy solid lines and marked M2(h)/T-5 on Schedule "A" to this By-law, which schedule is attached to and forms part of this By-law. THAT Section 26 Temporary (T) Zone, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding the following section to Defined Areas and End Dates: 26.4.2 M2(h)/T5 as shown on Schedule A Map 3 permits an outdoor wind turbine blade storage yard, for a period not exceeding three (3) years ending July 21, 2019. THIS By-law comes into force: a) Where no notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the expiration of the prescribed time; or b) Where notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2016. READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK This is Schedule"A"to By-law No.Z650-2016,passed the rx s Y`xD )t5* day of jd� ,2016 M2(h)/T-5 // d Mayor Clerk ;a 2 U �� n ' Z ;. � 4 1 J t V- (n _ ig 4 t i LOT 19 LOT 20 q LOT 21 LOT 22 LQT'23� CBOT 24 CO T 25 or w- 4 0 LOT 26 r3, 47� a SEE SCHEDULE O. q �j LOT 27 ^y PoWPEDEN SEE SCHEDULE A- t} MAP No. SEE SCHEDULE A- MAP No.6 a' MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Laendd - SCHEDULE A O ZOLA NORTH MAP No.3 LPRCA Regulation Limit o zoo m" aoo s ZONING BY-LAW Z456-2003 CONSOLIDATED JAN 8,206 Healthy Communities Partnership March 30th, 2016 from 9:00-11:00am Present: Dan McKillop, Dan McNeil, Linda Stevenson, Laura Crandall, Erica Arnett, Megan Pickersgill, Margret Underhill, Heather James, Rodd Tapp,Arthur Oslach, Mary Bodnar 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Additions to the Agenda 3. Review of the Minutes from January 26th, 2015 • Changes to the minutes-Trudy from the Wayside is the Rotary Leader. • The Healthy Kids Community Challenge funding and work plan was approved in early February. 4. Business arising a. ESTPH representation-Laura • Laura's last day before starting maternity leave will be May 20th.Jessica Lang will be filling her position and will be the new ESTPH representative on this committee. • Erica will continue to attend the next few meetings to ease the transition. • Jessica attended a Trillium Collective Impact workshop on March 301h • A meeting will be arranged with Dan McKillop, Dan McNeil,Jessica, and Laura prior to the next HCP meeting. b. Entegrus—Erica/Dan McNeil/Dan McKillop • Through communications with MMM, Erica received some information on possible options to investigate, one being Orland Conservation Authority. Their specialization is in different land ownership models and trust relationships. Erica has forwarded this option to Tomo. • Linda suggested County Council presentation may be beneficial • Dan McKillop would be willing to take the lead on this initiative as co-chair • Mary—municipality of West Elgin has purchased the land from Blacks Lane to Furnival Road • Dan will connect with all the council members from the applicable municipalities and ask the area conservation authority to see if they have a role to play in these conversations. • Dan will report back on progress at next meeting c. Community Leader's Cabinet Update—Dan McNeil/Erica • At last week's meeting a new website was launched: www.stthomaselgincic.com featuring the work of the CLC. • The Healthy Communities Partnership's report was shared with the committee. • The report was circulated with this meeting's agenda • Action: Linda asked what the funding priorities are from each of the groups represented around the table?What are the Ministry funding priorities that they are funded by? d. Quality of Life Scorecard-Erica • Possible indicators that should appear on the Quality of Life Scorecard o %Complete on the Cycling Master Plan o #of Physical Activity Infrastructure in our Community o Rates of physical activity o Rates of sedentary behaviour o Number of sport, recreation and leisure providers listed www.activeelgin.ca e. Healthy Kids Community Challenge update-Laura • Dan Patterson Ski Trail-Trail signs have been installed at the trail and a photo op was done on Feb 26th to announce the trail to the public however, the trail was not used this year. Everything is set up to have the trail open for the 2016/17 winter season. • Ice Rink Kits-The volunteer training was a great success. 16 volunteers were present from Sparta, Straffordville, Faith Baptist Church, Malahide, and Port Stanley Anglican Church. Due to weather only the Straffordille rink went up for 3 weeks with great success and community involvement. All volunteers are still eager to get started for the next season. • Physical Activity Challenge-The challenge ended on March 20th with 94 participants (online) I don't have numbers yet from the library paper forms. The prizes will be announced March 29th.The majority of promotion was done using social media with a great response- 1434 additional visits were made to the active elgin website through this paid facebook promotion. • Cycling Safety Campaign-work is underway with Relsih Elgin.The Technical committee met on February 12 to guide the direction of the campaign. I have asked all technical committee members to let me know in which way their municipality can help promote the campaign. We will be working on launch the campaign in April and it will actively run until the end of June. • Active Elgin website-this is in the process of being transferred to a new website developer to ensure consistency with the new health unit website. The physical activity database has been completed and the GIS mapping of the trail map will be completed in the coming weeks. As part of the website. Relish Elgin has developed an Active Elgin Free and Low-Cost Print guide. This will highlight free and low-cost activities offered in Elgin-St.Thomas. • Phone surveys-due to cost the phone surveys were not completed. Funds allocated to the phone survey.The funds allocated to the phone surveys was redistributed to include initiatives within the schools that our school nurses are part of-Pause to Play, iWalk resources, physical literacy kits. • Budget—all Healthy Kids Community Challenge funds were spent by the March 315Y deadline. • Financial breakdown attached. • Next theme of the Healthy Kids Community Challenge is Drink more Water- • Action: Linda recommended finalizing the Healthy Kids Community Challenge Report and sending it out to each of the municipalities. • Action: Laura to connect with Ross re Pinafore Park o Water Consumption ideas: 1. Education campaign around municipal water—Erica talked about working regionally to develop/promote the messages. Possibly something like the Blue W 2. Linda encouraged launch events at events like Day Out Thomas 3. Margret reminded us that not all communities have municipal water. So some of the message needs to be drink more water, have your well tested, drink your water 4. Campaign may need to be regional (i.e. some have municipal water, some are wells) • At the next meeting this group will discuss some criteria for using the funds for water bottle filling stations/drinking fountains f. Trillium Collective Impact planning-Laura • The application and notes from the June planning meeting were reviewed together. • Dan noted that we need to share with all the area municipalities need to hear about this new funding formula. Municipal staff and recreation master plan contacts need to be involved in the planning forum. • Focus of the next meeting needs to be a refresh on Collective Impact and that key staff(recreation, CAO as appropriate),what can we spend the money on, what are our specific plans. Action: Laura will look into having Tamarack come and facilitate a refresher on collective impact and how to effectively move forward with our plans. Action: Laura will send out the Build the Case Letter of Intent. 5. New Business a. Cycling master plan—request to add part of CASO line-Erica • Erica noted that she is on the ONTrack board. This is the Board that is working on the St Thomas Elevated Park.The Board is interested in adopting the Cycling Master Plan. • Support and adopt the recommendations within Cycling Master Plan as a Board. Then they can be named as an organization who has adopted the plan. Action: Erica will bring the above language to the ONTrack Board. b. HCP identity under Active Elgin-Laura • This a thought to brand the HCP under Active Elgin as we are using Active Elgin as the go to spot for not only sport and recreation information but active transportation, cycling safety etc. OR would the Partnership like to continue using each municipal logo as the identifier of the Partnership? • All the municipal logos should be on the active elgin website • Decision is to keep operating with all area municipalities/partners logos and post information for the public on the www.activeelgin.ca website. c. TOR review-Dan McNeil • The terms of reference were due to be reviewed in January. • Action: Laura to send out the terms of reference with the Minutes • Dan flagged that the funding has changed and he would like the Collective Impact and the focus on working together be included in the TOR. There should also be changes to the accountability. • Action: Please review the TOR and provide feedback to the Laura. Laura will collate the feedback and then there can be a discussion at the next meeting 6. Standing Items a. Citizens 4 Active Transportation Update—Laura • The committee completed a scan of where they would recommend having bike racks on Talbot Street.This information has been sent to Ric Radauskas at the City for consideration when planning the next phase of the streetscape project.This will also go to the Downtown Development Board. • The committee also completed a comprehensive scan of the side walk gaps within the City of St.Thomas.This information has been sent to the City via Erica in response to their sidewalk project. Action: Laura will circulate the Working in the Sun Workshop Information with the minutes. 7. Next Meeting-TBD Healthy Communities Partnership June 215t, 2016 from 9:00-11:00am Elgin St.Thomas Public Health-Talbot Boardroom In, Mv FT Minutes Present:Jessica Lang(minutes), Dan McNeil (chair), Erica Arnett,Steve Evans, Meghan P, Lyndsay D, Chris Cox, Dan McKillop, Heather James, Mary Bodnar, Margaret Underhill, Rod Tapp,Arthur Oslach 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Additions to the Agenda—none 3. Review of the Minutes from March 30— reviewed and no changes needed 4. Financial Report -Jessica provided a financial status update with an overview of expenses from the workshop held in May. An updated balance sheet was shared with the committee noting there is just over$20,000 left. (See separate balance sheet for details). Jessica reported that there is also a $20,000 from the Collective Impact grant received from Ontario Trillium Foundation to spend by March 151 2017. Dan McNeil added that there is opportunity for the partnership to do more with Trillium funding and that the Health Unit doesn't qualify to receive Trillium funding directly. Therefore, the funding is held with the Municipality of Central Elgin. 5. Business arising a. Entegrus— Dan McKillop provided an update on this project. He was tasked to look at the track in West Elgin, Dutton Dunwich and Southwold Township that could be purchased from Entegrus for recreation purposes. Dan spoke to Robert Orland from Orland Conservation Authority as MMM Group had recommended him based on his past experience with land use acquisition. Dan shared a proposal from Robert Orland with the HCP. Dan met with Entegrus and they would like one buyer, rather than multiple buyers. Dan also met with Mark McDonald and Clayton Walters with the County of Elgin. They confirmed that the County could own the land for recreation purposes. Dan has since spoken to councillors from West Elgin, Dutton Dunwich and Southwold to share this information he obtained. No action at this time. A question was raised if there is potential to extend this trail into East Elgin County and it was noted that the rail line still runs in the east end of Elgin. However, this trail would connect to St. Thomas at the Elevated Park. b. Community Leader's Cabinet (CLC) Update—Dan McNeil/Erica i. The next CLC meeting is June 22nd.This committee is designed to integrate multiple sectors in partnership to improve quality of life in Elgin St. Thomas. They are looking at demographic mapping re: % low income families with many other data sets such as % physical activity rates,to better understand current realities in specific parts of our community. The Province continues to fund the Healthy Kids Community Challenge, which the CLC oversees. The CLC is also looking at shared measurement. There may be some opportunities to share indicators of measurement moving forward as this is a requirement of the Trillium collective impact funding. c. Healthy Kids Community Challenge—Erica i. CLC will receive an update on June 22 regarding the next HKCC theme: water does wonders. The emphasis is on promoting water to reduce consumption of sugar sweetened beverages. ii. Municipalities, schools and daycares can apply for water hydration stations; up to $2000 total. Municipalities could apply for more than one hydration station. HKCC funding is not open to private businesses, but they could look at Blue W water refilling program. A question was asked about whether or not the water filling stations need to be connected to municipal water. Erica clarified that hydration stations could be connected to a well water source as long as the well water is tested. ESTPH does test well water. See attached link for more information on water sample testing and drop off sites https://www.elginhealth.on.ca/your-environment/environmental- health/drinking-water/well-water/water-sample-pick-and-drop-sites iii. ACTION: Jessica will send out HKCC water does wonders application to the entire HCP once it is approved by the CLC on June 22. d. Trillium Collective Impact Workshop: follow-up & next steps L Review summary of activities from collective impact workshop—this was reviewed in detail with further discussion notes below. ii. Review proposed timeline from June 2016 to March 2017—this was reviewed with everyone. iii. Discuss Municipal Communication Strategy—feedback was received on what to include in the 2-pager that will be shared with councils.Jessica took notes. ACTION:Jessica and Dan will meet in July to work on the 2 pager with the goal of having a draft ready to send to the HCP by early August. This would allow for a few weeks for the HCP to provide feedback before the 2-pager is submitted to individual councils prior to the presentations in September. A list of council meeting dates in September was shared for planning purposes—Jessica took note of them. Main discussion point: to highlight accomplishments the HCP has made to date, with the Cycling Master Plan as the key highlight. The Trillium project is not replacing existing plans or budget with the municipalities, but rather enhancing existing plans already identified. The goal is to work collectively together. An example (similar to our collective impact work)to share with councils could be the Community Improvement Plan with the County of Elgin. It was proposed that we could ask councils to pass a resolution to approve the Get Active Elgin plan to obtain official commitment. The proposed budget for how to spend the $20,000 grant was also reviewed and everyone agreed upon the items listed based on the activities from the workshop. Dan noted that Trillium is looking at a new funding formula for collective impact. They are looking to the Elgin St. Thomas HCP as a role model or good example to demonstrate how collective impact can work. Erica noted that Sheila Simpson is no longer working for the OTF. Patrick is the new contact. ACTION:Jessica will make contact with Patrick this summer to review progress made to date and invite him to attend future meetings. e. Terms of Reference review and approval - Dan McNeil/Jessica !. TOR—were updated and shared with the committee with the revisions submitted from Mary. Further changes need to be made to the accountability and funding paragraphs. ii. ACTION:Jessica will work with Dan over the summer to update the TOR again. They will be reviewed at the September 201h meeting. 6. Standing Items a. Citizens 4 Active Transportation Update—Jessica gave a brief update on C4AT. 1. Re: C4AT interest in applying to become a Bicycle Friendly Community. The HCP agreed that we have a lot going on right now with the Trillium grant and that our main priority is to fully implement the Cycling Master Plan before we consider applying to be a Bicycle Friendly Community. ACTION:Jessica will relay the committee's stance on this at the next C4AT meeting in September. 7. Next Meeting-September 20th at 9:00am—location to be determined as rooms at'ESTPH are all booked! Elgin , p - R D EGEeVE JUN 2 4 2016 June 17, 2016 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Mayor Paul Ens Municipality of Bayham 9344 Plank Road, P.O. Box 160, Straffordville, ON NOJ 1Y0 Dear Mayor Ens and Members of Council: Please be advised that Elgin County Council adopted the following resolution at its meeting held on June 14, 2016: "THAT the report titled "Project Screening Report — Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna" dated June 2, 2016 be received and authorized for circulation as part of the Class EA for the project; and, THAT the Municipal Class EA Notice of Completion for the Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna, dated June 14, 2016, is authorized to be issued and circulated; and, THAT this report and attachments be circulated to the Municipality of Bayham. - Carried. (signed) Warden Bernie Wiehle" A copy of the report titled "Project Screening Report — Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna" is enclosed for ease of reference. Please contact Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services (cwatters@elgin.ca) should you have any questions. Yours truly, Katherine Thompson, Marketing and Communications Coordinator Enclosure County of Elgin cc Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services, County of Elgin Administrative Services 450 Sunset Drive St.Thomas,ON N5R 5V1 Phone:519-631-1460 www.elgincounty.ca �unty�'u�rc REPORT TO COUNTY COUNCIL P.%wsst.e bl FROM: Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services DATE: May 27, 2016 SUBJECT: Project Screening Report— Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna INTRODUCTION: The County of Elgin is ready to finalize the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) planning process for the proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement project located in Vienna. The County's consultant has prepared a detailed Project Screening Report that outlines the proposed project and summarizes the completed Class EA. The next step in the EA process is the Notice of Completion 30-day review period. A copy of the report and the Notice of Completion is attached. Authorization from Council to circulate the Project Screening Report and to issue the Notice of Completion is requested. DISCUSSION: The proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement project is based on Alternative D as outlined in Section 3.5 of the Project Screening Report. Alternatives were considered, including an extension of Old Mill Line, upgrading Creek Road and creating an access road to Light Line. Given the low daily traffic volume on Edison Drive, a pre-fabricated panel bridge was chosen to replace the existing steel truss bridge. The existing structure will be removed and the present concrete abutments will be modified for use with the new panel bridge. Construction will require about two months in order to allow for removal of the existing bridge, modification of the abutments and installation of the panel bridge. Construction is planned for the late summer or fall of 2016. There will be no access across Big Otter Creek during this time. The council report dated February 9, 2015, outlined the plans for the creation of a temporary access lane around the section of Creek Road that will be closed to traffic during construction. The estimated cost to construct the new bridge is $642,000. This estimate includes costs for demolition and removal of the existing structure, modifying the existing concrete abutments, construction of the new single lane panel bridge, upgrades to the temporary Creek Road detour route and restoration after the completion of construction, upgrading and paving Edison Drive road approaches and the completion of a heritage study and archival photo record for the existing Edison Drive Bridge. Attached for Council's review and authorization is the Notice of Completion, which will conclude the Class EA process with a 30-day public review period. Copies of this Notice, along with the Project Screening Report, will be circulated to agencies, local property owners and other persons who have been involved in the project. The Notice will also be placed in local newspapers and on the County of Elgin website. If concerns arise regarding this project that cannot be resolved through discussion with the County, a request can be made to the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change for a Part II Order. If there are no requests received by July 15, 2016, the County of Elgin will proceed with the design and construction of the proposed bridge replacement project. As a courtesy, this report along with the Project Screening report should be circulated to the Municipality of Bayham for their information. CONCLUSION: A new pre-fabricated panel bridge is proposed to replace the existing Edison Drive Bridge, located over Big Otter Creek in Vienna. The proposed project is being planned under Schedule B of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA). In order to complete the EA process, issuing a Notice of Completion and addressing any final project concerns during the Notice period is required. Authorization from Council to circulate the Project Screening Report and the Notice of Completion is requested. RECOMMENDATIONS: THAT the report titled "Project Screening Report— Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna" dated June 2, 2016 be received and authorized for circulation as part of the Class EA for the project; and, THAT the Municipal Class EA Notice of Completion for the Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna, dated June 14, 2016, is authorized to be issued and circulated; and, THAT this report and attachments be circulated to the Municipality of Bayham. All of which is Respectfully Submitted Approved for Submission Clayton Watters Mark G. McDonald Director of Engineering Services Chief Administrative Officer PROJECT SCREENING REPORT PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT COUNTY OF ELGIN AND MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM JUNE 2, 2016 l R � • �i. s 1` � r d • 19 SPRIET ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS J ARCHITECTS Spriet Associates 155 York Street Phone:519-672-4100 o London,Ontario,Canada Fax:519-433-9351 N6A 1A8 E-mail:mail @spriet.on.ca To Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services Peter Dutchak, Deputy Director of Engineering Services County of Elgin Engineering Services Department Copy Paul Shipway,Administrator, Municipality of Bayham Copy John R. Spriet, Project Engineer and Manager From David Mihlik, Project Planner Subject PROJECT SCREENING REPORT Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna Municipal Class Environmental Assessment County of Elgin (lead proponent)and Municipality of Bayham Date June 2, 2016 File 214202 NOTICE OF COMPLETION LOCATION PLAN 1. CLASS EA PLANNING PROCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 1.1 Overview 1.2 Problem Statement 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.1 'Site Conditions 2.2 Existing Bridge 2.3 Municipal Planning 2.4 Provincial Policy Statement 3. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.1 Municipal Class EA Alternatives 3.2 Alternative A - Old Mill Line Extension Road 3.3 Alternative B - Access Road to Light Line 3.4 Alternative C - Upgrade Creek Road 3.5 Alternative D - Edison Drive Bridge Replacement 3.6 Alternative E - Do Nothing 3.7 Assessment of Alternatives 4. PUBLIC AND AGENCY CONSULTATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.1 Consultation Plan 4.2 First Notice 4.3 Second Notice 4.4 Project Comments 5. PROPOSED PROJECT.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 5.1 Project Description 5.2 Implementation Measures APPENDIX A Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report APPENDIX B Natural Heritage Report County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, VIENNA Municipal Class Environmental Assessment NOTICE OF COMPLETION A new pre-fabricated panel bridge is proposed to replace the existing Edison Drive Bridge (also known as the Vienna Bridge), located on Edison Drive in Vienna. This bridge spans Big Otter Creek and connects the Edison Drive area north of Big Otter Creek to the Vienna community.The existing steel truss bridge,which has significant deficiencies,is proposed to be removed and the concrete abutments modified. The new panel bridge will be installed from the south side. Bridge removal,abutment modification and replacement bridge installation is expected to require about two months,and is planned for the late summer or fall of 2016.During bridge replacement,properties located on Edison Drive north of Big Otter Creek will be provided with a temporary access along the section of Creek Road now used as a farm lane. A private lane will be temporarily utilized for access around the section of Creek Road closed to traffic. The temporary Creek Road access provisions will be used by approximately three residences, a farm operation and agricultural lots along Edison Drive. A Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report of the existing bridge has been prepared,followed by completion of a Cultural Heritage Documentation Report as a record of the bridge prior to removal. The proposed project is being planned under Schedule B of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment(Class EA). The County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham are the project proponents,with the Countyof Elgin as the lead proponent. The proposed replacement bridge will be owned and maintained by the County of Elgin.As indicated in the February 8, 2016 Class EA Notice, the project name has been changed from PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE ACCESS ROAD,VIENNA, to PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, VIENNA. Subject to comments received as a result of this Notice, and the receipt of necessary approvals, the County of Elgin intends to proceed with the design and construction of this project. Project plans and other information are available at www.elgincounty.ca, and at the following location: Engineering Services Department Phone: 519-631-1460 County of Elgin Administration Building E-mail: cwatters@elgin.ca 450 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas, ON N5R 5V1 Office open Monday to Friday, 8:30 am to 4:30 pm Interested persons should provide written comment to the municipality on the proposal within 30 calendar days from the date of this Notice. Comment should be directed to the Director of Engineering Services at Elgin County. If concerns arise regarding this project,which cannot be resolved in discussion with the municipality,a person or party may request that the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change order a change in the project status and require a higher level of assessment under an individual Environmental Assessment process(referred to as a Part 11 Order).Reasons must be provided for the request. Requests must be received by the Minister within 30 calendar days of this Notice. Minister of the Environment and Climate Change 77 Wellesley Street West, 11th Floor, Ferguson Block, Toronto, ON M7A 2T5 and Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, Environmental Approvals Branch 135 St. Clair Avenue West, 1 st Floor, Toronto, ON M4V 1 P5 and Engineering Services Department Phone: 519-631-1460 County of Elgin Administration Building E-mail: cwatters@elgin.ca 450 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas, ON N5R 5V1 Office open Monday to Friday, 8:30 am to 4:30 pm If there is no request received by July 15,2016,the County of Elgin will proceed to design and construction of the proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement project, as presented in the planning documentation. Please note that ALL personal information included in a Part II Order submission-such as name,address,telephone number and property location-is collected,maintained and disclosed by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change for the purpose of transparency and consultation. The information is collected under the authority of the Environmental Assessment Act or is collected and maintained for the purpose of creating a record that is available to the general public as described in s.37 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.Personal information you submit will become part of a public record that is available to the general public unless you request that your personal information remain confidential.For more information,please contact the Ministrys Freedom of Information and Privacy Coordinator at 416-327-1434. This Notice issued June 14, 2016. Clayton Watters, P. Eng., MBA Director of Engineering Services, County of Elgin LOCATION MAP PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, NT�INE VIENNA COUNTY OF ELGIN AND MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM o 0 MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT a EXISTING EDISON DRIVE ° BRIDGE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A NEW PRE-FABRICATED PANEL BRIDGE o�- 19 O�\J PO PGG��S ® � O� R0 Q TEMPORARY ROAD ACCESS FOR PROPERTY OWNERSnON/ AND CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES TO CREEK ROAD �XV AND LIGHT LINE(OVER AN ! UNIMPROVED SECTION OF CGV QUEEN z CREEK ROAD AND A PRIVATE FARM LANE) G��� J TNOT a f�...... G O CHES ANN z w 0 Q V I E N N A W L�QN GH LINE MUNICIPALITY � FULTON FU 41 UTE OF w BAYHAM z N z a U G��� PFARC T �\G O��ER GNPP�L S�R��� �iFN TFR QO F wAtNUj = MUNICIPAL ROAD F- ELGIN COUNTY ROAD KING ROAD NOT MAINTAINED SPRIETASSOCIATES STE Z 214202GCA02F01 /v9 BASE MAP:MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM TF,Q MAP FEATURES AND SCALE ARE APPROXIMATE. ROAD WIDTHS SHOWN ARE NOT TO SCALE 0 METRES 400 19 TUNNEL LINE PROJECT SCREENING REPORT Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna Municipal Class Environmental Assessment, County of Elgin (Lead Proponent) June 2016 1. CLASS EA PLANNING PROCESS 1.1 OVERVIEW A new pre-fabricated panel bridge is proposed to replace the existing Edison Drive Bridge(also known as the Vienna Bridge), located on Edison Drive in Vienna. The proposed project is being planned under Schedule B of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA). The County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham are the project proponents,with the County of Elgin as the lead proponent. Spriet Associates are project consultants. This Project Screening Report has been prepared as an outline of the proposed project and to summarize the Class EA planning process that has been completed. For an itemized listing of project correspondence and reports prepared for the proposed project, refer to the associated Documentation Report. Additional information on the project is available by contacting the Municipality or project consultants. Engineering Services Department Spriet Associates County of Elgin Administration Building 155 York Street, 450 Sunset Drive, ST. THOMAS, ON N5R 5V1 LONDON, ON N6A 1A8 Contact: Clayton Watters, P. Eng., MBA Contact: John R. Spriet, P.Eng., Director of Engineering Services Project Engineer and Manager Phone: 519-631-1460 Phone: 519-672-4100 E-mail: cwatters@elgin.ca E-mail: mail@spriet.ca The Edison Drive Bridge is located in the community of Vienna, part of the Municipality of Bayham(Figure 1-1A). Prior to January 1, 1998, the Village of Vienna was a separate municipality. The Municipality of Bayham was created on that date by the amalgamation of the former Township of Bayham, Village of Port Burwell and Village of Vienna.The bridge connects properties located on the north side of Big Otter Creek to the Vienna community. Edison Drive is the only maintained road servicing this area (Figure 1-1B), so the bridge is a key component of the local road system. Properties requiring road access include three residences, a farm operation and a number of agricultural fields. The bridge is owned and maintained by the County of Elgin, while the adjacent road, Edison Drive, is a local road owned and maintained by the Municipality of Bayham. The existing bridge is a steel truss structure constructed in 1907 and moved to the current location in 1944. As a follow-up to a structural inspection of the Edison Drive Bridge, at the October 22, 2013 Elgin County Council meeting the weight limit on the bridge was reduced to a single 5 tonne posting.A triple posting (10 tonne, 15 tonne and 24 tonne) weight limit had previously applied. The restricted 5 tonne load capacity rating does not permit large trucks, including some emergency vehicles, to cross the bridge. In addition to the weight limit,the bridge truss structure restricts larger trucks and farm vehicles from using the bridge. It was recognized that the reduced 5 tonne weight limit on the bridge would have to be upgraded to maintain adequate road access for the north section of Edison Drive, either by repairing or replacing the existing bridge, or providing another road access to the part of Edison Drive north of Big Otter Creek. Several alternatives have been considered in this Class EA. The following is a brief overview of these alternatives, which are outlined in more detail in Section 3 of this report. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-1.wpd 1-1 Alternative A - Old Mill Line Extension Road Mill Street, which historically extended east of the bridge to the current Old Mill Line, has been considered as a potential access road to the Edison Drive area north of the bridge. The Mill Street road allowance extends east of the bridge, through the Big Otter Creek flood plain and up a steep slope to Old Mill Line. Very few traces of the former road remain. An all-terrain vehicle trail extends along part of the road allowance. One advantage is that the length of road to be constructed is only about 0.5 km long. After the consideration of various approaches by Elgin County and Bayham, the current Class EA was initiated with an Elgin County Request for Proposal(RFP), dated June 13, 2014. Following a competitive bidding process, Spriet Associates were awarded the project.The work to be undertaken consisted of the preparation of a Schedule B Class EA and related engineering design services to construct a local road, approximately 500 metres long, connecting Edison Drive (on the north side of the bridge)to Old Mill Line. The project was named the "Old Mill Line Extension". Project proponents are the County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham, with Elgin County as the lead proponent. Initial work on the Old Mill Line Extension project indicated that the existing road allowance was not ideal for a new municipal road. A survey of the road allowance indicated it was narrower than expected, contained jogs and was located quite close to the watercourse.There were also engineering,groundwater and natural heritage concerns to be addressed, plus potential concerns with residential properties adjacent to the steep slope area. As a result, the focus of the project changed to evaluating Alternative B. Alternative B-Access Road to Light Line A review of survey plans for Vienna indicated that a road had extended directly north from the settlement to Light Line. Although now part of the adjacent agricultural field, it was determined that the original road allowance remained a public road. Traces of the original road were located along the valley slope, and confirmed by review of a 1945 LPRCA air photo. It was assumed that use of the road to Light Line would have declined after the Edison Drive road and bridge were established in 1944. While this access road alignment is longer (about 1.0 km long) than Alternative A, it is partly across an open, level field that is mostly within an existing road allowance. Following authorization, the Class EA was renamed "Proposed Edison Drive Access Road, Vienna". The first EA Notice was issued January 23, 2015. Project work continued in 2015, including a topographic survey, preliminary engineering, geotechnical, natural heritage and archaeological studies to determine project feasibility,costs and site-specific approval and mitigation requirements. However, by August 2015 it was evident that, although the proposed access road was technically feasible,the construction costs would be significantly higher than expected (just over $1 million, or nearly twice the allocated budget). The higher costs were the result of several factors, including soil and slope characteristics,extensive archaeological assessment requirements and constraints imposed by the need to minimize natural heritage impacts. Alternative C- Upgrade Creek Road Creek Road, which extends from the west end of Edison Drive along Big Otter Creek, then north to Light Line,was historically used as another access route to the area. However, a culvert on Creek Road about 700 metres south of Light Line was washed out some years ago and not replaced.The south part of Creek Road that connects to Edison Drive is no longer maintained and does not provide an access route to Light Line, although it is still used as a farm lane for field access. In addition to the culvert problem, parts of the road are very close to the Big Otter Creek bank, and there is a steep slope that has eroded. A farm gate has been installed across Creek Road at Edison Drive to reduce trespassing and vandalism concerns. The section of Creek Road to be upgraded is approximately 1.5 km long. Upgrade costs were estimated to be much higher than Alternative B, so Alternative C was not considered to be a feasible option. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016- 214202H01-1.wpd 1-2 Alternative D- Edison Drive Bridge Replacement Replacement of the existing bridge with a completely new structure was not considered to be feasible,both because of high cost and the lack of construction access to the north side of Big Otter Creek during the lengthy bridge construction period. A lower-cost approach was considered, where the existing bridge abutments would be reused (with modifications)and a prefabricated panel bridge installed from the south side. Following authorization,a second EA Notice was issued February 8,2016.The Class EA project was renamed "Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna",and is the basis for this Screening Report. The Municipal Class EA flow chart is reproduced in Figure 1-2. The first Public Notice was considered a Phase 1 notice. The second (February 8, 2016) Notice is the formal Phase 2 public and agency consultation, with Alternative D as the preferred project alternative. 1.2 CLASS EA PROBLEM STATEMENT The 2015 Municipal Class EA document (MCEA) outlines the "purpose of the project"in B.2.2.3: "A water crossing will be justified where an existing or new roadway is required to cross a river, lake, canal, bay or similar water body. Replacement or modification to an existing water crossing facility may be necessary to address a structural deficiency, a functional deficiency related to transportation demands or a functional deficiency related to hydrological conditions." There are two types of EA deficiencies with the existing Edison Drive Bridge project: • Structural deficiency-the deterioration in the steel bridge structure requiring a reduction to a 5 tonne load capacity for the bridge. • Functional deficiency- dimensional constraints imposed by the steel truss bridge design that restrict bridge access by larger trucks, farm equipment and some emergency vehicles. A Problem Statement was initially prepared for Status Report 2, dated November 12, 2014. The following version has been updated to reflect project changes. The existing Edison Drive bridge over Big Otter Creek in Vienna, Municipality of Bayham, is owned and maintained bythe County of Elgin.The narrow,through-truss steel bridge structure was originally constructed in 1907 and relocated to the current Edison Drive location in 1944,with the addition of a new substructure and deck.The bridge provides access to a small number of properties located on the north side of Big Otter Creek, along Edison Drive. Properties requiring access include three residences, a farm operation and some agricultural lots. In October 2013,following an engineering review,the bridge was reduced by the County to a 5 tonne load rating that does not permit large trucks, including some emergency vehicles, to cross the bridge. Larger trucks and farm vehicles are also restricted from using the bridge by size limitations imposed by the steel bridge structure. Upgrading the existing bridge is not considered a cost-effective solution, given the access restrictions imposed by the structure. The problem to be addressed is to provide a permanent access to the Edison Drive area north of Big Otter Creek that can be accessed by car, truck, farm and emergency vehicles. The project solution should be cost-effective, give consideration to Municipal, County and Provincial planning policies, minimize environmental impacts and maintenance requirements. For alternatives that propose an access road as a project solution, existing road allowances that connect to Edison Drive should be evaluated to determine if at least part of an existing road allowance could be utilized. The County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham are the proponents for the proposed project,with the County of Elgin as the lead proponent for the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment(Class EA)process. The County of Elgin will be responsible for project construction costs and future bridge maintenance costs. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-1.wpd 1-3 FIGURE 1-1A PROJECT LOCATION - BAYHAM AND AREA A�,, Y p AvoN 5 C F AR E �4r nr 3 00 - , vra x� �7 z5"'l' J (j �► x1ouNr �O ..... .VERNON r -. -- t r aPt 4y,.4►, - � .-_._ � - .- O� --=-- TILLS +NJ5QRG F 4B o —• O"UTH-WET OXFORD TOWNSHIP LYONS 19}4e 48 49 tA 4'r4`+� lr a x, s2�� 1; - - -:' •I ..\I I\1 .- ,11+R �i�\ it f;tL it q .. SIi77 l \\P?LILLJk -, ,.,=5}4E9 4 5 T SPRlNGFlELp ' -CORNLTH // I }<C. ajr,25 RI SI +•9aa 73 (01 LI GF LINT - ;}u". % _ O' i HALL 4 C 4 f• 4 5>124 4?4F �(LI\COLT\ 11\P C = ( v i - t LLY@ EOE-. AYLM ER y ' z if tgd(r>. Ry[}(b .:.KOt" ••9 J t(7tcS full kp}7111\ , �19 I'll, p a r.'\t BnLUpr\ Vl I I LNc '�11n_pli_Vt IIII xC, Il IIRa (lIIfLRIN\]7 I.1\I Q 5.977 RICHE^O%: t m ORI\1:" ° IOL IiA C'!( \.\' \:C �\• 'Tj �- LhE c.�, r P\\` �.. lib(O6 y SUMMERS j;�r {?\\\ o 'o� 7k^ H/illka I i\L CORNERS yis3 36 rr o SRADI LYOU I K I:R\1TIUV Ll].I F. !I cli .0 LI\1 '""R 40 41 - s STRAFF°RDVILLE. ss i �Y \L s, � ♦IRS � - iA520 O!1\BISI LtVL,SOt7t} < G _�_.. LUTON,, 95 5/6C(-..:- r5i627 - ?s47 52338 )A\t1:5 i - TD A37 , _ - ;- UNBOYNE MOUNT SALEA4 5, c PROJECT - l F';e O 534Di _° LOCATION se 7 19 1IfY, r \'Ii�\\\I I\I : r'Gt; ^.•- O'' :549227 ':.: - 5b577 5 52521 .m v CANDYVILLE C J�1NI 1?U1t\_11\I GROVES ENDS 57 COPENHAGE '. \O\'a5WTl.tl{S\G - s2. :lgLAKEVIEW -i0 VIENNA �1A _ , 5133 >,. f;l..—,,\V 4i\litci�}•u Nil 42 PORTBRUCE 139 0 KILOMETRES 4 - _ PORT BURWELL MAP SOURCE:COUNTY OF ELGIN SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202HO1F01-1A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 1-113 PROJECT LOCATION - VIENNA 0 a 0 w w IL O LOCATION OF EDISON DRIVE OLO BRIDGE VIENNA 19 MUNICIPALITY Q OF p �o�oQ isp� BAYHAM QUEEN z � Q Cj0�� CHESTNu� ANN z Q w w 0 z o ll� FULTON 41 CHUTE SINE NE U w Z N z a w U PFgR[ G�EE� TTER g\Gp�CEFZ PEL S�REE� ♦ Vj CHP ®® ENN ®® MUN.ROAD-ASPHALT ♦♦ MUN.ROAD-TAR&CHIP WG[NU ••••••••••••••• MUN.ROAD-GRAVEL T ROAD NOT MAINTAINED(RNM) _ ------------------ LANEWAY KINO � PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY ♦ STF. p ELGIN COUNTY ROAD BASE MAP SOURCE:EAST ELGIN MAPPING ♦ qTF SERVICES-AIR PHOTO MAPPING(TRACED). ♦♦� MAP FEATURES AND SCALE ARE APPROXIMATE. •� ROAD WIDTHS SHOWN ARE NOT TO SCALE ••�� 0 METRES 400 19 TUNNEL LINE SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F01-1B PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 1-2 MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FLOW CHART - SCHEDULE B EXHIBIT A.2 MUNICIPAL CLASS EA PLANNING AND DESIGN PROCESS NOTE: TJJi.e flow chart is to he read in conjunction with Parr A q/'the/blunic'ipal class EA PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE S ALTERNATIVE• ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITY SOLUTIONS PREFERRED SOLUTION .,. ' IDENTIFY aLTEHt:ATNE IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVE COMPLETE ;OEN7I FY PflOBLENI APPROVED- DESIGN CONCEPTS COr.!PLE7E CONTRACT I-- SOLUTION$TO PHOULEM ENVIRONMENTAL 0Ti OPPORTUNITY 1 OR OPVOHTUNITY %IAY PROCEED FOH PREFERRED STUDY REPORT i DHAYII.NGS AND Al SOLUTION TENDER DOCUMENTS Y F1 1 EIJ VIHONM,CiJTaL 1 2 DISCRETIONARY PUBLIC F SELECT SCHEDULE SCHEDULE T DETAIL INVENTORY STUDY REPORT(ESRI ; N �',,, ^ _ OF NATUITAL,SOCIAL PLACED ON PROCEED TO CONSULTATION TO REVIEW (APPENDIX 1) —I A'A• 1 AND ECONOMIC PUULIC HECORO CONSTRUCTION AND I PROBLEM OR OPPORTUNITY — I ENVI RONM.ENT OPERATION I NOTICE OF CGn!FLETION ,4 IF NO TO REVIEW AGENCIES AND PUBLIC INVENTORY NATURAL OHOER�- MAY PROCEED 1 IDENTIFY IL".PACT OF 1 .I I'.ETEIMINEAPPLICABILITY\ SOCIAL,ECONOMIC 1 T ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS COPY OF � �OF IAASTER PLAN APPROACH/ ENVIHONMCNT ON ENVIRONMENT,AND NOTICE OF COMPLETION I l.IOh'ITOH FOR ISBO Sf-A.2.i)�I I MITIGATING MEASURES TOMOE-EAURANC.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ORDER 1 PROVISIONS AND I COMMITMENTS FIRST; PRo«VE!N�T„ IOENTIrY IMPACT Or ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIUNS INDIVIDUAL 1 EA NOTICE EA. ON THE EN'JIFlONMENT OR ABANDON 1 A EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE JAN. 23,2015 ANO MITGAT,NG S1CA$•JPES PROJCOT OE$IGN$ IUf:NTIFY OPYORTUNRY TO I RECOMMENDED DESIGN REOUEST MINISTER WITHIN 3U DAY$OF NOTIFICATION - V 1 TO REOUESTAN ORDER EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE OPPORTUNITY ; I 1 SOLUTIONS FO P ORDER' 'IDENTITY v v I I RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS REQUEST TO LAIN CONSULT REVIL AGENCIES A PREVIOUSL'i _ I WAYS INTERESTED d DIRECTLY /� OPTIONAL DAYS OF A NOTIFICATION AFFECTED)PUBLIC � rORMAL h!EOIATION Ala ' I A*`S<e Simon A.2.t1.1'I 5 CCN5UL7 RFN.6W I �• AOENGES AND PU60C NOTICE 1--------------- .PRCSLEM CR OPPpRNNITY 1 ' �{- COMPLETION y y y I AND ALTERNATIVE CpLVi1pNS TO REVIEW DEIGN AOENCIBUC ES& SELECT PREFERRED PL ORDER- S E C O N D DISCRETIONARY GRANTED. OP.CEP PUBLIC PROCEED `.IATTEPI DENIED EA NOTICE . 1 CONSULTATION ASPER REFERRED ",THOR TO REVIEY! MINISTER'S TO WITHOUT FEB. 8, 2016 SELECT PREFERRED �- SCHEDULE B PREFERRED DIRECTION MEDIATION MINISTER'S SOLUTION I .. DESIGN OR ABANDON CONDITIONS PROJECT SCHEDULE C REVIEW ENVIRONMENTAL $13li"ICA NCE 8 CHOICE ---D INCIICAiI'v Cv;.`IICIF rVTNn. OF SCHEDULE IEANCiACURv EQFNT.S REVIEW AND CONFIHM INDIVIDUAL __ �� INDIC4TC'i FROBAB!.0 C:run CHOICE OF SCIIEDULE E.A. t MANC or,PIiJL:;:CONTACT POINTS — — — r PRELIMINARY FINALIZATION OF PREFERRED DESIGN MUNICIPAL SCHEDULE B O DEt110'J POINTS ON CHOICE CF 5cHffiiULE �! ENGINEERS NOTICE OF r�'i OPTONAL ASSOCIATION COMPLETION PAPT"OR;`"'"•.'r"^A2". SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202HOlFOl-2 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 SITE CONDITIONS Existing land uses in the project area are shown in Figure 2-1. Most of the urban-type development in Vienna is located south and west of Big Otter Creek. The section of Edison Drive located north of the Creek is shown as a heavy green line. This is the area that is dependent on the Edison Drive Bridge for road access.The approximate locations of existing Edison Drive residences and farm buildings are shown on Figure 2-1. The Elgin County Engineering Services Department indicated that the 2014 traffic count for Edison Drive was approximately 25 vehicles per day. Based on the Ontario Ministry of Transportation reference "Inventory Manual for Municipal Roads(1991)",a traffic count of 25 AADT would not normally justify costly road improvements, such as bridge replacement. On page (iv) the Manual states: "LOW VOLUME RURAL ROADS (LESS THAN 50 AADT) All rural roads with a current AADT of less than 50 shall be considered to be adequate with normal maintenance procedures. However, a spot improvement may be costed at an isolated location to improve a severe condition." While Edison Drive is not a rural road, it is in a location within a small community where the population density in the subject area is comparable to a rural location. However, the dependence on a single road for access creates a relatively unique condition where the provision of road access is needed. 2.2 EXISTING BRIDGE Photos of the existing bridge are provided in Figure 2-2. Note the substantial rust and deterioration in structural members on the underside of the bridge. As part of this Class EA,a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report(CHER)on the existing Edison Drive Bridge was prepared by Unterman McPhail Associates. The full report is included as Appendix A. The following bridge information is from the CHER. The existing steel truss bridge was constructed in 1907 for the County of Elgin and installed across Big Otter Creek at King Street in the south part of Vienna, replacing an earlier bridge that had deteriorated. The bridge had a steel superstructure and concrete deck. In the early 1930s, Provincial Highway 19 was constructed between Tillsonburg and Port Burwell,with the subject bridge as part of the Highway. In 1938, a new concrete highway bridge was constructed, by-passing the steel truss bridge. The truss bridge was returned to County ownership. In 1937 there was extensive flooding in the Vienna area, damaging structures in the north part of the Village, including a mill and adjacent dam. The planned solution was to relocate the road away from the Creek, with a new bridge location across to Mill Street (now Edison Drive). Figure 2-3A is a sketch prepared by Fred Bell, Elgin County Engineer, showing the road diversion and bridge relocation. Figure 2-313 is an engineering plan of the relocated bridge (called the Mill Street Bridge on the plans), with new abutments to be constructed on wood piles. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-2.wpd 2-1 The CHER provides the following quote from the Nov. 22, 1944 Elgin County Road Committee report: "Mill Street in the Village of Vienna was rerouted for a distance of about 114 mile and the Lower Bridge in Vienna, abandoned by the Department of Highways, was moved and placed on new abutments on the new diverted road. The bridge has a span of 110 feet, will safely carry modern traffic and it is expected will serve for many years." (Edison Drive Bridge CHER, p. 10) The CHER also provides a description of the existing bridge: "The Edison Drive Bridge is classified as a steel through truss structure that uses a double intersection Warren style of truss with riveted connections. British engineers, James Warren and Willoughby Monzoni patented the Warren truss in 1848. The original form of the truss comprised a series of equilateral triangles. The diagonals set between parallel chords carried both compressive and tensile loads. Verticals were later added to provide bracing for the triangular web system. The double intersection Warren truss or lattice truss is a subtype of the Warren truss and consists of two triangular truss systems that are superimposed upon each other, with or without verticals. ... The Warren truss and its variants were widely built throughout North America from the mid 1800s into the 20th century." 2.3 MUNICIPAL PLANNING Municipal planning policies are outlined in Official Plans for the County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham. Bayham zoning regulations are also applicable. County of Elgin Official Plan The Elgin County Plan outlines three tiers of settlement areas in the County.Vienna and Port Burwell are the only two Tier 1 settlement areas in Bayham. A Tier 1 settlement has the following definition: "Tier 1 settlement areas generally have the largest populations in the County and as a consequence have full municipal services(municipal water and sewage services). The boundaries of these settlement areas are shown on Schedule A to this Plan and are listed in Table 3. Given the type of servicing that is provided in these settlement areas and the potential for these settlement areas to be central communities where a range of uses and opportunities are and can be provided, this Plan directs the majority of new growth to Tier 1 settlement areas." Municipality of Bayham Official Plan Bayham Official Plan Schedule C, Vienna:Land Use and Constraints, is shown in Figure 2-4.The position of the Edison Drive Bridge is marked on Schedule C, with the location of the Edison Drive area north of Big Otter Creek. While most of the developed part of Bayham is south and west of Big Otter Creek, there is a large undeveloped area extending from the Creek north to Light Line that is designated'Residential'. This area is now a mix of agricultural fields and woodlots, sloping to the Creek. Note that the Edison Drive Bridge is the only road link between the developed part of Vienna and the large undeveloped area to the north of Big Otter Creek that is designated for development. With the Tier 1 designation in the County Official Plan applied to Vienna, it is possible that future development north of Big Otter Creek could strengthen the future need for a water crossing at Edison Drive. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-2.wpd 2-2 2.4 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT Policies on infrastructure are provided in the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 (PPS). The proposed replacement bridge is considered consistent with applicable PPS policies. • With regard to Cultural Heritage and Archaeology policies in PPS 2.6, the existing bridge has been evaluated through preparation of a CHER (see Appendix A). Although the bridge does have cultural heritage value, it is not a designated or listed structure that requires long-term preservation. • Comments on the CHER from the Ministry of Tourism,Culture and Sport(MTCS)in Subsection 4.4 of this Report observed that both Alternative B and D have heritage components. For the Alternative B road alignment, a Stage 4 archaeological assessment is required for a pre-1870 homestead site prior to road construction through the site. If Alternative D is implemented and the existing Edison Drive Bridge is demolished,the homestead site, and a previously assessed (Stage 3) aboriginal site will be preserved. • The CHER mitigation recommendations are included in this Screening Report(see Subsection 5.2) as part of the implementation recommendations. • PPS 1.6.7.2 states: "Transportation systems should be provided which are safe, energy efficient, facilitate the movement of people and goods, and are appropriate to address projected needs." The proposed bridge replacement will replace a bridge that is potentially unsafe with one that improves the the movement of vehicles, since the new bridge will not have weight and height/width restrictions. Safe access will be provided to the north Edison Drive area, which is consistent with the above PPS policy. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-2.wpd 2-3 FIGURE 2-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS - VIENNAAREA Al 4 � EXISTING .:, EDISON DRIVE EDISON DRIVE AREA BRIDGE NORTH OF BIG OTTER ®EXIST RESIDENCE CREEK REQUIRING • _ } ACCESS(GREEN LINE) QF EXIST.FARM BUILDING f USED AS GATED - � 0- � �- FARM LANE • (NOT MAINTAINED) • ?°"`�' R F R { CREEK ROAD GATE 41 • e t Y A! MUN.ROAD-ASPHALT —————- MUN.ROAD-TAR&CHIP iF a "_.: • ••••••••••••••• MUN.ROAD-GRAVEL ROAD NOT MAINTAINED • ------------------ LANEWAY AIR PHOTO:EAST ELGIN MAPPING SERVICE - ELGIN COUNTY ROAD BASE MAP:MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM MAP FEATURES AND SCALE ARE APPROXIMATE ••• ROAD WIDTHS SHOWN ARE NOT TO SCALE •••••• 0 METRES 400 SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F02-1 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA . -. { .�. -• , .pt,ass a d--! �• �`'-�� +�� _' d�'� � �.' dn•:. � - .-y' �� � �_y 8. ��tt �F� F � �%eit �yt���s''9`+r 4"'�p.�:t �;.�;�".ls♦'^ �, •: `3":. -tam. . � ���-yy.. ; r 41, IN w Y vt .#a} a♦! 02 'om WIR-M� 1 rr • i l �`�j r �; ' ,fir" 4 {t 4, '` � ; � t ` C a, . -1 ' i1t Y4" 3 \l�[ �- A FIGURE 2-3A 1944 SITE PLAN - BRIDGE RELOCATION AND ROAD DIVERSION MILL STREET NOW KNOWN AS EDISON DRIVE L. f,r Ryaok NEW ROAD CONSTRUCTED (GRAY SHADING oz- N r c 1• p \ c; .511-6 TCH PJ'0/00,lcd Iticaho/7 NILL �Tl?ffT 1,,'R1L)GL CcU!-rTy o!' E L G!N t � G 5 i�1 6 JPI J/- MOM(23.017/ Jan 22'•'1344 ly cdein SPRI ET ASSOCIATES-214202HOI F02-3A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 2-313 1944 BRIDGE RELOCATION PLAN WITH NEW ABUTMENTS o -71 yr el sa- P71LL C ?ffT BRIDGL "i fr...L r� .3, cemenl- 742 )-n;J J11L L,4� or YIL 1YJYA SELCTICY4. 01 FLOOR S PRI ET ASSOCIATES-214202H01 F02-3B PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 2-4 BAYHAM OFFICIAL PLAN SCHEDULE C, VIENNA OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE MUNICIPALITY of BAYHAM SCHEDULE 'C' VIENNA: J s LAND USE and CONSTRAINTS ED DRIV R'SoTH E AREA NORTH OF BIG OTTER CREEK REQUIRING j / j� •s+.'�'�� ACCESS(GREEN LINE) land Use Residential Z= Commercial Institutional Industrial Open Space EDISON DRIVE Constraints Hazard Lands Flood Fringe t 1,.�� r •r Floodway Existing Petroleum Wells \\ i Base Features — Counly Roads — Local Roads Wi Watercourse +i s 0 120 240 480 `�- Metres WnypR'.. Sehadule'C'famis part of Offl,W Plan of the fAunicipaliry of Bayham and must be road In conjunction with the written teat. January 2012 SOURCE:OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM,JANUARY 2012(EDITED EXCERPT);REFER TO COMPLETE PLAN FOR PLANNING PURPOSES SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F02-4 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA 3. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 3.1 MUNICIPAL CLASS EA ALTERNATIVES The Municipal Class EA(MCEA)document(2015 version) lists some of the possible alternative solutions for a bridge project that is subject to the Class EA planning process. General comments on water crossing alternatives are provided in MCEA B.2.3.3.Alternative Solutions,Grade Separations, (c)Water Crossings (page B-13): "Where a water crossing is necessary for a new roadway, there are very few practical alternatives to the water crossing which can be considered. In exceptional circumstances, where the water body is of such width or has such navigational requirements, a tunnel or a surface water transportation system, such as a ferry, might be considered as alternatives. A transportation deficiency specific to a water crossing site may require the replacement or modification of the existing roadway water crossing or the construction of a new roadway water crossing. Alternative solutions which may be considered are: Road Deficiencies: (i) modify the existing facility through non-structural improvements such as signing or traffic controls (ii) divert traffic to other existing roads and/or water crossings (iii) resolve a deficiency elsewhere in the road network (iv) restrictive traffic signing or closure of the road (v) reconstruct the water crossing (vi) "do nothing" Hydraulic Deficiencies: (i) increase hydraulic capacity (ii) "do nothing" " Based on a review of project requirements, four alternatives are considered (plus "Do Nothing"): Alternative A Old Mill Line Extension Road Alternative B Access Road to Light Line Alternative C Upgrade Creek Road Alternative D Edison Drive Bridge Replacement (Construct Replacement Panel Bridge on Existing Abutments) Alternative E Do Nothing Alternatives A, B and C are classified as alternative solutions (ii) and (iii) under road deficiencies: • divert traffic to other existing roads and/or water crossings • resolve a deficiency elsewhere in the road network These alternatives will result in the diversion of existing bridge traffic to another road. Since all three alternatives require substantial improvements to local roads, the alternative solution 'Deficiencies elsewhere in the road network"also applies. Alternative D implements alternative solution (v): • reconstruct the water crossing. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-1 Figure 3-1 illustrates the road alignments for Alternatives A, B and C, in relation to the location of the Edison Drive Bridge (Alternative D). Figure 3-2 shows the same alternative alignments, overlaid on the Official Plan Land Use Plan for Vienna.Alternatives A and B are within the future Vienna residential area, while Alternative C is outside the Vienna settlement area. Alternative A would provide an internal street connection between the residential area on Old Mill Line and Soper Road and the Vienna urban community.Alternative B connects the urban Vienna area to Light Line and, unlike the other alternatives, provides a road through a designated future residential area that is now undeveloped agricultural land. 3.2 ALTERNATIVE A-OLD MILL LINE EXTENSION ROAD Initial work on the Class EA commenced in August 2014, following County of Elgin authorization. The Terms of Reference for the project anticipated that the preferred road alignment would be an extension of Old Mill Line, using an existing road allowance to connect to Edison Drive on the north side of the existing bridge(approx.0.5 km long). However, initial project studies identified several concerns,including an undersized road allowance that would require widening,a potentially significant natural area that would be disturbed, and existing residences on both sides of the narrow historic Mill Street road allowance that could be adversely impacted by a road. Existing wells and underground aquifers were reported in the area, requiring a detailed hydrogeological assessment. A site review indicated that building a new road up the steep slope to connect to Old Mill Line would require costly slope stabilization. Figure 3-3A Alternative A -Air photo and Survey Sketch Comparison for Road Alignment • The actual road allowance is very narrow (only 12.125-12.344 metres wide in the east part), with an extra jog. Additional land will be needed. • The road allowance is closer to Big Otter Creek than anticipated. Road construction in the flood plain near the Creek is a concern, and may not be feasible. Figure 3-313 Alternative A - Site Photos • Photo A is a view along an existing trail / laneway east of the bridge • Photo B is along the former Mill Street (now regenerating with small trees), viewing east up a steep slope towards Old Mill Line. There are also steep side slopes. Note the shed on the adjacent residential property located in the upper right corner of the photo. • Photo C is a view west from the end of Old Mill Line, at the top of the steep road slope shown in Photo B. The sloped part of this former road is no longer accessible, even by ATV. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-2 3.3 ALTERNATIVE B -ACCESS ROAD TO LIGHT LINE In late 2014, another access road alignment was proposed; connecting Edison Drive to Light Line. Status Report 2, dated November 12, 2014, outlined the proposed road alignment, which would also utilize existing road allowances(see Figure 3-4A)with some small acquisition areas.While the total length of the new road was longer(approx. 1.0 km), over half of the proposed road length would be within existing road allowances across open fields, which are designated for future development (as shown on Figure 3-2). There are no adjacent residences or potential land use conflicts along the Alternative B alignment. The first Class EA Notice was issued on January 23,2015. Property owners adjacent to the proposed road alignment were contacted to discuss the project and obtain authorization for property access. Several technical studies were undertaken to evaluate Alternative B and prepare a cost estimate. • Topographic Survey and Road Design - A topographic survey of the proposed access road alignment was completed by Spriet Associates in April and May 2015. The preliminary road design was prepared in late April, with subsequent minor revisions. In late August, following completion of the Geotechnical Study, further road design work was completed to incorporate geotechnical data on road bed design and minimum side slope requirements. Cut and fill quantities for road construction have then been calculated as part of the cost estimate. The proposed Alternative B road alignment is shown in Figure 3-413. • Natural Heritage Review - Life science inventories, including a breeding bird study and three-season Floral Inventory have been completed by Biologic.One Special Concern bird was identified (Eastern Wood Pewee). Significant plant species included two Butternut trees and Giant St. John's Wort (S3). A subsequent Butternut Health Assessment report (submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry) concluded that the Butternuts were both hybrids and therefore not protected. Refer to Appendix for the Natural Heritage Study. • Geotechnical Study - A draft report for the geotechnical investigation has been submitted by Golder Associates, dated August 14, 2015. The soil investigation consisted of 10 shallow augerholes (1.5 metres deep) located along the proposed road alignment. Augerholes in the north part of the site(field area) indicated a layer of sand under the topsoil. Samples taken on the slope area indicated silty sand, and samples from the lower valley area had silty clay under the silty sand. Recommendations on pavement and slope design were also provided. • Archaeological Assessment - Stage 1 and 2 archaeological assessments have now been completed by Mayer Archaeological Consultants for all project areas anticipated to be disturbed by the proposed Alternative B road construction. Two sites required a more intensive Stage 3 assessment. One site (Location 4) appears to be a Euro-Canadian homestead site dating to the mid-1800's that requires full Stage 4 excavation.This site extends across the existing road allowance and cannot be avoided. A budget of $50,000 would be needed to complete the Stage 4 assessment. The road layout shown in Figure 3-413 is the basis for the preliminary cost estimate outlined in Table 3-1. A budget of$1,051,500. is proposed, based on a preliminary engineering design. Detailed design has not yet been completed for the proposed road and associated storm drainage system. Based on an Engineering Services Report to Elgin County Council, dated June 10, 2014, a budget of$540,000 has been allocated to construct a new access road that could replace the Edison Drive bridge.The preliminary budget of$1,051,500. for Alternative B is nearly double the allocated project budget. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-2142021-101-3mlod 3-3 Over 11,800 cu. metres of excess excavated material would have to be removed from the site. There are no known sites nearby where this substantial quantity of material could be deposited to reduce trucking costs, without causing adverse natural heritage, agricultural or archaeological impacts. For comparison purposes with Alternative D, costs for the heritage assessment, demolition of the existing bridge and bridge site restoration are included. However, Alternative B implementation is not contingent on demolition of the existing bridge (unlike Alternative D) and could be delayed. The budget in Table 3-1 includes an allowance of$50,000 for property acquisition, legal and survey costs. Property negotiations have not commenced, so it is not known if this allowance is sufficient. Similarly, regulatory agency approvals may require additional mitigation measures, which could increase the project budget. Figure 34A Alternative B -Existing Road Allowances to Be Utilized • The existing road allowances that would be utilized for Alternative B and shown in red shading. While the allowance is narrow (49.5 ft or 15.09 metres across the field area), it is sufficient for a local access road, given the flat field. However, additional land will be needed in the slope and valley areas. • Additional land will also be needed to join the two parts of the allowance. This jog may have been around an early settlement building, since the Stage 4 archaeological site is in this area. Figure 3-4B Alternative B - Proposed Road Alignment • The road alignment outlined in this Figure is the result of a topographic survey and engineering analysis to estimate construction quantities, based on geotechnical data and a reasonable slope for a local (50 kmh)road.The heavy red line indicates the approximate boundary of the disturbed area.This line has been used as a boundary for archaeological assessment purposes and the natural heritage review.Property acquisition areas were notfinalized when work on this alternative was ended. Figure 3-4C Alternative B - Site Photos • Photo A is a view south from Light Line, along the existing road allowance. The entire road allowance, other than the row of trees along the property line, has been cultivated and is farmed as part of the adjacent field to the east. • Photo B is also a view south, taken part-way down the valley slope, on the former road. The narrow, eroded roadway can still be seen, although fallen branches and debris restrict vehicle access. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016- 214202H01-3.wpd 3-4 TABLE 3-1 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE -ALTERNATIVE B (Access Road to Light Line) Item Est. Cost Total A. Site Preparation Al. Site clearing/grubbing to remove tree cover 25,000 A2. Strip and stockpile topsoil 8,700 A3. Traffic control and signage(Light Line access, Edison Drive bridge area) 2,000 A4. Silt fence around project perimeter(where required) 5,300 Sub-Total $41,000 B. Road Construction B1. Excavate/fill for road base(est.26,000 m3),excess material disposal (off-site) 182,000 B2. Granular A,supply and place(est. 5120 tonnes) 92,200 B3. Surface treatment-double layer tar and chip(approx. 1.0 km road,6.3 m.wide) 53,600 B4. Road drainage-storm drains 128,000 B5. Road drainage-manholes,catchbasins, outlets to Big Otter Creek 101,500 B6. Erosion protection (rip rap)for road ditches,catchbasins,etc. 25,000 B7. Place topsoil on sloped areas 7,800 B8. Supply/install erosion control mat,seed slopes(est. 12,600 sq. m.) 50,400 B9. Install barriers,signage at existing bridge(to be closed after road construction) 2,500 B10. Roadside cable guide rail/braces on curves(est.300 m of cable guide rail) 12,800 Sub-Total $655,800 C. Additional Project Costs Cl. Class EA, Engineering,Technical Studies(approved budget, plus expenses) 72,900 C2. Geotechnical Study(completed) 3,900 C3. Archaeological Assessment,expanded Stage 2 review area(completed) 2,000 C4. Archaeological Assessment,Stage 3 sites-Locations 1 and 4(completed) 24,500 C5. Archaeological Assessment-Stage 4 site(max. budget-to be completed) 50,000 C6. Heritage Study on existing bridge, archival photo record (completedf) 11,400 C7. Demolish/remove existing bridge after road completed(leave abutmentsf) 100,000 C8. Bridge site restoration-remove road approaches,topsoil/seed(') 10,000 C9. Allowance for property acquisition, legal and survey costs 50,000 C10. Contingency Allowance 30,000 Sub-Total $354,700 ESTIMATED TOTAL-ALTERNATIVE B $1,051,500 NOTES 1. Cost estimates are preliminary,and are rounded to nearest$100. HST not included. 2. Estimated costs for the heritage assessment, existing bridge demolition and site restoration are included for comparison purposes with Alternative D. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-5 3.4 ALTERNATIVE C -UPGRADE CREEK ROAD Creek Road extends from the west end of Edison Drive, along the north bank of Big Otter Creek, then directly north to Light Line. The section of Creek Road to be utilized for Alternative C is approximately 1.5 km long,extending from the west end of Edison Drive to the start of the maintained section of Creek Road, which is about 0.5 km south of Light Line. Access to the south end of Creek Road is restricted by a farm gate installed across the road. It is understood that trespassing and vandalism problems have prompted installation of the farm gate.There are also"Road Closed"warning signs at both ends of the road section. Most of Creek Road is accessible for use by farm vehicles as a non-maintained farm lane, with the exception of the north 200-300 metres of road that has revegetated following a culvert washout and is no longer accessible. Figure 3-5A illustrates the location of Creek Road in relation the Edison Drive. Although Creek Road is currently not available for public access, it remains a public road allowance and has periodically been considered as a potential alternative route to the Edison Drive north area if the bridge is no longer functional. For example, prior to the start of the current Class EA, the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution at their March 20, 2014 Council meeting: "THAT the County of Elgin be requested to take the necessary action to rectify the situation caused by the downgrading of the bridge on Edison Drive, Vienna, by either repairing or upgrading the bridge to a standard that will legally accommodate vehicles of heavier weights such as emergency, fuel,garbage trucks and farm machinery or by undertaking road construction to bring Creek Road, from Edison Drive to Light Line, to a level that will accommodate such vehicles and be open for public use or any other option that is suitable to the Municipality's needs." The costs to upgrade Creek Road for use as a municipal road are expected to exceed Alternative B,since the road is substantially longer and has a similar section with a steep grade (see Figure 3-5A for steep slope location). The road section requiring a culvert would either require full rebuilding (with a new culvert, erosion protection, improved side slopes, etc.)or land would have to be acquired for a new section of road constructed across farmland. In other areas, the close proximity of the road to Big Otter Creek would also have to be addressed, likely by acquiring additional land and constructing a new road away from the watercourse. In summary, the generally poor condition of longer Creek Road alignment, the steep slope area, the hazardous area near the Creek, and the significant culvert replacement would likely result in reconstruction costs substantially higher than the costs associated with Alternative B (which is not an affordable alternative). During the preliminary review of alternatives,it was concluded that the Creek Road alternative would be too costly for use as a year-round, maintained road, even though the accessible part of Creek Road can be used now as a farm lane and temporary access route. Figure 3-5A Alternative C- Creek Road Utilization Constraints • Road utilization constraints are indicated (closed area-no culvert, steep slope, areas where the road is near the Creek bank, road gate). Figure 3-513 Alternative C- Site Photos • Photo A shows the farm gate and "Road Closed" sign at the south end. • Photo B illustrates how Creek Road is very close to the watercourse bank. • Photo C is a view of the revegetated road near the culvert washout. Although the ground is obscured, extensive reconstruction will be needed. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-6 3.5 ALTERNATIVE D - EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT The alternative of constructing a new replacement Edison Drive Bridge was considered before this Class EA was initiated. The capital cost for a new, conventional replacement bridge was estimated at approximately$2,000,000.Given the County's estimated daily average traffic count of only 25 cars(AADT) on Edison Drive, this substantial expenditure for a new bridge could not be justified by the County. In response to the high estimated cost for Alternative B, and in consideration of the complex approval requirements for the new access road to Light Line, the County Engineering Services Department suggested that a lower-cost bridge alternative should be investigated. In particular, a pre-fabricated panel bridge was proposed as a potential solution, given the low daily traffic volumes. Alternative D follows this approach. Figure 3-6A is an example of the panel bridge installed on Clarke Road, Municipality of Bayham. This bridge was constructed in 2011 as a permanent bridge on a low-traffic road. The bridge offers full vehicle load capability and has no overhead structure to restrict large vehicle access. Following a review of the existing bridge and the original plans, it has been determined that the existing concrete bridge abutments can be modified for use with a new panel bridge. Similar to the Clarke Road bridge, the original bridge abutments were supported by a series of wood piles. Once the Edison Drive steel truss bridge is removed, the abutments will be modified to suit the new panel bridge. It is anticipated that bridge construction will require about two months, for removal of the existing bridge, abutment modification and panel bridge installation. During this time, there will be no access across Big Otter Creek. Properties located on Edison Drive north of Big Otter Creek will be provided with a temporary access along the section of Creek Road now used as a farm lane. Following authorization of an agreement between Elgin County and the property owners, a private lane (located on the 6475 Creek Road farm property) will be temporarily utilized for access around the section of Creek Road closed to traffic. The temporary access route will be used by approximately three residences, a farm operation and agricultural lots along Edison Drive. Provisions have been included in the project budget for minimal maintenance upgrades to Creek Road and the private lane. The work needed to utilize Creek Road is considered as road maintenance work on an existing municipal road. The temporary improvements to the private lane are being completed on private property with the agreement of the owners.Once construction is completed, the private lane will be restored to a pre-construction state. This temporary access route is not intended to meet municipal road construction standards, or be used by the general public. During construction, the temporary access route will be monitored and maintained as needed for vehicle access. A sign will be placed at south end of Creek Road stating: "TEMPORARY ACCESS ROUTE FOR USE BY PROPERTY OWNERS AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES DURING EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT. WARNING !! UNIMPROVED ROAD SURFACE AND STEEP SLOPES, USE AT OWN RISK. MAXIMUM SPEED 20 km PER HOUR." Similar signs will be placed at both ends of the private lane: "TEMPORARY PRIVATE LANEWAY FOR USE BY PROPERTY OWNERS AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES DURING EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT. WARNING !! UNIMPROVED ROAD SURFACE. USE AT OWN RISK. STAY WITHIN FENCES AT ALL TIMES. MAXIMUM SPEED 20 km PER HOUR." SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-7 The pre-fabricated panel bridge will be assembled on the south side. As new sections are added to the bridge, the structure is pushed towards the north bank of the Creek. One or more cranes are used to stabilize and position the structure. It is expected that most bridge-related work will occur on the south side, minimizing the need for construction vehicle access to the north side (via Creek Road). The proposed budget for Alternative B is $756,400., which is almost $300,000 less than the Alternative B access road to Light Line. A cost estimate for Alternative D is provided in Section 5 of this Report. Figure 3-6A Alternative D Example -A crow Panel Bridge in Bayham • Photos of the panel bridge installed on Clarke Road in Bayham. The proposed Edison Drive bridge would be similar, except with a steel grating deck. Figure 3-613 Alternative D - Site Photos • Photos A and B show the Edison Drive road approaches to the existing bridge. The new bridge will have slightly raise approaches, with new steel guide rails. • Photo C is a view of the underside of the existing bridge, looking towards the concrete abutment that is to be retained for the new bridge. 3.6 ALTERNATIVE E - DO NOTHING Alternative E-Do Nothing For this Class EA, the 'Do Nothing'alternative would be continued use of the bridge, subject to load and height constraints, until bridge closure is required as a result of ongoing structural deterioration in the steel structure.The vehicle load rating on the bridge has already been substantially reduced to a 5 tonne weight restriction, so the next step in a 'Do Nothing' approach (assuming there are no structural repairs)would likely be bridge closure. Structural inspections of the bridge are normally required every two years. Given past concerns about the structural adequacy of the bridge, it is possible that the bridge could be closed on short notice, if concerns arise following an inspection. Incremental repairs on the bridge are not expected to remedy the significant structural deterioration that has already occurred. The existing bridge was understood to be structurally refurbished when relocated to the current Edison Drive location in 1944, with a new substructure and deck. Prior to the start of this Class EA,the bridge was estimated to require approximately$350,000. to replace the concrete deck with a lighter steel deck grating, and repair or replace the rusted steel beams and components. However, repairing the existing bridge structure would not change the height and width constraints on bridge access, and therefore does not address project requirements. Adopting the'Do Nothing'alternative would result in substantial problems if Edison Drive Bridge had to be closed, since the Edison Drive property owners, residents and agricultural workers would have no road access to the area. While Creek Road is accessible now by tractor or a four-wheel drive vehicle with off- road capability(subject to weather constraints), the section of Creek Road with the culvert washout does not support any type of vehicle access. The only access is along a private lane. While this temporary access approach is planned for use during the proposed Alternative D bridge replacement, only a small number of vehicles are anticipated to be using the temporary route, and the condition of the route will be closely monitored.This level of monitoring would not be feasible for regular use of Creek Road. Use of the temporary access route during winter weather conditions is not planned, and is not likely feasible. In summary, Alternative E 'Do Nothing' is not considered a viable project solution. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-8 3.7 ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES Table 3-2 provides an assessment of project alternatives based on some standard MCEA screening criteria,(Appendix 3 - Screening Criteria), and criteria derived from the Problem Statement outlined in subsection 2.2 of this report.The following notes outline the approach to assessing the Problem Statement requirements (items PS 1 to 8) in terms of the project alternatives. 1. Provides permanent access to Edison Drive north area 2. Access for cars, trucks, farm, emergency vehicles • All of the Alternatives, except Alternative E (Do Nothing), satisfy these requirements and provide a permanent access road for all specified types of road vehicles. 3. Cost-effective access solution • Only Alternative D provides a cost-effective access solution. • A cost estimate has not been prepared for Alternative A, but it is estimated to exceed Alternative D, based on valley-based road construction, slope stabilization and mitigation. • The Alternative B budget is nearly $300,000 more than Alternative D. Additional costs could result following detailed design and project approvals,including additional mitigation measures and property acquisition costs. • A cost estimate is not provided for Alternative C since it is estimated to substantially exceed the over-budget Alternative B. Alternative C (about 1.5 km long) is 50% longer than B. Although parts of Creek Road are used now as a farm lane, the road will essentially require a full reconstruction, relocation away from the watercourse bank, regrading and shaping the steep slope, plus constructing a new watercrossing for the washed-out culvert. • Although Alternative E does not require a significant expenditure, it is not a cost-effective solution, since the problem is simply postponed and not addressed. 4. Consideration to County and Municipal planning policies 5. Consideration to Provincial Policy Statement provisions • Alternative D is supported by planning policies, since it provides a viable access to the north Edison Drive area without adverse environmental impacts. Demolition of the existing bridge is addressed through the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report(CHER)that has been prepared for this project and accepted by MTCS. • Alternative A requires further study to determine policy compliance. Alternative A would also provide an internal road link between urban Vienna and the Old Mill Line and Soper Road area. • Alternative B would construct a new access road north to Light Line and also provide(as a side- benefit to the municipality and local property owners) access to the designated Vienna residential area on the north side of Big Otter Creek. • Alternative C also requires further study. Unlike Alternatives A and B, Alternative C would link Edison Drive to Creek Road, a rural Bayham road outside the Vienna urban designation. This road link could lead to land use concerns along the adjacent Big Otter Creek and nearby agricultural areas. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-9 • Edison Drive is a designated part of the municipal road system. Alternative E would not maintain long term access to the north Edison Drive area, which is intended for significant future residential development in the Bayham Official Plan. 6. Minimize impacts on the environment • The Natural Heritage Study prepared for the project is provided in Appendix B.The Summary and Conclusion section of the Study states (page 20): "This Natural Heritage Report has assessed the natural heritage features and functions within the study area that includes lands of approximately 10ha with the objective to provide the best alternative, from a natural heritage perspective, to address the access constraints of the existing bridge. The alternative to construct a new panel bridge on the existing abutments provides the least amount of impact to natural heritage features and functions. With the other two alternatives (extend Old Mill Line or construct an access road to Light Line), natural heritage features and functions would be impacted considerably in comparison. Provided the recommended mitigation measures are implemented, there are no net effects to the natural heritage features and functions expected, and the project can proceed as proposed. ..." • The natural heritage mitigation measures referenced in the Natural Heritage Report for Alternative D are outlined in Subsection 5.2 of this Screening Report. It is emphasized that work on the proposed replacement bridge is planned to be completed within the existing road allowance and utilizes the existing abutments, with no in-water work. • Based on a preliminary natural heritage review, the Alternative A impacts will be difficult to minimize or mitigate. • It is anticipated that the adverse natural heritage impacts of Alternative B could be mitigated. However, design work on Alternative B was not finalized before changing the project focus to Alternative D, so regulatory agency comments on the Alternative B road alignment and design have not been obtained. The estimated construction cost for Alternative B could increase, depending on specific mitigation requirements. • Alternative C requires further study to determine impacts.An upgraded road may require some relocated sections away from the watercourse, a significantly reshaped valley road slope, and new culvert; all of which will likely have substantial environmental impacts. • Alternative E, although ineffective in terms of satisfying the project Problem Statement, does minimize environmental impacts with the'Do Nothing' approach, at least in the near term. 7. Minimize maintenance requirements • Alternative D is expected to have the least maintenance requirements, since construction is limited to a new bridge structure. Alternative B, as a new road based on detailed engineering design and a series of technical studies, should also have reduced maintenance needs. • Given that the Alternative A road location would mostly be within a flood plain, there could be maintenance concerns associated with high water levels. Alternative C is the longest road alignment, with a significant length of road adjacent to Big Otter Creek and flood issues. Alternative E postpones maintenance on the existing bridge, resulting in further deterioration. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-10 8. if applicable, utilizes part of an existing road allowance • Alternatives B and C would utilize significant existing road allowances. • The road allowance for Alternative A is narrow and poorly positioned - too close to the watercourse. Further study is needed to determine how much of the road allowance could be utilized. In summary, the only alternative that satisfies the general Class EA screening criteria and the Problem Statement requirements is Alternative D - Edison Drive Bridge Replacement. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-02.06.2016-214202H01-3.wpd 3-11 TABLE 3-2 ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES-SCREENING AND PROJECT FACTORS FACTOR ALT.A ALT.B ALT.C ALT.D ALT.E Alternative Description Old Mill Line Access Road Upgrade Edison Drive Do Extension Road to Light Line Creek Road Bridge Replacement Nothing CLASS EA SCREENING CRITERIA (from Appendix 3,Municipal Class EA) Municipal Class EA Schedule Schedule B Schedule B Schedule B Schedule B No change Permanent and intermittent watercourses water crossing not required for access new culvert needed, replacement bridge existing bridge and water bodies,navigable waterways feasibility not known on exist.abutments retained Groundwater and Subsurface conditions need groundwater, geotechnical study conditions not known no impact-no new not applicable subsurface studies prepared subsurface constr. Rare,endangered or significant assemblage further study needed natural heritage study required no impacts not applicable of wildlife fish and plant species study prepared Fisheries,fish habitat no water crossing water crossing at measures to avoid not applicable,unless culvert requires study construction impacts bridge collapses Environmentally sensitive area further study needed mitigation measures study required no impacts not applicable required during const. Hazard lands potential concerns-access roads extend through flood plain areas no impacts;LTRCA no change approval anticipated Woodlots need detailed study design-level review study required not applicable Natural Heritage Features need detailed study design-level review study required not applicable Ornamental or Street Trees design-level review no trees to be not applicable removed for const. Recreational Areas Big Otter Creek along north Edison Drive is an agricultural area;recreational uses are discouraged Tourist Facilities there are no known tourist facilities in the north Edison Drive area Historical Resources bridge removal is not required for access road utilization;however bridge heritage existing heritage existing heritage bridge would be closed and likely demolished to avoid evaluation,document bridge retained,but ongoing structural and safety concerns prior to demolition not structurally stable Archaeological Resources assessment required Stage 4 assessment assessment required not applicable First Nations Lands not applicable-no local First Nation lands(subject site is within urban Vienna area) Social Service Facilities not applicable-no nearby social service facilities Transportation Service Facilities road construction would improve local road connects to rural provides permanent future bridge closure transportation system within Vienna Bayham road system access solution for expected,loss of north Edison Drive road access for north area;construction Edison Drive area uses temporary unimproved road/lane Utilities existing electrical utility corridors to be considered in road alignment constr.utility locates not applicable FACTOR ALT.A ALT.B ALT.C ALT.D ALT.E Alternative Description Old Mill Line Access Road Upgrade Edison Drive Do Extension Road to Light Line Creek Road Bridge Replacement Nothing Sensitive or Special Planning Areas within Vienna urban,see hazard,flood,open Bayham rural area, existing bridge on municipal road,no special space policies;no special planning areas hazard,woodlands planning policies Prime Agricultural Areas/Specialty Crop Areas valley area valley and agric.area rural agricultural area not applicable designated urban Where project partially or entirely federally funded or involves Not Applicable federal land Works directly affecting"Great Lakes interconnecting Not Applicable channels" Niagara Escarpment Planning Area Not Applicable Parkway Belt Planning Area Not Applicable Oak Ridges Moraine Not Applicable Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statements(PPS) potential impacts mitigation measures study required,poss. consistent with PPS not a long term to address concerns upgrade impacts access solution PROBLEM STATEMENT ASSESSMENT The problem to be addressed is to provide a permanent access to the Edison Drive area north of Big Otter Creek that (excerpt from Problem Statement,see report page 1-3 above) can be accessed by car,truck,farm and emergency vehicles. The project solution should be cost-effective,give consideration to Municipal, County and Provincial planning policies,minimize environmental impacts and maintenance requirements.For alternatives that propose an access road as a project solution,existing road allowances that connect to Edison Drive should be evaluated to determine if at least part of an existing road allowance could be utilized...." PROBLEM STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS ALT.A ALT.B ALT.C ALT.D ALT.E 1. Provides permanent access to Edison Drive north area 2. Access for cars,trucks,farm,emergency vehicles 3. Cost-effective access solution ? X X ✓ X 4. Consideration to County and Municipal planning policies ? ? V X 5. Consideration to Provincial Policy Statement provisions ? ? V X 6. Minimize impacts on the environment X ? V 7. Minimize maintenance requirements X ✓ X ✓ X 8. If applicable,utilizes part of an existing road allowance SUMMARY-Addresses Problem Statement X X X ✓ X SYMBOLS: ✓ SATISFIES REQUIREMENT X DOES NOT SATISFIES REQUIREMENT -- NOT APPLICABLE ? FURTHER STUDY NEEDED FIGURE 3-1 LOCATION OF CLASS EA PROJECT ALTERNATIVES CREEK ROAD LOT 13 LOT 14 CON 4' - *" LOT 15 ) ALTERNATIVE B ' ACCESS ROAD TO B LIGHT LINE A='-. + CREEK ROAD (ORANGE LINE) CLOSED TO TRAFFIC (NO CULVERT) O • ALTERNATIVE A • OLD MILL LINE LOT 1L LOT 12 .k EXTENSION ROAD { • er— (BLUE LINE) L.� LOT 13 CON 3 t ALTERNATIVE C $, e UPGRADE CREEK ROAD `iM L'OT 11 C (YELLOW PART OF YELLOW LINE) 'E EDISON DRIVE � ; .. A •• �..� REQUIRING ACCESS ` LOT;15 (GREEN LINE) • ; ' rt . ALTERNATIVE D CONSTRUCT •,- ,,� CREEK �� REPLACEMENT PANELBRIDGE ON - •��� , w � �G�#, ABUTMENTS EXISTING ROAD G r4 ' AT `� � O 0 metres 250 AIR PHOTO SOURCE: V I E N N A EAST ELGIN MAPPING SERVICE MUNICIPALITY (PROPERTY BOUNDARIES MAY BE OF BAYHAM APPROXIMATE;REFER TO REGISTERED PLANS FOR DETAILS) " .,. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-1 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-2 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES - BAYHAM OFFICIAL PLAN SCHEDULE C, VIENNA CREEK ROAD i�; y OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE MUNICIPALITY of BAYHAM 'Z �! SCHEDULE V CREEK ROAD ALTERNATIVE B �' CLOSED TO TRAFFIC ACCESS ROAD TO B VIENNA: (NO CULVERT) LIGHT LINE (ORANGE LINE) LAND USE and CONSTRAINTS > EDISON DRIVE AREA - � NORTH OF BIG OTTER I,I CREEK REQUIRING ALTERNATIVE C ACCESS(GREEN LINE) UPGRADE CREEK ROAD ? (YELLOW LINE) A ALTERNATIVE A C OLD MILL LINE LandU so ETENSION BLUE LINE ROAD Residential Commercial Instilutional IIIIIIII Industrial Open Space Constraints ..�1 Hazard Lands ALTERNATIVE D // CONSTRUCT \ ,`; :: '» Flood Fringe BRIDGE ON REPLACEMENT PANG - ! t,yf` ! / ' Floodway CREEK BRIDGE ON EXISTING t`y v��� � �..� — / �,� Busting Petroleum Welts ABUTMENTS �� -' ROAD 1. �'-`� � I ease Features GATE •+ cia+sa !• _ — County Roads s — Local Roads �, ° '� •/j/ U Watercourse 0 120 240 480 �� Metres Y¢sr�N", 1:10,000 _rrAiF''. Sclmdule'6'forma part of OfncW Plan N 4. of o Municipality of Bayham 2"must he road to conjunction widt tho written test. January 2012 SOURCE:OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM,JANUARY2012(EDITED EXCERPT);REFER TO COMPLETE PLAN FOR PLANNING PURPOSES SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-2 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-3A ALTERNATIVE A-AIR PHOTO AND SURVEY SKETCH COMPARISON FOR ROAD ALIGNMENT L1 ROAD ALLOWANCE AS SHOWN ON AIR PHOTO (DASHED YELLOW) y LOCATION OF - •:.•�r• MILL STREET FROM 0 metres 50 EXISTING SURVEY SKETCH ,<` EDISON DRIVE (ORANGE) AIR PHOTO:EAST BRIDGE ELGIN MAPPING SERVICE o z °t°` 0 AAB Ja 54 w PLAN i•u u u REGISTERED 5h "B• A,yA91 \ �BnP S£� SURVEY SKETCH P<1RT r YYR E M '4J LOCATION OF MILL STREET 40yA4��� MILL STREET,REGISTERED PLAN 54 r aP E B E �+.o B. (VILLAGE OF VIENNA, sLDerc df a1Yv P+S \ "hc e• GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF BAYHAM) REGISTERED PLAN sh ;` Bi�,9°'° NO MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM,COUNTY OF ELGIN " Po 4`M1l KIM HUSTED SURVEYING LTD. 092 j �I� �Q�\ \�1•''N;�S n SEPTEMBER 11,2014 a L07 1 1 N� REGISTERED °I'M(P6 k N�.1 R-b68 e°ti1i I e�,^ \,� • •lso�• f 5 C1,� �+�. �4,h Tp 5`,$� Q'� PAR 11R CBa,B•xo• cut; f -I �7>y "Ba• 84(u)u(BB.Y55 PB) x0 E P6) BO.ST PS Pn h 4 .x92(Pl.PS h M l�M1l ,�'ems', C • Q I �,E (u .-m•oo•E PB,PB)os.�lOT:u)� TRAVELED 1 e Ml 57 REE7' • k Cl _ NOT I.(u) 'zo•B ) _ MILL TRAVELED u BB Bo n E I.• "siaei cPl.�jaa F- W B n m 4j111 V i La - p'f PB � 0.EP51FaE0 q. V V N �` I � F• I n RO Av aorn P"e�c nano L07 44 � or uu„ REEK c.l -� \ Nn '" M� m oEFlr,Es 'di' G Ell, VxC ofK�mm o"K a I I I a --- -- -- LOT "EST OF OF PLANK RO u REGISTEF{ED LOT -17 FLAN EAST OF' OTTER CREE'< SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F04-3A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-313 ALTERNATIVE A - SITE PHOTOS i� {7 � , ql� }� ;ate "� i i�� � •+ {� 7`l'; < „�.n _� r} },r ° `-w'ry r r 5-3 �i *� -. °�Yir � txa6,i'+.. �- � j!s z��}f !4 �,..+. �� r't,r �_�t yi � •> y-i�9 v !� « #fit!c�.s� i' 1 s +�`"� ���y f j� �t�v �•''i`�T:, � �+ }.. r i t �L Y� � �-Yi"ft r ;D }.ji � � �7 �*tY``4`s '.?r•�^ � .� �•_L f r ` y I�n'f�.�-•. 11 .i jCu ' �` .: e i yw•��Ya r�•- .y .�$ i.,'3.P 3:,v,'e,.e « �' � ,s�.z g,•�, �kc. �� �_ ��`• "'` 'ti _ �� i7F 1�q r °� i��1y!q`'f�t�i3 r o�,,., y.gwt'�,�•f �,'f`K` � �p y.q¢ }sTjt,4�-$�r.�'t � }� '�A�'�`'�.-1'yp,9f vP'�'#x «ar PS� s tf^°k"" lz'.s f�'k�d."' � ,, �} �� s<� -•+-`x ..� •/ 9 - �} '•Ar�'' k• � ] `•�� ,.4T t i`�L � �`..�.iA.j�T+k,�' 3. �,� f� '7� �Y�. 1�� � � i A. VIEW EASTALONG EXISTING TRAIL,LOCATED EAST OF BRIDGE (PHOTOS:OCTOBER 10,2014) G� : Y �A �✓ S ,t - � � lit.t�- 3 y} • y B. VIEW EAST UP SLOPE,ALONG FORMER MILL STREET C. (BELOW)VIEW WEST FROM OLD MILL LINE TOWARDS PROPOSED ALIGNMENT e; i- au �f V j SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-3B PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 34A ALTERNATIVE B - EXISTING ROAD ALLOWANCES TO BE UTILIZED ! r9 T,ErAX PLAHw 1�TR-iorz for I y C�l 8 •wrnun ...M.�ey.Ai•.�SSS_ b PART 1 `, •.- -.'__f1»,.--- < �S �... v »•n m PMi LON FLAX LOT MST IRCA Tbl,9V PART Y ' ! •H r:,rii 1 I cu for !� y il4ADk y LAw a a+erEr rx �. "� -ltq, -• PART OF BLDCKS A,B AND C ',.J• �r REGISTERED PLAN 34 f rayf (1 GC Of Vr+u PART OF LOTS 14 AND LS CONCESSION S j � ��• � aaceevwc rowsa>a eAmiu 4��. LOT COUNTY OF ELGIN .. b s + EXISTING'ROAD Aq LOWANCE M N151IM A"" C Lro. TO BE USED FOR PROPOSED =: ACCESS ROAD(SHADED AREA) e. .t g '.• PART 1 �grsLOT. lit I ! 8 P e t•I`I �J .. h`_` iPlnCK c f.1 r _v; pp aLor-K I: t e -PART 2 � " x - ( �:yy7_ � • E € ! �� o� '1>.•..�"> y � gs MOCK a I PART 1 A�� 4 ♦ • L�f• y y8 L Si •f ••� ,e�+ �t.•,tF fs :A� i�� t � 1= TC9,.FNQ 2 ! • " '' ` i BLOCK A D� , 1! BLOCK C t !U�%EYOWS CERTFICATE nL^K E 2 ...,b1Lxx o �'�` � � f A� ntccX 1 ' r I ......r.- i•l •� y� r a _L�l. LEGEND NOTES --''~� -•-''J CURRENT/ //,/ Lq - ""•,"" 1py NusTEO suRVEmlc LTD. EXISTING EDISON ALIGNMENT OF /// g�a$ y HUSTE M`DSEVIING DRIVE BRIDGE BIG OTTER CREEK SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-4A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-413 ALTERNATIVE B - PROPOSED ROAD ALIGNMENT �P. I v� 11,�11 •I I w �� � \A �" y •"" PROPERTY n BOUNDARY EXISTING \ `' + � PROPERTY 3 (BLUE OUTLINE) EDIsoN \ k_ 1 ate' ,_ y-� DRIVE T pS P y �f� (340100400125000) PROPOSED ' MAYER LOCATION i PRELIMINARY MAYER LOCATION 4 I 6.5 m WIDE LOCAL II ss - ARCH.ASSESS. PROJECT AREA STAG E4ASSESS. V ACCESS ROAD �•-F`" �� pq COMPLETED TO BE DISTURBED REQUIRED(PINK) 1' (ABORIGINAL) (ORANGE SHADING) ( ) (YELLOW LINE) g`. EURO-CANADIAN +� ;u- � PROPOSED „, - �— - - - - - - — --- DRAINAGE OUTLET _ — — — — — ——— —— — — — — A.. ... _ .,s ..�w. r LOCATION Y:v� q.. ,.y PROPERTY 1 y1` -_PROPERTY 2 BOUNDARY 4 ' PROJECT ;(340100000204700) STUDY AREA sf (HEAVY RED OUTLINE) AREA A-EXIST.ROAD ALLOWANCE I ~ NOT NEEDED FOR ROAD;POTENTIAL TRANSFER TOPROPERTY2 PROPERTY1 = fir., (GREEN AREA-0.090 ha) I m .. � (340100000206100) ,I EXISTING ROAD ALLOWANCE ar ..i>..±, tl o ten„zo IGRAVSHADEDAREA) �1 '-• NOTE:REFER TO SURVEYPLANS FOR DETAILS - SOURCES:AIR PHOTO-EAST ELGIN MAPPING SERVICE;LOT BOUNDARIES FROM REG.PLAN IIR-7082 TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING PROVIDED BY SPRIET ASSOCIATES,APRIL-MAY,2015 NOTE: THIS FIGURE IS CONCEPTUAL AND HAS BEEN REDUCED FROM ORIGINAL 11"x 17"FORMAT. PROPERTY TO BE ACQUIRED FOR NEW ROAD IS NOT SHOWN ON THIS FIGURE SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-4B PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-4C ALTERNATIVE B - SITE PHOTOS wk A. VIEW SOUTH FROM LIGHT LINE B. (BELOW)VIEW SOUTH,DOWN FORMER ROAD SLOPE (PHOTOS:OCTOBFR 10, 2014) i • -}'+�'� i �ll:•Fj ��� .�,� �"s i tw`i�'1�"i!t�>r`» c`, `r�i`��,� �'., +` - - i+ �..•*�t�.�3w � ,mot i '� '���,j� ,�7$�� �r�!v�"� 'J ��`. �y r�C- „air�'��" ,,.ems° := .♦-,.> � �+ e• ♦ 3• S T. � ,Yl5♦���� 7 �r' � i _.4-'i`' "h•� l RL • ��* ,'sa�F����'"�,s�Y�'-•sS�d�a s ,� Y`,:Z,•�%•."r•':S`.'-��,'r<> 'a�r-•� :��.a'��+: $� "':� '�?=3S' C�►sS���:Y�. "G ..r^s•1T y�` tirt `' �al' y•- 't"1' � r` •� � 4�>+6R�, a:�.3f'y�,��, ':. _' yes i'g .i 1�V��,� �� �'`�`�,�, •w� �y�i��1.', '1/ �,}Vf% tat" yy ��,�`"'L�+• �'•�V"apyF � SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-4C PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-5A ALTERNATIVE C - CREEK ROAD UTILIZATION CONSTRAINTS LOT 11j x R u, LOT 15 Y ti • CREEK ROAD (MAINTAINED) CREEK ROAD ',•" CLOSED TO TRAFFIC (NO CULVERT) a 0, + ( J � a ♦ ♦ j STEEP SLOPE ' LOT 12 _ + RECONSTRUCTION LOT13 NEEDED ' CONS + Y"= NORTH PART OF • e'�L�Tw7a # _ ALTERNATIVE C ? EDISON DRIVE $ , UPGRADE CREEK ROAD REQUIRING ACCESS k ^�L d r:p 'r ` YK�, LOT-'IS: (YELLOW LINE) F (GREEN LINE) •* A. Ls,�- j°I" *.7� - - �+.'I ac- r' CREEK ROAD VERY r i NEAR TOP OF BANK (BIG OTTER CREEK) �44' O O ♦ ALTERNATIVE - > ♦ _ CONSTRUCT - ,�� ` '" t4� REPLACEMENT PANEL � a rr,. • CRERO EK �� BRIDGE ON EXISTING "'�` a�`' �� 'r• V ABUTMENTS * �" GATE � O 0 metres 250 AIR PHOTO SOURCE: VI E N NA EAST ELGIN MAPPING SERVICE M U N ICIPALITY (PROPERTY BOUNDARIES MAYBE OF BAYHAM APPROXIMATE;REFER TO _ REGISTERED PLANS FOR DETAILS) Mli SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-5A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-513 ALTERNATIVE C - SITE PHOTOS ROAD CLOSED f�,ir7..,�4vi3"4 t iF+��J �s.��a�,+. ti.. 3 r'a' a ,s � A. VIEW WEST FRO(JM�EDISON DRIVE TOWARDS CREEK ROAD GATE (PHOTOS:A-OCT. 10,2014;8-MAR.22,2016;C-SEP.4,2015) Zm 1 .a'•'�`� M` � ,�j P Frp 1P.ems LJI� I �J;��:3� jA �#i:. �� �� Y�.. B. CREEK ROAD ALONG BIG OTTER CREEK C. (BELOW)CLOSED PORTION OF CREEK ROAD IS USED AS UTILITY CORRIDOR films t ROAD SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-5B PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 3-6A ALTERNATIVE D EXAMPLE -ACROW PANEL BRIDGE IN BAYHAM MAXIMUM ?} 20 tonnes . x - kr JA ��.�gih�'f � �S •t y l i A. VIEW SOUTH ACROSS CLARKE ROAD BRIDGE (PHOTOS:AUGUST 5,2015) 7 t. �T ti. i cTY. B. VIEW OF BRIDGE ABUTMENT C. (BELOW)ANGLE VIEW OF BRIDGE MAOMUM 20 tonnes .R 4 SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F03-6A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA r } `y try 1, ��*,� G�',ram __ � •� t�r ;� t � �a ,'�. -,i _ ,��'. f i Iv t Al 2 � 4. PUBLIC AND AGENCY CONSULTATION Section 4 of this Report is an overview of the public and agency consultation program completed as part of this Class EA. For more detail, refer to the Documentation Report that is prepared as part of the Class EA planning process. The Documentation Report (also referred to as a Class EA Project File) is made available (with this Screening Report) for public review during the Notice of Completion period, and consists of a document list for the project, with copies of each listed document. All relevant correspondence and project reports are included. 4.1 CONSULTATION PLAN The Municipal Class Environmental Assessment,2011(MCEA)outlines the consultation requirements for a Class EA project planning process. While there are certain mandatory requirements, a consultation program should reflect the type and extent of the proposed project. A Consultation Plan is intended to identify the type and extent of consultation suited to a specific project. MCEA Appendix 5 - Consultation, lists the key items: • who is to be consulted • what they will be consulted about • where they will be contacted in the process • how they will be consulted, i.e. what methods will be used • how input from the public will be integrated in the study and the decision-making • the manner in which comments and concerns will be responded to • how the plan will be monitored to determine its effectiveness MCEA Appendix 3 - Screening Criteria, identifies appropriate contacts for various projects, with the following to be contacted in all cases: • MOE Regional Office - EA Co-ordinator(and other appropriate MOE offices) • property owners adjacent to project site • local Area municipality(as appropriate) • local Regional municipality(as appropriate) • County or Planning Board • potentially affected members of the public, landowners and adjacent municipalities Project Scope for Consultation The proposed Edison Drive Bridge replacement project has been a combined road and bridge project over the Class EA planning process, based on consideration of road construction alternatives and bridge replacement. The proposed bridge replacement project has a relatively low impact since the existing abutments are reused, and there is no significant disturbance to the watercourse or bank areas. All installation and construction work occurs within the existing Edison Drive road allowance, and no natural areas are disturbed. 1. Groups to be Consulted Groups and organizations to be consulted include: • Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change(MOECC), Regional EACoordinator/Planner • Conservation Authority, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry • Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (heritage bridge evaluation) • Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-1 • Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs; any specified First Nations • other applicable regulatory government agencies • property owners adjacent to project site and/or impacted by proposed project • utility companies responsible for utility services in the project area 2. Subjects for Consultation • Consultation on the proposed project in accordance with MCEA provisions 3. Timing for Consultation There are a minimum of two consultation periods for a Schedule B Class EA project: • (1) Class EA Notice - Project Initiation and Consultation • (2) Notice of Completion (30 day notice and appeal period) 4. Consultation Methods • (1&2) Two consecutive newspaper ads placed in the local newspapers(Aylmer,Tillsonburg) for each of the Class EA notices. • (1&2) Notice and Location Plan mailed to each property owner within the circulation area • (1) Public Meeting/Public Information Centre to outline and discuss the proposed project; comments form available at the meeting; to be held at a community facility in the area • (1) Class EA Notice, Location Plan, Agency Notice and Response form mailed to each review agency (and utility company)for the first EA Notice; comment form attached • (2) Notice of Completion, Location Plan and Agency Notice mailed to each agency and utility company for the second EA Notice (Notice of Completion). • (2) Notice of Completion, plus additional Notice to MOECC as required by MCEA. • (1&2) Notice and Location Plan mailed to any additional persons or organizations that have requested project notification. • Where appropriate, follow-up notices and correspondence will be sent by e-mail. 5. Integrating Public Input • Correspondence from the public,agencies,circulated to Municipal staff and project consultants • Relevant correspondence included in Class EA documentation (Documentation Report) • Property owner mailing lists(names,addresses, roll numbers)are provided to the Municipality. SPRIET ASSOCIATES - 02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-2 6. Addressing Comments and Concerns • Comments from the public/agencies are requested to be in writing for EA documentation. • Comments and concerns will be reviewed and, where applicable, responses will be provided in writing either by e-mail or letter mail. Verbal comments by phone or in meetings will be considered as informal discussions and should be confirmed in writing. • Class EA correspondence with the public and agencies on project comments and concerns will be copied to Municipal staff. Any significant items that impact the parameters or feasibility of the project will be reviewed with Municipal staff in draft form prior to submission. 7. Monitoring the Consultation Plan • If needed, special meeting arrangements will be made to discuss specific concerns. • If issues are identified that have a wider public or agency scope, or if the project undergoes significant changes during the Class EA planning process,then the notice circulation may have to be adjusted to include additional property owners and/or review agencies. 4.2 FIRST NOTICE The first Class EA Notice was issued January 23,2015,as a "Notice of Project Initiation and Consultation". At that time, the preferred project alternative was Alternative B -Access Road to Light Line. This Notice was considered preliminary (no public meeting), as technical site studies had not yet commenced. Internet Posting The Notice (Figure 4-1A) and Location Map (Figure 4-1 B) were posted to the Elgin County web site (www.elgincounty.ca)by County staff on January 23,2015, (the Notice issue date)as Adobe Acrobat PDF files for downloading. Newspaper Notices Copies of the Notice have been placed in the following newspapers: • Aylmer Express - January 28 and February 4 • Tillsonburg Independent newspaper- January 28 and February 4 Property Owner Circulation Property owner circulation was based on a circulation area that included the subject bridge, the Edison Drive north area and properties near the proposed Alternative B access road alignment to Light Line (see Figure 4-2). Each owner within the area is mailed a copy of the EA Notice and Location Map.The rationale for the circulation area includes: 1. Properties within and adjacent to the proposed new road 2. Properties adjacent to the Edison Drive Bridge approach road(Queen to bridge) 3. Properties adjacent to the section of Edison Drive that require road access if bridge closed 4. Residential properties fronting on Light Line, near the proposed new road intersection SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-3 Review Agency Circulation The following regulatory agencies and utilities are considered to be Review Agencies for this EA. Southwest Regional Office, Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Manager, Consultation Unit, Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs Aylmer District, Ministry of Natural Resources Western Municipal Services, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing SW Ontario - Env. & Land Use, Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Culture Services Unit, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Long Point Region Conservation Authority Asset Sustainment Manager, Hydro One Networks Inc. Eastlink (Aylmer) Eastlink (Halifax, Nova Scotia) Natural Resource Gas Limited 4.3 SECOND NOTICE The second notice was issued February 8,2016(see Figure 4-3A).This Notice indicated that the proposed project had changed to a bridge replacement project (see Location Map, Figure 4-313). The Notice also advertised a public meeting on February 25, 2016 at the Bayham Municipal Office. The property owner circulation area for the second notice (Figure 4-4)was expanded to include properties fronting on Creek Road,from Edison Drive north to Light Line.These additional properties were included since Creek Road was planned as a temporary access route for residents on Edison Drive north. Review Agency Notices were mailed and e-mailed to the following agencies: Craig Newton, Environmental Planner Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Rachael Manson-Smith, Manager (Acting) Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs Heather Riddell, District Planner Aylmer District, Ministry of Natural Resources Bruce Curtis, Regional Director (Acting) Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Drew Crinklaw, Rural Planner Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Joseph Muller, Heritage Planner Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Cliff Evanitski, General Manager/Sec. Treasurer Long Point Region Conservation Authority Hohahes Leroy Hill, Secretary Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council Chief R. Stacey LaForme Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation Chief Sheri Doxtator Oneida Nation of the Thames Tony lerullo, Asset Sustainment Manager Hydro One Networks Inc. Eastlink, Aylmer Eastlink, Halifax William Blake, President and General Manager Natural Resource Gas Limited For both notices, each Agency Notice and Response Form is individually addressed. Refer to the project Documentation Report for further details. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-4 The advertised public meeting was held on February 25, 2016 at the Bayham Municipal Office. The Agenda for the meeting is attached (Figure 4-3C). Representatives from Elgin County Engineering Services,the Municipality of Bayham Council and Spriet Associates were in attendance. No local property owners or other members of the public attended. 4.4 PROJECT COMMENTS The Class EA planning process for the proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement project has considered three alternatives: • Alternative A Preliminary review, September- November 2014 (no EA Notice) • Alternative B First EA Notice, January 23, 2015 • Alternative D Second EA Notice, February 8, 2016 Proposed Notice of Completion, June 14, 2016 As part of the Class EA planning process, a Documentation Report has been prepared as a separate report, providing an itemized list of project correspondence, interim reports, notices, plans, etc. that are relevant to the proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement project. With regard to documentation, the focus is on correspondence relating to project design, approval and public/ agency consultation for the preferred project alternative-Alternative D. Site-specific private property items,such as the arrangements for the temporary use of Creek Road area property,are generally not part of the Class EA documentation. Table 4-1 summarizes project comments received during the project that relate to the proposed Edison Drive Bridge replacement project. For a more comprehensive listing of project documentation, plus document copies, refer to the separate Documentation Report, which will be available for public review during the Class EA Notice of Completion period. Notes are provided in Table 4-1 indicating how each of the comments can be addressed. All comments have either been addressed already, are procedural items (EA Notice circulation, etc.), or will be considered during detailed design. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-5 TABLE 4-1 PROJECT COMMENT REVIEW DATE CURRENT APPROACH TO PERSON/AGENCY COMMENT ISSUE I CONCERN ADDRESSING COMMENT January 13,2015 (e-mail/letter) "Please be advised at the regular Council meeting of the Bayham Council resolution supporting the Municipality of Bayham held January 8,2015 the Class EA. Brenda Gibbons following resolution was passed. Clerk's Assistant Municipality of Bayham THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham approve a'Class EA Notice of Commencement'as prepared by Elgin County's consultant to formally initiate the Class EA planning process; AND THAT Council adopt the EA Problem Statement...." January 16,2015 (e-mail) "...In response to the draft proposal to route Edison Comments considered in the design of Drive north and east of the existing bridge, LPRCA staff the Alternative B road alignments. Ben Hodi,Water Resources has the following preliminary comments: Analyst I Regulations Officer 1. Detailed topographic information will be required, An application for the proposed Long Point Region 2. There is concern for the potential of filling within the replacement Edison Drive bridge has Conservation Authority 100-year flood plain extent, been submitted to LPRCA and has been (LPRCA) 3. The proposed road may be subject to erosion of Big recommended for approval. Otter Creek, 4. Drainage must be maintained...." January 30,2015 (e-mail/letter) Note: Correspondence includes an e-mailed letter The Preliminary Assessment Checklist (see excerpts below), 'Aboriginal Consultation was completed on the basis of project Bob Aggerholm,Environmental Information" and "Preliminary Assessment Checklist: Alternative B(the preferred alternative in Planner/Regional EA First Nation and Metis Community Interests and Rights". early 2015).Following further Coordinator, Refer to the Documentation Report for complete correspondence and clarification with Ministry of the Environment and correspondence and a completed copy of the above- MOECC,First Nations were circulated as Climate Change noted Checklist. part of the second EA Notice,with (MOECC) Alternative D as the preferred alternative. "This letter is in response to the Notice of Commencement for the above-noted project. This is to advise you of the following Ministry instruction regarding First Nations and Metis community consultation in the MEA Class EA process...." "...A draft copy of the Project File or Environmental Study Report(ESR)should be sent to the appropriate Ministry of Environment regional office prior to the filing of the final report as applicable,allowing a minimum of 30 days for the ministry's technical reviewers to provide comments.Please also forward the Notice of Completion and Project File/ESR to the appropriate regional office when completed. ..." May 15,2015 (letter) Correspondence interpreted "...as a request for See related MOECC correspondence.All information about which Aboriginal communities may First Nations listed were contacted for the Corwin Troje,Manager have rights or interests in the project area. second Class EA Notice. Ministry Partnerships Unit Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs Contact information provided for the following: (MAA) Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council • Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation • Oneida Nation of the Thames "...MAA does not wish to be kept informed of the progress of the project;please be sure to remove MAA from the mailing list. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-6 TABLE 4-1 PROJECT COMMENT REVIEW DATE CURRENT APPROACH TO PERSON/AGENCY COMMENT ISSUE/CONCERN ADDRESSING COMMENT January 8,2016 (e-mail/letter) (See excerpt from correspondence below) Resolution from the Bayham Council in support of a prefabricated bridge with an Brenda Gibbons, approximate 5.62 metre wide clearance. Clerk's Assistant, Municipality of Bayham This resolution confirmed Bayham's support for the proposed replacement bridge. "...Please be advised the resolution below was passed by the Council of the Municipality of Bayham at the recent regular meeting held January 7,2016 in regard to the Proposed Edison Drive Bridge replacement. Moved by: Deputy Mayor Southwick,Seconded by: Councillor Breyer THAT correspondence from Spriet Associates re Proposed Panel Bridge be received for information; AND THAT The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham supports the Elgin County proposed new Edison Drive prefabricated panel bridge with approximate clearance measurements of 5.62 metres(18 ft.5 in.)in width. CARRIED" March 3,2016 (e-mail) 'A permit is required from the Long Point Region The LPRCA application form and Conservation Authority.A complete application form, stamped engineering plans have been Bonnie Bravener plans,sediment and erosion control and a description of submitted for review and permit approval. Resource Technician, the method of construction should be included in the Long Point Region submission. In a June 1/16 report to the LPRCA Conservation Authority Board,staff recommended approval of (LPRCA) It is staffs understanding that it is expected that there will the project. be no in-water work required during all phases of construction. Of concern to the LPRCA is ensuring the capacity of the new structure to pass floodwaters will be maintained and the relief for higher flood flows will be maintained on the north side of the structure." March 3,2016 (e-mail/letter) Note: Correspondence includes an e-mailed letter The March 3/16 correspondence from (see excerpt below), Aboriginal Consultation MOECC was in response to circulation of Craig Newton, Regional Information" and "Preliminary Assessment Checklist: the second Class EA Notice.MOECC will Environmental Planner/ First Nation and Metis Community Interests and Rights". be sent a copy of this Screening Report Regional EA Coordinator, Refer to the Documentation Report for complete for review,in addition to the Notice of Ministry of the Environment& correspondence. Completion. Climate Change,Southwestern Region(MOECC) The First Nations communities identified in May 2015 Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs correspondence were circulated copies of the second Class EA Notice,and will be sent the Notice of Completion. "This letter is this ministry's response to the Notice of Commencement recently received for the above noted project. ... ...As you know, the Class EA planning process includes consultation with interested stakeholders,evaluation of alternatives, assessment of the effects of the proposed works and identification of measures to mitigate any adverse impacts.In addition to public agencies,and the general public, consultation with First Nations and Metis is required. ... ... Please keep this office fully informed of the status of this project as it proceeds through the Class EA process...." March 7,2016 (e-mail/form) "EastLink has an existing copper telephone distribution Utility services will be reviewed as part of cable in the vicinity of the Edison Drive bridge that may detailed engineering design Al Carnahan conflict with the bridge replacement work." Eastlink,Aylmer Note: Comment provided on EA Response Form; location of cables shown on marked up Location Map SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-7 TABLE 4-1 PROJECT COMMENT REVIEW DATE CURRENT APPROACH TO PERSON/AGENCY COMMENT ISSUE/CONCERN ADDRESSING COMMENT March 11,2016 (e-mail/letter) (See excerpt from correspondence below) This letter is a MTCS review and acceptance of the CHER for the existing Joseph Muller, Edison Drive Bridge.The CHER Heritage Planner,Culture recommendations are included as Class Services Unit,Ministry of EA mitigation measures in this Report. Tourism,Culture and Sport Preparation of the CHDR is considered a (MTCS) mitigation measure for the project,and will be finalized once the Class EA is completed. Archaeological Resources Stage 1-4 archaeological assessments(AA)have been undertaken by archaeologists licenced under the OHA,who are responsible for submitting the reports directly to MTCS for review.It is understood that two archaeological sites of cultural heritage value or interest have been identified and the intent is to mitigate these sites through conservation in situ. Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes A cultural heritage evaluation report(CHER)was conducted to determine whether the subject bridge retained cultural heritage value or interest(CHVI)and concluded that it did,although it is not designated under the Ontario Heritage Act nor included in the Municipal Register of Heritage Properties. The preliminary preferred alternative for this EA project was to retain the Edison Drive Bridge and construct a new crossing nearby.archaeological assessment of the proposed corridor identified archaeological CHVI along this route,and the revised preferred alternative is to replace the existing bridge. Commemoration of this bridge with a heritage plaque is proposed,and the draft Cultural Heritage Documentation Report(CHDR)has been submitted to document the history behind the bridge,in addition to its physical attributes,which it does appropriately. Some further information in the CHDR would be useful in order to provide a broader context for the decisions made on this project, including the balance between the conservation of the archaeological sites and removal of this bridge. The evaluation of alternatives at the overall EA level takes this into account,along with budgetary and other tangible factors,but the acknowledgement of their role in the decision-making process will provide a rationale for the course of action chosen in the CHER and CHDR. In addition, while this may also be detailed in other documentation at the overall EA level,the alternative for relocation of the bridge for passive commemoration is not presented or explored,although such an alternative may prove similarly unviable as reusing it as a bridge elsewhere.Commemoration of the existing bridge through the incorporation of sympathetic or referential design components, whether structural or aesthetic,into the new bridge may also be considered. Environmental Assessment Reporting All technical heritage studies and their recommendations are to be addressed and incorporated into EA projects. Thank-you for consulting MTCS on this project:please continue to do so through the EA process,and contact me for any questions or clarification." April 4,2016 (e-mail/letter) (See excerpt from correspondence below) MNCFN will be sent a copy of the Notice of Completion.Project reports and related Fawn D.Sault, documentation for the proposed project Consultation Manager, will be available for review on the Elgin Mississauga of the New Credit County web site during the Notice of First Nation (MNCFN) Completion period. "... Thank you for the notification sent to The Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation(MNCFN)regarding the Proposed Edison Drive Bridge Replacement, Vienna. We have reviewed the document you have provided and determined that,at this time,MNCFN has a low level of concern about the project.Please see the attached letter for more information. Respectfully, we ask that you immediately notify MNCFN if there are any changes to the project as they may impact MNCFN's interests. Additionally,MNCFN requests a copy of all associated environmental and/or archaeological reports. These can be electronic copies,if you prefer.Furthermore,MNCFN employs Field Liaison Representatives who must be on location whenever any fieldwork for environmental and/or archaeological assessments is undertaken.If additional work is scheduled,please notify us as soon as possible so that we may work together to discuss and arrange for MNCFN's participation...." Note: A two page letter addressed to Clayton Watters,County of Elgin,was attached to the e-mail.Refer to the Documentation Report for complete correspondence. April 19,2016 (e-mail) "Based on that information, we are not requesting any MNRF was circulated project information further consultation or information.If the nature of the as part of the second Class EA Notice. Andrea Fleischhauer project changes,you may wish to contact our office." This e-mail confirms that the proposed District Planner,Aylmer District, bridge project does not require more Ministry of Natural Resources Note: This is the final e-mail in a series. Refer to the extensive project consultation or and Forestry(MNRF) Documentation Report for complete correspondence. information. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-4.wpd 4-8 FIGURE 4-1A CLASS EA NOTICE - JANUARY 23, 2015 County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE ACCESS ROAD, VIENNA Class Environmental Assessment NOTICE OF PROJECT INITIATION AND CONSULTATION A new municipal access road is needed to connect the Edison Drive area north of Big Otter Creek in Vienna, Municipality of Bayham, to the local road system. This area Is now accessed using the Edison Drive Bridge, which is owned and maintained by the County of Elgin. Following a recent engineering review, the bridge has a restricted load capacity rating that does not permit large trucks, including some emergency vehicles, to cross the bridge. Larger farm vehicles are also restricted from using the bridge by both the reduced load rating and size limitations imposed by the steel bridge structure. Properties located north of Big Otter Creek that require access include three residential buildings, a farm operation and some agricultural lots. The Edison Drive bridge was originally constructed in 1907 and relocated to the current location on Edison Drive over Big Otter Creek in 1944, with the addition of a new substructure and deck. Upgrading the existing bridge, or the construction of a new replacement bridge (estimated to cost more than $2 million dollars)are not feasible alternatives. The future use or disposition of the Edison Drive bridge will be the subject of a separate study,in accordance with Class EA and heritage bridge assessment requirements. Once a new access road is constructed, the bridge will be closed to vehicle traffic. The current preference is to utilize existing road allowances and construct a road to Light Line, north of Vienna.However,alternative road alignments may need to be evaluated.It is expected that additional land will have to be acquired.The County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham are the project proponents.The proposed new access road will be owned and maintained by the Municipality of Bayham. The County of Elgin will be responsible for road construction costs and is the lead proponent for the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment(Class EA)process. The proposed project is being planned under Schedule B of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment. PUBLIC INPUT AND COMMENT ARE INVITED, for incorporation into the planning and design of this project,and will be received until TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24,2015.Once more information is available, it is anticipated that a public meeting will be held to discuss the project. Details on the timing and location for a future public meeting will be published and circulated in a future Notice. For more information on this project and the Class EA planning process, contact the Project Engineer. John R. Spriet, P. Eng., Project Manager Phone: 519-672-4100 Spriet Associates London Limited Fax: 519-433-9351 155 York Street, London, Ontario N6A 1A8 E-mail: mail@spriet.on.ca Subjectto comments received,the receipt of project approvals,and funding availability,the County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham intend to proceed with the planning,design and construction of this project. This NOTICE issued JANUARY 23,2015,by the County of Elgin,lead proponent for the proposed project. Clayton Walters, P. Eng., MBA, Director of Engineering Services Phone: 519-631-1460, ext.4 County of Elgin Fax: 519-631-4297 450 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas, ON N5R 5V1 E-mail: cwatters@eigin-county.on.ca SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F04-1A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 4-113 LOCATION MAP - JANUARY 23, 2015 NOTICE LOCATION MAP PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE ACCESS ROAD, VIENNA GyT��NE COUNTY OF ELGIN AND MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE MUNICIPAL CLASS ACCESS ROAD o ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (DASHED LINE INDICATES 0� PROPOSED ROAD ALIGNMENT c� ALONG AN EXISTING ROAD LLI d ALLOWANCE.MINOR LAND ACQUISITION IS ANTICIPATED. PROPOSED ROAD LOCATION AND ALIGNMENT IS PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE.) O\- 19 �5��o�oP EXISTING o/S�ti \ ,'' O FORMER ��� ' COUNTY OF Rid CREEK ROAD ��4 �Q,�'� ELGIN BRIDGE QUEEN Y Q (ACCESS CLOSED, G (TO BE CLOSED) ROAD NOT MAINTAINED) TNUT LL <..... O CHES ANN z � w 0 VIENNA W z ° MUNICIPALITY � FULTON FULTON 41 CHUTE LANE p� OF LU BAYHAM z z z a `� LU PFgR< T 6\G 0`01�R GNPP�V S�RE�� ® �O ®` Q ® wAON(JT = MUN.ROAD-ASPHALT F- ------ MUN.ROAD-TAR&CHIP K/ 00 ............••• MUN.ROAD-GRAVEL SPRIET ASSOCIATES ��SjF Z ROAD NOT MAINTAINED 214202GA02F01 -2015.01.21 /2 ------------------ LANEWAY BASE MAP:MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ••�TF� ELGIN COUNTY ROAD MAP FEATURES AND SCALE ARE APPROXIMATE. •.� ROAD WIDTHS SHOWN ARE NOT TO SCALE •� 0 METRES 400 19 TUNNEL LINE SPRIETASSOCIATES-214202HOl F04-1 B PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 4-2 PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE AREA - CLASS EA PUBLIC NOTICE, JAN. 23, 2015 0 a� - 00 Y W. W U 1� ALTERNATIVE 2 PROPERTY ACCESSPROPOSED ACCESS ROAD tt OWNER ALIGNMENT �� (DASHED LINE) NOTICE AREA—� (RED LINE) t k � C �I EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE O =`u �5 BIGyOTTER GR� r 4 J Li SPRIET ASSOC IATES-214202H01F04-2 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 4-3A CLASS EA NOTICE - FEBRUARY 8, 2016 County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA Municipal Class Environmental Assessment NOTICE OF PROJECT CHANGES AND PUBLIC MEETING A Notice of Project Initiation and Consultation for the PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE ACCESS ROAD, VIENNA,was issued on January 23,2015,by the County of Elgin for a proposed new municipal access road to connectthe Edison Drive area north of Big Otter Creek in Vienna,Municipality of Bayham,to Light Line, located north of Vienna. During 2015,engineering and technical studies were undertaken for the proposed access road, as part of a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) planning process.While these studies have indicated that the proposed road is feasible,the road construction cost is nearly double the original budget.Several factors,including soil conditions,topographic constraints and extensive archaeological assessment requirements, have increased the proposed budget.As a result, other alternatives are being considered. The Edison Drive area north of Big Otter Creek is now connected to Vienna by the Vienna Bridge(also known as the Edison Drive Bridge), located on Edison Drive.This 1907 steel truss bridge was moved to the current location in 1944. The bridge is owned and maintained by the County of Elgin, and has a restricted 5 tonne load capacity rating that does not permit large trucks, including some emergency vehicles,to cross the bridge. Larger farm vehicles are also restricted from using the bridge by both the reduced load rating and size limitations imposed by the steel truss bridge structure. A pre-fabricated panel bridge has been proposed as a cost-effective replacement.The existing steel truss bridge would be removed and the concrete abutments modified.A new panel bridge would be installed in sections from the south side.Bridge removal,abutment modification and replacement bridge installation is expected to require about two months,and would occur during the summer or early fall.During bridge replacement, properties located on Edison Drive north of Big Otter Creek would be provided with a temporary road access along the section of Creek Road now used as a farm lane. A private lane would be temporarily utilized,for access around a section of Creek Road that has been closed to traffic.The temporary Creek Road access provisions will be utilized by approximately three residences, a farm operation and agricultural lots along Edison Drive.Any special access needs will be addressed by the County prior to construction.A Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reportofthe existing bridge is being prepared as part of the Class EA. The proposed project is being planned under Schedule B of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment(Class EA).The County of Elgin and Municipalityof Bayham are the project proponents,with the County of Elgin as the lead proponent. The proposed replacement bridge will be owned and maintained by the County of Elgin. The project name has been changed from PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE ACCESS ROAD,VIENNA,to PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA. PUBLIC INPUT AND COMMENT ARE INVITED, for incorporation into the planning and design of this project,and will be received until THURSDAY, MARCH 10,2016. A PUBLIC MEETING to discuss the proposed project will be held on THURSDAY,FEBRUARY 25,2016, at 7:00 p.m.,at the BAYHAM MUNICIPAL OFFICE,located at 9344 Plank Road,Straffordville. All local residents and any other persons with an interest in this project are invited to attend. For more information on this project and the Class EA planning process,contact the Project Engineer. John R.Spriet, P. Eng.,Project Manager Phone: 519-672-4100 Spriet Associates London Limited Fax: 519-433-9351 155 York Street,London, Ontario N6A 1A8 E-mail: mail@spriet.on.ca Subject to comments received,the receipt of project approvals,and funding availability,the County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham intend to proceed with the planning,design and construction of this project. This NOTICE issued FEBRUARY 8,2016, by the County of Elgin,lead proponent for the project. Clayton Watters, P. Eng., MBA Phone: 519-631-1460,ext.4 Director of Engineering Services, County of Elgin Fax: 519-631-4297 450 Sunset Drive,St.Thomas, ON N5R 5V1 E-mail: cwatters@elgin.ca SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202HOl F04-3A PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 4-313 LOCATION MAP - FEBRUARY 8, 2016 NOTICE LOCATION MAP PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE C/ BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, GyT�INE VIENNA COUNTY OF ELGIN AND MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM o a MUNICIPAL CLASS ° ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT W a EXISTING EDISON DRIVE ° BRIDGE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A NEW PRE-FABRICATED PANEL BRIDGE o�- 19 F-�P�gs Q TEMPORARY ROAD ACCESS Q�p�QP FQ Q FOR PROPERTY OWNERS p\5\r\G ESQ 0 AND CONSTRUCTION J\� VEHICLES TO CREEK ROAD AND LIGHT LINE L� Y (OVER UNOPEN SECTION OF QUEEN CREEK ROAD AND A PRIVATE G� z FARM LANE) Q O� EST NUT a 0\ PNN z Q 0 VIENNA MUNICIPALITY w FULTON FUI.TON 41 CHUTE OF w BAYHAM z 0 z n `� v pFgRC \G O��ER � STREET 6 EL VHF OTTFR GNPP /V N QO F wq< NUT = MUNICIPAL ROAD F- ELGIN COUNTY ROAD ROAD NOT MAINTAINED SPRIETASSOCIATES KINCST.F zO 214202GBA02FOl -2016.02.05 GL 9 BASE MAP:MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM TF,p MAP FEATURES AND SCALE ARE APPROXIMATE. ROAD WIDTHS SHOWN ARE NOT TO SCALE 0 METRES 400 19 TUNNEL LINE SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202HOlF04-36 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 4-3C PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA - FEBRUARY 25, 2016 PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA Municipal Class Environmental Assessment County of Elgin and Municipality of Bayham February 25, 2016, 7:00 pm Bayham Municipal Office,9344 Plank Road, Straffordville 1. Introduction-Clayton Watters • Introduction to protect consultants and purpose of the meeting(Class EA consultation). Clayton Watters, Director of Engineering Services, County of Elgin Peter Dutchak, Deputy Director of Engineering Services, County of Elgin John R.Spriet, Project Engineer, Spriet Associates David Mihlik, Project Planner, Spriet Associates • Copies of the Public Notice have been mailed to property owners in the study area. • Comments should be submitted in writing (Response Forms are provided). All submissions will be included in the Class EA documentation for public review. • Meeting participants should add their name to the Attendance List. 2. Class EA Planning Process and Proposed Project-David Mihlik • Class EA planning process briefly outlined,circulation and notice procedures,expected timing to complete Class EA • Review project alternatives and the rationale for the proposed bridge replacement: Alternative A Old Mill Line Extension Road Alternative B Access Road to Light Line Alternative C Upgrade Creek Road Alternative D Construct New Panel Bridge on Existing Abutments Alternative E Do Nothing • Overview of the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report prepared on the existing bridge • Description of the proposed bridge replacement project and temporary access road 3. Project Engineering-John Spriet • Discuss condition of the existing bridge;structural and safety concerns • Details of the proposed pre-fabricated panel bridge 4. Meeting Summary-Clayton Walters • General questions from the public will be addressed following the presentation. Once all questions have been considered,the meeting will end. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F04-3C PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 4-4 PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE AREA - CLASS EA PUBLIC NOTICE, FEB. 8, 2016 o Y•o y � W' U C.' r,a n fff i EDISON i PROPERTY DRIVE OWNER BRIDGE 4u NOTICE AREA (RED LINE) G O _ -r BIG OTTER GR - SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F04-4 PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA 5. PROPOSED PROJECT 5.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed bridge replacement project was previously described in Subsection 3.5. Subsection 5.1 provides additional project information. The Long Point Region Conservation Authority (LPRCA) application contained a brief summary of the proposed Alternative D bridge replacement project: Existing bridge to be removed and abutments modified. New pre-fabricated panel bridge to be installed on existing abutments. Road approaches to be rebuilt and raised to suit higher bridge deck, with surface overflow route maintained. Creek Road upgraded for temporary access. Figures 5-1A and 5-1 B are excerpts from the engineering plans, and shows the plan view of the proposed bridge (5-1 A), and the cross-section view(5-1 B). The stamped engineering plans that were submitted to LPRCA for approval are included in the Documentation Report. The estimated cost for Alternative D is outlined on Table 5-1. Project components include: • Complete a heritage study and archival photo record for the existing Edison Drive Bridge • Upgrades (grading, additional granular where needed) to the temporary Creek Road/private lane detour route around closed portion of Creek Road • Demolition and removal of the existing Edison Drive Bridge • Modify existing concrete abutments for new panel bridge installation • Construct new single lane panel bridge (Acrow Bridge, or equivalent), approx. 110 ft. long, 18 ft.wide(curb to curb),with a galvanized steel grating deck and steel guide rails; Bridge Design load CL 625 truck as per CHBDC 2006, 75 year Design life on steel bridge components. • Upgrade and pave Edison Drive road approaches, add guide rails • Restore private lane detour route to pre-construction condition A site meeting was held with an Acrow Bridge engineering representative to confirm that a new panel bridge could be assembled and installed from the south side of the existing bridge. The estimated project cost shown in Table 5-1 has been increased to include a galvanized steel grating road deck.Although considerably more expensive than the treated wood deck included in the earlier cost estimate (see October 10, 2015, Status Report 4), the steel deck has lower long-term maintenance and repair costs. With allowances for the Creek Road and private lane temporary access route included, the proposed budget is $756,400., which is$295,100. less than the estimated cost of$1,051,500. for the Alternative B access road to Light Line. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-02.06.2016-214202H01-5.wpd 5-1 TABLE 5-1 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE -ALTERNATIVE D (Construct New Panel Bridge on Existing Abutments) Est. Item Cost Total A. Site Preparation Al. Traffic control barriers and signage(bridge site) 1,000 A2. Demolish/remove existing bridge structure(leave abutments) 100,000 Sub-Total $101,000 B. Creek Road Detour Route B1. Creek Road upgrades, maintenance, Edison Drive residents access arrangements 50,000 B2. Private lane upgrades, maintenance,crop compensation, legal costs 50,000 B3. Traffic control signs,temporary fencing for detour route 5,000 Sub-Total $105,000 C. Panel Bridge Cl. Supply/deliver new 110 ft. long (33.53 m)Acrow Panel Bridge 182,500 C2. Nose structure required to install from south side(rental/transport costs) 10,000 C3. Modify existing abutments for panel bridge-allowance 30,000 C4. Install bridge on existing abutments 49,700 C5. Supply and install galvanized steel grating road deck 140,000 C6. Supply and install steel guide rails 5,800 Sub-Total $418,000 D. Road and Site Work D1. Upgrade existing road approaches to new bridge elevation 20,000 D2. Asphalt pavement on approaches 10,000 D3. Site restoration-allowance 10,000 D4. Guide rails on road approaches to bridge 6,000 Sub-Total $46,000 E. Additional Project Costs El. Heritage Study(CHER)on existing bridge,archival photo record 11,400 E2. Engineering (survey,design details, plans, inspection),finalize Class EA(2) 45,000 E3. Contingency Allowance 30,000 Sub-Total $86,400 ESTIMATED TOTAL-ALTERNATIVE D $756,400 NOTES 1. Cost estimates are preliminary, and are rounded to nearest$100.HST not included. 2. Engineering/Class EA budget includes current EA work on Alternative D,but does not include the consulting costs for Alternative B. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-02.06.2016-214202H01-5.wpd 5-2 5.2 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES In summary, the Class EA process undertaken for the proposed Edison Drive bridge replacement project has addressed project requirements and comments. The following implementation measures are intended to minimize and mitigate any environmental impacts associated with the project. Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report In accordance with the MTCS checklist for heritage bridges, a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report was prepared for the existing Edison Drive Bridge and is included as Appendix A. Mitigation recommendations are provided on page 28 of the CHER. Given the demonstrated cultural heritage value or interest of the Edison Drive Bridge, the following mitigation recommendations are provided in order to alleviate the adverse effects of the replacement of the bridge. • A Cultural Heritage Documentation Report(CHDR) of the structure will be completed prior to any change at the site. The CHDR should contain existing drawings of the structure, history of the bridge and its site, detailed description of the truss structure and photographs of the bridge and its site keyed into plans included in the report. The attributes described in this CHER should inform the selection of photographs. • The County of Elgin and the Municipality of Bayham should retain copies of the CHDR for their record and shall provide a copy of the CHDR to the Elgin County Archives and the Elgin County Library(Straffordville and Port Burwell branches). • Consideration should be given to the fabrication and installation of an interpretive plaque at the Edison Drive crossing to commemorate the existing bridge and its history in Vienna. The CHER has been submitted to MTCS for review, and has been accepted by the Ministry (see MTCS e-mail correspondence in the Documentation Report and summarized in Subsection 4.4 of this Report). The Cultural Heritage Documentation Report(CHDR), one of the above-noted implementation measures, has already been prepared and will be circulated, as noted, and included in the Documentation Report. Consideration will be given to installing a commemorative plaque at the bridge site once the new bridge is installed. Natural Heritage The following recommendations were included in the Natural Heritage Report, prepared by BioLogic Incorporated (Appendix B of this Screening Report). Recommendation 1: Avoid vegetation clearing during migratory bird breeding season (May to July 31) to ensure that no active nests will be removed or disturbed, in accordance with the Migratory Birds Convention Act and/or Regulations under that Act. If works are proposed within the breeding season, prior to any vegetation removal, the area should be checked for nesting birds (including Eastern Wood-Pewee). If there are any nesting birds, works within the nesting area should not proceed until after July 31. SPRIET ASSOCIATES -02.06.2016-214202H01-5.wpd 5-3 Recommendation 2: All road works should be within the road allowance. Recommendation 3: The grading plan should be reviewed by an ecological consultant to determine if trees within the road allowance need to be removed to facilitate the bridge replacement. A tree preservation report should be completed in conjunction with the review of the grading plan if trees of the adjacent forest communities need to be removed. Recommendation 4: Install sediment and erosion control fencing prior to any construction works, at the edge of the road allowance on the east and west side of Edison Drive on the south side of the bridge, continuing along the top of slope to connect to the bridge to prevent erosion of slopes and collect sediment before it enters Big Otter Creek. Recommendation 5: Any required soil stockpiling should be within the road allowance and setback from the creek 30m. Recommendation 6: Equipment storage areas should be setbackfrom the creek20m and outside the tree dripline. Recommendation 7. Best management practices should be used to create a spill control and pollution prevention plan to protect the adjacent Big Otter Creek Recommendation 8: Restore any disturbed natural areas by planting native species These natural heritage measures will be implemented through the engineering plans and appropriate construction management practices. SPRIET ASSOCIATES-02.06.2016-2142021-101-5.wpd 5-4 FIGURE 5-1A PROPOSED REPLACEMENT BRIDGE - PLAN VIEW II B.v. RESTORE ROADWAY APROACHES TO GRADE WITH GRANULAR'B', 150mm GRANUALR 'A'AND 80mm INSTALL 3-3.81m LENGTHS C/C STEEL BEAM GUIDE RAIL ELEMENTS H.1-4 ASPHALT SURFACE. ROADWAY TO BE 5.5m WITH TERMINAL END SECTIONS AT EACH END AS PER OPSD 912.101 WIDTH WITH 2:1 SIDE SLOPES.LANES TO BE 2.75m WITH STEEL POSTS AND OFF—SET BLOCKS AS PER OPSD 912.130 WITH 27 CROSSFALL AND HAVE 1.Om SHOULDERS —" '.:'Y,•,- INSTALL 450mm DIA.CONCRETE BOLLARD POST WITH 4-15M _ REINFORCING BARS VERTICALLY SPACED EVENLY. POSTS TO BE 1.2m BELOW GROUND LEVEL AND 0.95m ABOVE GROUND.ANCHOR STEEL _— BEAM GUIDE RAIL WITH CONCRETE ANCHOR BOLT DRILLED INTO POST. TYPICAL ALL FOUR CORNERS OF BRIDGE 'r IEL Ei PROPOSED ACROW 700XS PANEL BRIDGE 33.53 SPAN GALVANIZED '_ .ems^Y o-_ WITH R/R—L 60-30x100 SAW CUT EXISTING TAR&CHIP SURFACE AND ROADWAY DECK GRATING --_ Ix- REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF 5m OF EXIST.SURFACE. .-.Y_— BLEND NEW ASPHALT WITH EXISTING ROADWAY5`OPE B.M.NAIL IN H.P.5m EAST STA.0+165.7 ELEV. 180.382 5 I 'yf ?1 VIENNA L'rl �p0 SAW CUT EXISTING TAR&CHIP SURFACE AND MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM p REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF 5m OF EXIST.SURFACE COUNTY OF ELGIN RESTORE ROADWAY APROACHES TO GRADE WITH 4 �, _'; BLEND NEW ASPHALT WITH EXISTING ROADWAY GRANULAR"B 150mm GRANUALR'A"AND 80mm "'•� H.L4 ASPHALT SURFACE.ROADWAY TO BE 5.5m \' WIDTH WITH 2:1 SIDE SLOPES. LANES TO BE 2.75m WITH A CROSSFALL AND HAVE 1.0m SHOULDERS EDISON DRIVE SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01F05-lA PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA FIGURE 5-113 PROPOSED REPLACEMENT BRIDGE - CROSS-SECTION VIEW PROPOSED PANEL BRIDGE FLEXBEAM STEEL GUIDE RAIL WITH OFF-SEf BLOCKS, TERMINAL ENDS AND FASTENING HARDWARE COMPLETE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH O.P.S.D. - 912.101, 5 6 912.104 AND 912.140 250mm GALVANIZED TRIM PLATE ALONG BOTH SIDES OF DECK FOR LENGTH OFI 33.909m (TYP) o o ACROW 700XS PANEL BRIDGE 33.53m SPAN GALVANIZED ROADWAY GRATING RECTANGULAR TYPE R/R-L 60-30x100 BEARING BAR SIZE 102x6.35 BY BORDEN GRATINGS OR EQUAL GALVANIZED FlNISH 0 ---- o ----------------------- -----� i I II------------------------------I I I I I I 17,71 I I I I I I I I I I I I�.'f�lg �� III,�j I�'III II1 L------—I— ff E EXISTING CREOSOTED PINE PILES llm LONG (TYPICAL ABUTMENTS & WINGWALLS) SECTION A - A SCALE:1 cm=0.5m(1:50) mmml SPRIET ASSOCIATES-214202H01FO5-lB PROPOSED EDISON DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,VIENNA-MUNICIPAL CLASS EA Petition to the Government of Canada Whereas: • The 150`h Anniversary of Confederation is approaching in 2017, providing an opportunity for Canadians to celebrate the achievements and history of our country; • The Government of Canada has chosen to designate diversity and inclusiveness, reconciliation with indigenous peoples, environment, and youth as the themes of the 1501h Anniversary celebrations; • The Government of Canada has not included Confederation or Canadian history as official themes of the 150`h Anniversary of Confederation; • The 150" Anniversary of Confederation is an important opportunity to commemorate the events which founded Canada and preserve and promote Canadian history; We, the undersigned, residents of Canada, call upon the Government of Canada to include Confederation as an official theme of the 1501h Anniversary of Confederation. Please return to: Hon. Peter Van Loan, MP for York-Simcoe 555-D Centre Block House of Commons Ottawa, ON K1A OA6 Signature Address (Do notprint) (Full home address, or city andprovince) Petition concerning adding Confederation as a theme of the 1501h Anniversary of Confederation in 2017. Signature Address (Do notprint) (Full home address, or city and province) Petition concerning adding Confederation as a theme of the 150`h Anniversary of Confederation in 2017. Signature Address (Do notprint) (Full home address, or city andprovince) Subject: Ontario150 Celebration, Youth Partnership & Capital Grant Programs - Local Information Sessions The Ontario150 program is a series of events and initiatives that will stretch to every corner of our province, showcasing Ontario's innovative spirit, our culture and our community diversity. In addition to a number of signature events planned across the province, municipalities, community organizations and Indigenous groups will be able to access funding programs designed to bring people together, while laying the groundwork for a strong economic, social and cultural legacy for Ontario's next 150 years. There are three application-based Ontario150 grant programs. They include: • The Community Celebration Program —a $7 million fund to help communities celebrate this historic year (application period opens July 6 and closes September 2, 2016). • The Partnership Program (Youth)—a $5 million program to support new partnerships and collaborations that engage, enable and empower youth as the next generation of Ontario leaders. Priority areas are: supporting young artists; promoting diversity and inclusion; environmental stewardship; supporting youth entrepreneurship; promoting active and healthy living; and, youth civic engagement. (application period opens July 6 and closes September 30, 2016). • The Community Capital Program —a $25 million fund to renovate, repair and retrofit existing community and cultural infrastructure to increase access, improve safety and maximize community use (application period opens July 18 and closes September 14, 2016) Please note the Ontario Trillium Foundation is the lead on the capital program so contact them for more information. To learn more about the programs and how to apply, visit ontario.ca/150. To register for a local information session to learn more about the Community Celebration and Youth Partnership Program, see dates and times below. Please note: • These sessions are intended for interested applicants from London, Middlesex County, St Thomas, Elgin County and the following 3 First Nations: Chippewas of the Thames, Munsee- Delaware and Oneida. If you are from outside of these areas, contact your local Regional Advisor for sessions in your area. Click here for a list of Regional Advisors. • Attendance at this information sessions are optional but are designed to help you to understand the program • If none of these dates/times work for you, feel free to contact me to discuss your project idea either by phone or to set-up an in-person meeting • If you would like me to come out to do an information session at a meeting or with a group, please let me know. • For the in-person sessions, the session for the Community Celebration will be immediately followed by the session for the Youth Partnership Program so you can attend both sessions in the same morning or afternoon. Please sign up for each session separately. • If you have any special requirements to accommodate your participation in these sessions, please do not hesitate to let me know. Ontario150 Community Celebration Grant Program Information Sessions (All in-person sessions will be held at the Provincial Government Building, 659 Exeter Road, London) • Tuesday, July 12, 9 to 10:30 a.m., In-Person. Click to register. • Thursday, July 14, 1 to 2:30 p.m., In-Person. Click to register. • Tuesday, July 19, 12 to 1:30 p.m., Teleconference. Click to register. • Monday, July 25, 1 to 2:30 p.m., In-Person. Click to register. • Wed., Aug 3, 1 to 2:30 p.m., Teleconference. Click to register. Ontario150 Partnership Grant Program (Youth) Information Sessions (All in-person sessions will be held at the Provincial Government Building, 659 Exeter Road, London) • Tuesday, July 12, 10:30 a.m. to noon, In-Person. Click to register • Thursday, July 14, 2:30 to 4:00 p.m., In-Person. Click to register. • Wed., Tuesday, July 20, 12 to 1:30 p.m., Teleconference. Click to register. • Monday, July 25, 2:30 to 4:00 p.m., In-Person. Click to register. • Thursday., Aug 4, 1 to 2:30 p.m., Teleconference. Click to register. As noted above, if none of these dates/times work for you, feel free to contact me to discuss your project idea either by phone or to set-up an in-person meeting I encourage you to share this information with other organizations in your community. Ontario150 is an opportunity to show the pride we share as Ontarians, to tell our story to the country and to the world, and help shape our province's future. Jo-Ann Hutchison Regional Advisor, Regional Services Branch Ontario Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration & International Trade Ministry of Tourism, Culture & Sport 659 Exeter Road London, ON N6E 1 L3 Ph: 519-873-4519 or 1-800-265-4730 Fax: 519-873-4061 Email: jo-ann.hutchison@ontario.ca www.citizenship.gov.on.ca. www.mtc.gov.on.ca www.grants.gov.on.ca Ministry of Infrastructure Minist&re de('Infrastructure Office of the Minister Bureau du ministreF0, 1 Mawat Block,5t"Floor edifice Mawat,5e stage "W%Ld 900 Bay Street 900, rue Say Ontario Toronto,Ontario M7A 1 C2 Toronto(Ontario) M7A 1 C2 Teiephone:416-325-8067 TdIdphone:416 325-8067 July 5, 2016 Mr. Jeff Yurek, MPP Elgin-Middlesex-London 201-750 Talbot Street West Wing St. Thomas, Ontario N5P 1 E2 f Dear urek.J// Premier Wynne has forwarded your letter and report on the Municipality of Bayham's infrastructure needs and future funding program considerations. l appreciate the municipality's time and effort in providing feedback on existing and future funding programs. As you are aware, in 2015, the province launched consultations to seek input on the design of new infrastructure programs and a framework to prioritize investments outside the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area. The municipality may be pleased to know that some changes stemming from the consultation process are already being implemented. In particular, our government recently announced that the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund will be increasing from $100 million per year to $300 million per year by 2018-19. Of this, $200 million will be available through stable, predictable formula-based funding. Municipalities will be able to accumulate formula-based funding for up to five years to address larger projects. We will also be updating the way the application process works. This will include more targeted eligibility and a greater focus on the health and safety aspects of projects. The expanded fund will be launched this spring with more details to follow at that time. Your feedback and that of the Municipality of Bayham will continue to play an important role in our processes. 12 -2- The Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund is part of our government's commitment to invest more than $160 billion over the next 12 years in public infrastructure to create jobs and help the province grow and prosper. Input received from communities such as Bayham will continue to be an important guide in making targeted improvements when selecting infrastructure investments. Thank you for writing and please accept my best wishes. Sincerely, Bob Chiarelli Minister c: The Honourable Kathleen Wynne, Premier His Worship Paul Ens, Mayor, Municipality of Bayham Council, Municipality of Bayham Ministry of Ministere des Municipal Affairs Affaires Municipales Ministry of Housing Ministere du Logement Ontario "\����)O Business Division de Is gestion des Imo./, Management Division activitds minist§rielles 17�Floor,777 Bay Street 17'Lslage,777,rue Bay Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Tel.: 416 585-6670 T61.:416 585-6670 Fax: 416 585-6191 T616c.:416 585-6191 DATE: June 27, 2016 TO: Municipal Clerks FROM: Jim Cassimatis Assistant Deputy Minister, Business Management Division RE: Proposed amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (RTA) This is a follow up to the letter sent by the former Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Ted McMeekin, to all heads of council May 18, 2016, regarding the introduction of Bill 204, the Promoting Affordable Housing Act, 2016. The Minister's letter detailed proposed Planning Act changes that support strategies to increase housing choices and the supply of affordable housing in Ontario communities through inclusionary zoning. This omnibus Bill also includes proposed amendments to other legislation. Schedule 5 of Bill 204,proposes amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (RTA). If passed, these changes would make local enforcement of residential rental maintenance standards more consistent across the province. Most municipalities now enforce property standards by-laws that protect tenants in rental housing. Some municipalities, however, rely on provincial enforcement of rental maintenance standards under the RTA. Bill 204 proposes to harmonize this system of local and provincial enforcement by ending provincial enforcement of residential rental maintenance standards. Enforcement responsibility would be transferred to remaining municipalities that do not have complete property standards by-laws. Specifically, the affected municipalities: i) do not have a property standards by-law, or ii) have a property standards by-law, which applies only to the exterior of rental buildings, or iii) have a property standards by-law, which applies only to some areas within the municipality. It is currently proposed that these municipalities would assume enforcement responsibilities on July 1, 2018. The tables in the attached package reflect information the ministry holds for each municipality regarding their property standards by-law. Please review this list to determine whether the information on your municipality is correct. If not, please contact your local Municipal Services Office to update your information. (See attached contact list.) /2 -2 - If your municipality does not currently enforce residential rental maintenance standards (i.e. your municipality is listed in Table 1 or 2 in the attached information package), your municipality would need to consider how it will deliver enforcement services by July 1, 2018. Municipalities listed in Table 3 in the attached package would likely not be affected, based on property standards by-law information available to the ministry. However, these municipalities should verify that ministry information regarding their property standards by-law is correct. The proposed amendments would provide affected municipalities with options on how they can approach enforcement. These options are explained in the attached information package. It is important to note the province has conducted a limited number of inspections in recent years. The tables in the enclosed information package break down the number of provincial inspections carried out over the past three years by municipality. The majority of municipalities have not had any inspections over the past three years. Further details of the proposed legislative change and enforcement options for municipalities affected are attached. You can obtain a copy of Bill 204—the Promoting Affordable Housing Act, 2016 and monitor the status of the Bill through the legislative process on the Legislative Assembly of Ontario website. If the proposed amendments are enacted, the ministry will help municipalities prepare for implementation. We will partner with municipal stakeholder groups to develop training and capacity-building plans. These plans would draw upon existing best practices and shared services approaches used throughout the province. For more information on the proposed amendments, you may contact your local Municipal Services Office. (See attached contact list.) Sincerely, Jim Cassimatis Assistant Deputy Minister Attachments enclosed c: Pat Vanini, Executive Director—Association of Municipalities of Ontario Monika Turner, Policy Center Director—Association of Municipalities of Ontario Steph Palmateer, President-Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario Italo Joe Luzi, President— Ontario Association of Property Standards Officers INFORMATION PACKAGE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT, 2006: ENFORCEMENT OF RESIDENTIAL RENTAL MAINTENANCE STANDARDS June 27. 2016 1. RESIDENTIAL RENTAL MAINTENANCE STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT IN ONTARIO Enforcement responsibility for residential rental maintenance standards is currently shared between the province and municipalities. Most of the 414 lower and single-tier municipalities in Ontario enforce property standards by-laws that include residential rental maintenance standards. Some municipalities do not have a property standards by-law, or have a "partial" by-law that does not address the interior of rental buildings, or has standards that do not apply in all areas of the municipality. The Ministry of Housing enforces residential rental maintenance standards in these municipalities. The following chart summarizes the types of municipal property standards by-laws and resulting provincial/municipal enforcement roles for residential rental maintenance standards. Municipal Number of Provincial enforcement Municipal enforcement property municipalities' role for residential rental role for residential rental standard by-law maintenance standards maintenance standards covers e Complete by-law 269 None Interior and exterior of residential rental units/complexes Partial by-law 52 Interior of residential rental Exterior of residential rental coverage units/complexes (where units/complexes municipal by-law applies only to the exterior of buildings) Interior and exterior of Interior and exterior of residential rental residential rental units/complexes in units/complexes, in areas geographic areas not covered by municipal by- covered by a municipal by- law law(where municipality has a geographic-based property standards by-law) No by-law 93 Interior and exterior of None residential rental unit/complexes Total lower and single tier 414 municipalities 'The ministry maintains a database on municipal property standard by-law and makes updates as information becomes available.As by-laws are subject to change and municipalities continue to adopt by-laws,some data may be out of date. 3 By-law covers interior and exterior of buildings and applies to all geographic areas in municipality. 3 By-law does not cover the interior of buildings and/or does not apply to all geographic areas within a municipality. Page 1 June 27, 2016 2. RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT The primary reasons for this proposed change are to: • Eliminate the current overlapping enforcement approach between provincial and municipal levels of government; • Provide a consistent enforcement approach across all municipalities that is accessible and responsive to citizens; • Recognize municipalities as the appropriate level of government to enforce building and property-related standards, aligning with responsibilities set out under the Building Code Act, 1992. 3. CURRENT PROVINCIAL ENFORCEMENT APPROACH The province's maintenance standards are included in Ontario Regulation 517/06 under the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006. The Regulation contains provisions that are similar to many property standards by-laws. A tenant in a municipality without a property standards by-law or with a partial property standards by-law can make a written complaint to the Ministry of Housing regarding maintenance deficiencies in their rental unit/complex. The Ministry uses a roster of part-time inspectors to carry out inspections. If necessary, an inspector may issue a work order if a property does not conform to the prescribed standards. A landlord who does not agree with a work order may request a review of the work order by the Landlord and Tenant Board. The Board may confirm, vary, or overturn the work order. It is an offence for a landlord to not comply with provisions contained in a work order. The ministry bills municipalities a set fee of $265 for each inspection or re-inspection. This fee has not changed since 1998. Historical Provincial Work Volumes The volume of provincial inspections has significantly diminished over the years, as more municipalities have chosen to adopt property standards by-laws. Tables 1 and 2 (attached) provide information on inspection activity in affected municipalities over the past three years. Most municipalities have not had any provincial inspections in the past three years. 4. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT AND ASSOCIATED MUNICIPAL IMPACTS The proposed amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act would, if passed, provide a consistent and more efficient local approach to enforcement across Ontario municipalities. Municipalities with complete property standard by-laws would not be impacted by the legislative amendment. Municipalities with partial by-laws or without by-laws would have the following options: OPTION 1 — Adopt a Property Standards By-law: Adopt a property standards by-law, under Section 15 of the Building Code Act, 1992 that would include residential rental maintenance standards (including interior building standards). Adoption of a property standards by-law would typically entail enforcement responsibility over a broader range of building/property types (i.e. over and above residential rental). The Building Page 2 June 27, 2016 Code Act also provides broader enforcement powers and more flexibility for municipalities to define standards that fit local conditions. Municipalities that Currently Enforce Partial Property Standard By-laws If the proposed amendments are enacted, municipalities with partial or geographic-based property standards by-laws would be required to enforce the province's maintenance standards in areas where the property standards by-law does not apply. Accordingly, municipalities that currently have partial property standard by-laws pursuant to the Building Code Act may wish to assess how they can amend their current by-laws to include interior rental maintenance standards. Municipalities with geographic property standard by-laws may wish to consider amending their by-laws to extend coverage to all areas within their municipalities. OPTION 2 — Enforce Residential Tenancies Act Standards: Begin enforcing the province's maintenance standards, included in Ontario Regulation 517/06 under the Residential Tenancies Act. It is currently proposed that municipal enforcement would begin July 1, 2018. Municipalities that implement Option 2 would be required to: • Receive written complaints from tenants regarding compliance with the prescribed maintenance standards; • Upon receiving a complaint, cause an inspector to make whatever inspection the municipality considers necessary o A municipality would be required to appoint one or more persons as "inspectors" for this purpose; o The inspector would be empowered to issue a "work order" to the landlord to remedy instances of non-compliance; o A landlord would be entitled to request a review of the work order by the Landlord and Tenant Board — the municipality could request to participate in any Board proceeding, but would not be required to do so; • Investigate allegations of failure to comply with a work order; and • Where circumstances warrant, prosecute landlords for non-compliance with a work order. The Residential Tenancies Act approach: • Would only apply to residential rental buildings (both interior and exterior, unless the exterior is already governed by a property standards by-law); and, • Would only allow current tenants in rental units to file complaints with municipalities. It is anticipated that municipalities would assess both options to determine the most appropriate local response. 5. NEXT STEPS The proposed legislation would provide municipalities with time to determine their preferred local enforcement approach. If the proposed amendments are enacted, the ministry will work with stakeholders to develop training and other best practice initiatives to assist affected municipalities prepare for this change. Page 3 June 27, 2016 Table 1 - Municipalities with No Property Standards By-Law Volume of Provincial Inspections/Re-inspections over the Previous 3 Years Property Standards Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- No. Municipality Three Year Average By-Law Coverage inspections 2013-14 inspections 2014-15 inspections 2015-16 1 Addington Highlands Township No-By Law 0 2 2 1.3 2 Adjala-Tosorontio Township No-By Law 2 0 0 0.7 3 Algonquin Highlands Township No-By Law 0 0 1 0.3 4 Amaranth Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 5 jArmstrong Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 6 Assiginack Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 7 Athens Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 8 Beckwith Township No-By Law 0 1 1 0.7 9 Brethour Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 10 Brudenell, Lyndoch and Raglan Township No-By Law 1 1 0 0.7 11 Burpee and Mills Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 12 Calvin Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 13 Carling Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 14 Casey Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 15 Casselman Village No-By Law 2 1 0 1.0 16 Central Frontenac Township No-By Law 3 3 6 4.0 17 Chamberlain Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 18 Chapple Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 19 Charlton-back Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 20 Chatsworth Township No-By Law 1 0 0 0.3 21 Clearview Township No-By Law 0 3 0 1.0 22 Cockburn Island Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 23 ConmeeTownship No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 24 Dawson Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 25 Drummond-North ElmsleyTownship No-By Law 0 1 1 0.7 26 Dubreuilville Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 27 East Garafraxa Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 28 Edwardsburgh-Cardinal Township No-By Law 0 0 2 0.7 29 Elizabethtown-Kitley Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 30 Enniskillen Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 31 Evanturel Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 32 Front of Yonge Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 33 Frontenac Islands Township No-By Law 01 01 01 0.0 34 1 Gauthier Township I No-By Law 01 01 01 0.0 Table 1 - Municipalities with No Property Standards By-Law Volume of Provincial Inspections/Re-inspections over the Previous 3 Years Property Standards Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- No- Municipality Three Year Average By-Law Coverage inspections 2013-14 inspections 2014-15 inspections 2015-16 35 Gillies Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 36 Gordon-Barrie Island Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 37 Greater Madawaska Township No-By Law 0 2 0 0.7 38 Harley Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 39 Harris Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 40 Head,Clara and Maria Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 41 Highlands East Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 42 Hilliard Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 43 Hilton Beach Village No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 44 Hilton Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 45 Hornepayne Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 46 Hudson Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 47 Huron Shores Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 48 Jocelyn Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 49 JolyTownship No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 s0 Kerns Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 51 Killarney Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 52 La Vallee Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 53 Lake of Bays Township No-By Law 0 0 5 1.7 54 Lake of The Woods Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 55 Lanark Highlands Township No-By Law 1 1 2 1.3 56 Larder Lake Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 57 Latchford Town No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 58 Limerick Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 59 Machin Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 60 Madawaska Valley Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 61 Manitouwadge Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 62 Markstay-Warren Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 63 Mattawan Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 64 McKellar Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 65 McMurrich-Monteith Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 66 Moonbeam Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 67 MoosoneeTown No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 68 IMorleyTownship No-By Law 01 01 01 0.0 Table 1 -Municipalities with No Property Standards By-Law Volume of Provincial Inspections/Re-inspections over the Previous 3 Years Property Standards Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- No- Municipality Three Year Average By-Law Coverage inspections 2013-14 inspections 2014-15 inspections 2015-16 69 Neebing Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 70 Nipissing Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 71 North Algona-Wilberforce Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 72 North Frontenac Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 73 O'Connor Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 74 Opasatika Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 75 Oro-Medonte Township No-By Law 2 0 1 1.0 76 Plummer Additional Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 77 Ryerson Township No-By Law 0 0 1 0.3 78 Seguin Township No-By Law 0 0 1 0.3 79 Sioux Narrows-Nestor Falls Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 80 South Algonquin Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 81 South Frontenac Township No-By Law 1 6 9 5.3 82 Springwater Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 83 St.-Charles Municipality No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 84 Stirling-Rawdon Township No-By Law 1 0 1 0.7 85 Stone Mills Township No-By Law 1 1 1 1.0 86 Tarbutt and Tarbutt Additional Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 87 Tay Valley Township No-By Law 3 0 1 1.3 88 Terrace Bay Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 89 The Archipelago Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 90 Thornloe Village No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 91 Tudor and Cashel Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 92 Val Rita-Harty Township No-By Law 0 0 0 0.0 93 Whitestone Municipality No-By Law 01 01 01 0.0 Total Inspections and Re-inspections 18 22 35 25 Total Municipalities with Inspections and Re-inspections 11 11 15 12 Table 2 - Municipalities with a Partial Property Standards By- Law (Exterior and/or Geographic Coverage) Volume of Provincial Inspections/Re-inspections over the Previous 3 Years Property Standards Inspections and Re- inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- No. Municipality Three Year Average By-Law Coverage inspections 2013-14 inspections 2014-15 inspections 2015-16 1 Admaston-Bromley Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 2 Alberton Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 3 Billings Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 4 Bradford-West Gwillimbury Town Geographic 0 0 0 0.0 5 Brockton Municipality Geographic 0 0 0 0.0 6 Central Elgin Municipality Geographic 0 0 0 0.0 7 Centre Wellington Township Exterior 3 1 2 2.0 8 Cobalt Town Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 9 Coleman Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 10 Deep River Town Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 11 Dorion Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 12 Dutton-Dunwich Municipality Geographic 0 0 0 0.0 13 EmoTownship Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 14 Englehart Town Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 15 Gore Bay Town Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 16 Greenstone Municipality Exterior 1 0 0 0.3 17 Grey Highlands Municipality Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 18 Huron-Kinloss Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 19 Ignace Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 20 Kearney Town Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 21 Killaloe,Hagarty and Richards Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 22 Macdonald Meredith et al Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 23 MacharTownship Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 24 Malahide Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 25 Mapleton Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 26 Markham City Exterior 0 2 0 0.7 27 Mattice-Val Cote Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 28 McDougall Township Exterior 1 0 2 1.0 29 McGarry Township Exterior/Geographic 0 0 0 0.0 30 Melancthon Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 31 Mono Town Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 32 Mulmur Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 33 Nairn and Hyman Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 Table 2 - Municipalities with a Partial Property Standards By- Law (Exterior and/or Geographic Coverage) Volume of Provincial Inspections/Re-inspections over the Previous 3 Years Property Standards Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- Inspections and Re- No. Municipality Three Year Average By-Law Coverage inspections 2013-14 inspections 2014-15 inspections 2015-16 34 Papineau-Cameron Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 35 Penetanguishene Town Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 36 Prince Edward County Exterior 6 4 14 8.0 37 Prince Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 38 Ramara Township Exterior 0 6 2 2.7 39 Rideau Lakes Township Exterior 4 0 0 1.3 40 Sables-Spanish Rivers Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 41 Shuniah Municipality Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 42 Municipality of South Dundas Geographic 0 0 2 0.7 43 Southgate Township Exterior/Geographic 1 0 0 0.3 44 Southwold Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 45 St.Joseph Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 46 St. Marys Town Exterior 3 3 3 3.0 47 TehkummahTownship Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 48 The Blue Mountains Town Exterior/Geographic 0 0 0 0.0 49 Tyendinaga Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 50 Wellington North Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 51 White River Township Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 52 IzorraTownship Exterior 0 0 0 0.0 Total Inspections and Re-inspections 1 99 16 25 20 Total Municipalities with Inspections and Re-inspections 7 5 6 6 Table 3 - Municipalities with Complete Property Standards By-law Coverage No. Municipality No. Municipality 1 Adelaide-Metcalfe Township 51 Clarington Municipality 2 Ajax Town 52 Cobourg Town 3 Alfred and Plantagenet Township 53 Cochrane Town 4 Alnwick-Haldimand Township 54 Collingwood Town 5 AmherstburgTown 55 Cornwall City 6 Armour Township 56 CramaheTownship 7 ArnpriorTown 57 Dawn-Euphemia Township 8 Arran-Elderslie Municipality 58 Deseronto Town 9 Ashfield-Colborne-WawanoshTownship 59 Douro-Dummer Township 10 Asphodel-Norwood Township 60 Dryden City 11 Atikokan Township 61 Dysart et al Township 12 Augusta.Township 62 Ear Falls Township 13 Aurora Town 63 East Ferris Township 14 Aylmer Town 64 East GwillimburyTown 15 Baldwin Township 65 East Hawkesbury Township 16 Bancroft Town 66 EastZorra-TavistockTownship 17 Barrie City 67 Elliot Lake City 18 Bayham Municipality 68 Erin Town 19 Belleville City 69 Espanola Town 20 Black River-Matheson Township 70 Essa Township 21 Blandford-BlenheimTownship 71 Essex Town 22 Blind River Town 72 Faraday Township 23 Bluewater Municipality 73 Fauquier-Strickland Township 24 Bonfield Township 74 Fort Erie Town 25 Bonnechere Valley Township 75 Fort Frances Town 26 Bracebridge Town 76 French River Municipality 27 Brampton City 77 Gananoque Town 28 Brant County 78 Georgian Bay Township 29 Brantford City 79 Georgian Bluffs Township 30 Brighton Municipality 80 Georgina Town 31 Brock Township 81 GoderlchTown 32 Brockville City 82 Grand Valley Town 33 Brooke-Alvinston Municipality 83 Gravenhurst Town 34 Bruce Mines Town 84 Greater Napanee Town 35 Burk's Falls Village 85 Greater Sudbury City 36 Burlington City 86 Grimsby Town 37 CaledonTown 87 Guelph City 38 Callander Municipality 88 Guelph-Eramosa Township 39 Cambridge City 89 Haldimand City 40 Carleton Place Town 90 Halton Hills Town 41 Carlow-Mayo Township 91 Hamilton City 42 Cavan Monaghan Township 92 Hamilton Township 43 Central Huron Municipality 93 Hanover Town 44 Central Manitoulin Township 94 Hastings Highlands Municipality 45 Centre Hastings Municipality 95 Havelock-Belmont-Methuen Township 46 Champlain Township 96 HawkesburyTown 47 Chapleau Township 97 Hearst Town 48 Chatham-Kent Municipality 98 Horton Township 49 Chisholm Township 99 Hwick oTownsh1p 50 Clarence-Rockland City 100 Huntsville Town Table 3 - Municipalities with Complete Property Standards By-law Coverage No. Municipality No. Municipality 101 Huron East Municipality 151 Niagara-on-the-Lake Town 102 Ingersoll Town 152 Nipigon Township 103 Innisfil Town 153 Norfolk County 104 Iroquois Falls Town 154 North Bay City 105 James Township 155 North Dumfries Township 106 Johnson Township 156 North Dundas Township 107 KapuskasingTown 157 North Glengarry Township 108 Kawartha Lakes City 158 North Grenville Municipality 109 Kenora City 159 North Huron Township 110 Kincardine Municipality 160 North Kawartha Township 111 King Township 161 North Middlesex Municipality 112 Kingston City 162 North Perth Town 113 Kingsville Town 163 North Stormont Township 114 Kirkland Lake Town 164 Northeastern Manitoulin&The Isl.Town 115 Kitchener City 165 Northern Bruce Peninsula Municipality 116 Laird Township 166 Norwich Township 117 Lakeshore Town 167 Oakville Town 118 Lambton Shores Municipality 168 Oil Springs Village 119 LaSalle Town 169 Oliver Paipoonge Municipality 120 Laurentian Hills Town 170 Orangeville Town 121 Laurentian Valley Township 171 Orillia City 122 Leamington Municipality 172 Oshawa City 123 Leeds and the Thousand Islands Township 173 Otonabee-South Monaghan Township 124 Lincoln Town 174 Ottawa City 125 London City 175.Owen Sound City 126 Loyalist Township 176 Parry Sound Town 127 Lucan Biddulph Township 177 Pelee Township 128 MadocTownship 178 Pelham Town 129 Magnetawan Municipality 179 Pembroke City 130 Marathon Town 180 Perry Township 131 Marmora and Lake Municipality 181 Perth East Township 132 Matachewan Township 182 Perth South Township 133 Mattawa Town 183 Perth Town 134 McNab-Braeside Township 184 Petawawa Town 135 Meaford Municipality 185 Peterborough City 136 Merrickville-Wolford Village 186 Petrolla Town 137 Middlesex Centre Municipality 187 Pickering City 138 Midland Town 188 Pickle Lake Township 139 Milton Town 189 Plympton-Wyoming Town 140 Minden Hills Township 190 Point Edward Village 141 Minto Town 191 Port Colborne City 142 Mississauga City 192 Port Hope Municipality 143 Mississippi Mills Town 193 Powassan Municipality 144 Montague Township 1941 Prescott Town 145 Morris-Turn berry Municipality 195 Puslinch Township 146 Muskoka Lakes Township 196 Qulnte West City 147 New Tecumseth Town 197 Rainy River Town 148 Newbury Village 198 Red Lake Municipality 149 Newmarket Town 199 Red Rock Township 150 Niagara Falls City 200 Renfrew Town Table 3 - Municipalities with Complete Property Standards By-law Coverage No. Municipality No. Municipality 201 Richmond Hill Town 251 Wasaga Beach Town 202 Russell Township 252 Waterloo City 203 Sarnia City 253 Wawa Municipality 204 Saugeen Shores Town 254 Welland City 205 Sault Ste.Marie City 255 Wellesley Township 206 Schreiber Township 256 West Elgin Municipality 207 Scugog Township 257 West Grey Municipality 208 Selwyn Township 258 West Lincoln Township 209 Severn Township 259 West Nipissing Municipality 210 Shelburne Town 260 West Perth Municipality 211 Sioux Lookout Municipality 261 Westport Village 212 Smiths Falls Town 262 Whitby Town 213 Smooth Rock Falls Town 263 Whitchurch-Stouffville Town 214 South Bruce Municipality 264 Whltewater Region Township 215 South Glengarry Township 265 Wilmot Township 216 South Huron Municipality 266 Windsor City 217 South River Village 267 Wollaston Township 218 South Stormont Township 268 Woodstock City 219 Southwest Middlesex Municipality 269 Woolwich Township 220 South-West Oxford Township 221 Spanish Town 222 St.Catharines City 223 St.Clair Township 224 St.Thomas City 225 Stratford City 226 Strathroy-Caradoc Township 227 Strong Township 228 Sundridge Village 229 Tay Township 230 Tecumseh Town 231 Temagami Municipality 232 Temiskaming Shores City 233 Thames Centre Municipality 234 The Nation Municipality 235 The North Shore Township 236 The South Bruce Peninsula Town 237 Thessalon Town 238 Thorold City 239 Thunder Bay City 240 Tillsonburg Town 241 Timmins City 242 Tiny Township 243 Toronto City 244 Trent Hills Municipality 245 Trent Lakes Municipality 246 Tweed Municipality 247 Uxbridge Township 248 Vaughan City 249 Wainfleet Township 250 Warwick Township MINISTRY OF MUNICPAL AFFAIRS I MINISTRY OF HOUSING Municipal Services Offices Contact List Central Municipal Services Office General Inquiry: 416-585-6226 Toll Free: 1-800-668-0230 Eastern Municipal Services Office General Inquiry: 613-545-2100 Toll Free: 1-800-267-9438 Municipal Services Office - North (Sudbury) General Inquiry: 705-564-0120 Toll Free: 1-800-461-1193 Municipal Services Office - North (Thunder Bay) General Inquiry: 705-564-6862 Toll Free: 1-800-465-5027 Western Municipal Services Office General Inquiry: 519-873-4020 Toll Free: 1-800-265-4736 June-27-16 TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHWOLD 35663 Fingal Line Fingal,ON NOL IKO OFFICE OF THE CLERK � Jt,5.� a Phone: (519)769-2010 Q� ,s � � Fax: (519) 769-2837 Email: cao(a southwold.ca July 4, 2016 Dr. Joyce Lock Via email:jlock@elginhealth.on.ca Medical Officer of Health RE: Rural Well Water Sample Drop off Locations Dear Dr. Lock: Please be advised that Council at its Regular meeting of Monday, June 27, 2016 passed the following resolution: 2016-212 Rural Well Water Sample Drop off Locations THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Southwold call upon the Elgin St. Thomas Public Health Unit to reconsider the decision to eliminate rural well water sample drop-off locations; AND THAT the Elgin St. Thomas Public Health Unit conduct a formal Request for Proposals (RFP) process to obtain competitive pricing for rural well water sample drop-off location courier service; AND THAT the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care re-evaluate its funding formulas to reconsider the funding reduction impact on rural communities; AND THAT a copy of this resolution be circulated to the Councils of Elgin County and all member municipalities for support; AND THAT a copy of this resolution be sent to Dr. Joyce Lock, Medical Officer of Health and the Honourable Mr. Eric Hoskins— Minister of Health and Long-Term Care seeking action on the issue of rural access to safe drinking water. CARRIED Thank you for your attention to this matter. Yours truly, Ken Loveland CAO/Clerk cc: Minister of Health and Long Term Care Elgin St. Thomas Health Unit County of Elgin Elgin Member Municipalities rr7pa c MUNICIPAL PROPERTY AUEE55MENT E❑RP❑RATI❑N June 13, 2016 To: Municipal Heads of Council, Finance Officers and Clerks, Treasurers and Tax Collectors From: Carla Y. Nell Vice-President, Municipal and Stakeholder Relations Subject: Changes to MPAC's Notice Mailing Schedule A potential strike by Canada Post employees may affect the delivery of Property Assessment Notices to residential property taxpayers in certain parts of Ontario. A strike deadline has been set for July 1, 2016. As a result,the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) has decided to send in-year Notices earlier than planned to ensure delivery to Canada Post by July 1, 2016.This includes Advisory Notices of Adjustment, Post-Roll Amended Notices, Special Amended Notices and Tax Incentive Approval Results. Delivery of these Notices to property owners and related products to municipalities will now be delivered June 14-17, 2016. The June Property Assessment Change Notices data extract,which originally included Notices for six regions, Cornwall (01), Pembroke (04), Barrie (16), Niagara (18), Hamilton (19) and Haldimand, Brant, Norfolk(20), will now include two additional regions—Brockville (02) and Kingston (05)—to ensure affected municipalities are provided the products they need to conduct their business. A full list of revised dates is included below: .June 2016 MPAC Extracts.(rye; potential CPC labor disruption) Event Extaratt Date To Vendor Notices to Canada estimated it of Appeal Post(mail date) roll numbers Deadline ANA Run F=Thu.,Jura, 09 Fri., Jun_ 10 Tue., Jun. 14 500 n/a PACN Run D=Thu.,Jura. 09 Fri.,Jun, 10 Fri.,Jun, 17 14..00 Thu., Sep, 15, PRAM Run IF=Thu.,Jun 09 Fri.. Jura. 10 Tue.,Jean. 14, 80 Man., Sep. 12 SAN Run F =Thu_,Jun. 09 Fri.,Jun_ 10 Tue_, Jun. 14 60 Mcra_, .Sep_ 12 TIA Run F= Thu_,Jun. 09 Fri_,Jun. 10 Tue_,Jun. 14 40 Moen., Sep. 12 rotats 14,680 1340 Pickering Parkway, Suite 101, Pickering, ON L1V OC4 www.m pac.ca Changes to MPAC's Notice Mailing Schedule June 13, 2016 Page 2 of 2 2016 Property Assessment Notices to Hamilton (19) and Brantford (20) are scheduled to be delivered to Canada Post by July 4; however, if there is a postal disruption delivery of these will be also be on hold. As you know, MPAC is also in negotiations with OPSEU,the union that represents approximately 1,300 of its 1,700 employees.The bargaining committees have met a number of times over the last few months and most recently,these meetings included a provincially appointed Conciliation Officer. While we have reached agreement on a number of items, some key items such as wages and benefits remain unresolved. A strike deadline has been set for June 17, 2016 at 12:01 a.m. Further meetings between the bargaining committees have been scheduled for June 15 and 16 and we are hopeful that we will achieve an agreement that is fair and equitable to our employees and reflective of the climate in the broader public sector. As good business practices would dictate, we are in the process of finalizing our contingency plan in the event that an agreement cannot be reached and a labour disruption is initiated.We will provide details of that contingency plan, in particular what services will be available and which will not, closer to the strike date. Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 289-315-1287. Yours truly, Carla Y. Nell Vice-President, Municipal &Stakeholder Relations 1340 Pickering Parkway, Suite 101, Pickering, ON L1V OC4 www.m pac.ca Queen's Park Office: Constituency Office: Room 444,Legislative Building 750 Talbot St.,Suite 201,West Wing ��. Jeff Yu re k M P P Queen's Park St.Thomas,Ontario N5P 1 E2 ' Toronto,Ontario M7A1A8 Tel.(519)631-0666 nor Ontario Elgin-Middlesex-London Tel.(416)325-3965 Toll Free 1-800-265-7638 LEGISLATIVE Fax: 416 325-3988 Fax 519 631-9478 ASSEMBLY ( ) ( ) E-mail:jeff.yurek@pc.ola.org E-mail:jeff.yurekco@pc.ola.org ECEIVE JUL 1 12016 MUNICIPALITY BAYHAM July 6, 2016 Hon. Bob Chiarelli Hon. Brad Duguid Minister of Infrastructure Minister of Economic Development& Growth Hearst Block, 8th Floor Hearst Block, 8th Floor 900 Bay Street 900 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E 1 M7A 2E 1 Dear Minister Chiarelli & Minister Duguid, I am writing you today in regards to the Clean Water& Wastewater Fund (CWWF). According to Infrastructure Canada's website this is a federal program that will: "Contribute to the rehabilitation of both water treatment and distribution infrastructure and existing wastewater and storm water treatment systems; collection and conveyance infrastructure; and initiatives that improve asset management, system optimization, and planning for future upgrades to water and wastewater systems. " It is my understanding that Canada will enter into Bilateral Agreements with provinces and territories to deliver this program and each province and territory will enter into agreements with eligible recipients to manage the projects. It is also may understanding that the bilateral agreements that have already been signed and announced have come with pre-approved and allocated projects. The Municipality of Bayham is in desperate need of funding to replace a water system (Richmond Community Water System) within their municipality that is in a"state of disrepair," and has been ordered by the Ministry of Environment to be repaired immediately. The municipality applied to the 2015 Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund (OCIF) however, was denied even though their application included a letter of support from the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change. Ministers, by way of this letter I am requesting that you submit the Richmond Community Water System, within the Municipality of Bayham, for funding through the CWWF as per the "Project Identification and Approval" section on Infrastructure Canada's website. I would also request that you provide my office with the appropriate Ministry contacts to further discuss this funding program. I appreciate your time and consideration in this matter and will forward your response to the Municipality of Bayham. Sinc ly,�f eff Yur , MPP Elgin-Middlesex-London Cc: Honourable Jeff Leal, Minister of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Honourable Glen Murray, Minister of Environment& Climate Change MP Karen Vecchio, Elgin-Middlesex-London Mayor Paul Ens& Council, Municipality of Bayham Resolution Perth County Council-Regular Meeting July 7, 2016 1. ) Moved by: Councillors "4 '-5 r, Seconded by: Councillor Ivl_i kc l a WHEREAS, the Ontario Provincial Government recently released a five-year Climate Change Action Plan for 2016-2020 which includes a strategy for reducing greenhouse gases and moving to a low-carbon economy; AND WHEREAS, the Ministry of Energy has identified the need for a balanced mix of clean energy sources, including natural gas, to meet the demand for electricity; AND WHEREAS the Premier has acknowledged by her remarks at the 2015 OGRA/ROMA conference that"limited access to natural gas is acting as a barrier to growth in too many rural municipalities'; AND WHEREAS, the identified actions in the province's Climate Change Action Plan include a "cap" to limit emissions from natural gas distribution; AND WHEREAS, Southwestern Ontario is one of Ontario and Canada's most productive agricultural regions; AND WHEREAS, the production of affordable food from rural Ontario benefits all Ontarians; AND WHEREAS, access to reliable, affordable energy, including natural gas, is vital for the Ontario agri-food sector and rural communities; AND WHEREAS, the availability of natural gas is recognized in Ontario as a key component to economic development growth and retention; AND WHEREAS, municipal governments adopt policies to support the protection, preservation, enhancement and improvement of the natural environment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the County of Perth requests: 1. THAT the Ontario government commit to consultations with rural Ontario municipalities, residents, and businesses regarding the design and implementation of the government's Climate Change Action Plan; and Resolution Perth County Council-Regular Meeting July 7, 2016 2. THAT the Premier remain committed to a provincial government that puts a rural tens on its decision-making, and ensure the expansion of natural gas to rural municipalities within the Climate Change Action Plan; and 3. THAT the Ontario government outline in detail how it will financially assist rural Ontario municipalities, residents, and businesses in order to transition to meet provincial targets for reducing greenhouse gases; 4. AND THAT this resolution be provided to the Honourable Kathleen Wynne, Premier of Ontario, the Honourable Glen Murray, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, the Honourable Jeff Leal, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the Honourable Glenn Thibeault, Minister of Energy, Mr. Randy Pettapiece, MPP Perth-Wellington, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Rural Ontario Municipalities Association, the Western Ontario Warden's Caucus and all Ontario municipalities. 1,JILLENE BELLCHAMBER-GLAZIER,CLERK OF THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF PERTH.HEREBY CERTIFY T $�TO BE A TfUE COPY OF,THE OJIGI�NAL� ]GNAT E E I`, CITY OF QUINTS WEST P.O. Box 490 Trenton, Ontario, K8V 5R6 . 1� Office of the Mayor , TEL: (613)392-2841 Jim Harrison FAX: (613)392-5608 July 14, 2016 The Honourable Bardish Chagger MP Minister Department of Small Business and Tourism CD Howe Building 235 Queen Street Ottawa, ON K1A OH5 Dear Minister Chagger: RE: Taxation — Impact on Campgrounds Please be advised that Council for the City of Quinte West, at its meeting on July 11, 2016 passed the following resolution; Whereas the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has decided that some campgrounds are too small to qualify for the small business tax deduction; And Whereas campgrounds in Ontario have begun receiving calls and letters from CRA warning them of reassessments in part because they are deemed not to qualify for the small business tax deduction since they employ fewer than five people; And Whereas the camping community provides a source of employment of 15,000 jobs across Ontario and supports economic activity by contributing $1 billion to Ontario's economy and generating $294 million in tax revenues; And Whereas Camping In Ontario, which represents 440 privately-owned campgrounds in Ontario, is working with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business to push the Department of Small Business and Tourism, Finance Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency to implement changes that ensure campgrounds are recognized as small businesses and pay the same taxes as other small businesses; 2 Now Therefore Be It Resolved that the City of Quinte West recognizes the benefit and values all campgrounds throughout Ontario and in Canada and supports Camping In Ontario's initiative that changes be implemented to ensure campgrounds are recognized as small businesses and pay the same taxes as other small businesses; And further that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Minister of Small Business and Tourism, the local Member of Parliament and all Ontario municipalities for their support. Carried The City appreciates your consideration in this matter. Yours truly, i :- arrison, Mayor cc: Neil R. Ellis, MP Bay of Quinte All Ontario Municipalities ECEIVE JUN 2 9 2016 MUNICIPALITY BAYHAM June 28, 2016 Dear Mayor and Council, I have recently purchased a property at 7 Oak Street in Vienna and I am very interested in purchasing the whole portion of the unopened road allowance that runs north and south along the west side of my property, between 7 Oak St and 11 Oak St in Vienna which is between lots 7 and 8. 1 have included an aerial photo from Elgin Mapping of the said parcel, highlighting the portion I am interested in. If you require any other information, my contact number is 519-719-3339. 1 appreciate your time and consideration in this matter, and I look forward to hearing from you in the near future. Thank you, Matthew Chapman F, t - 1 fyc � 5 t1�t r. N'N 1 r' a a'. 6.aF 'RT •y�i� �Y a ..tag tiQo'74�•�t1oS.loO • vJ -VOL: e p -*lot' O 1°Q �-dvn` t h -pt\ n o i• Otto jttl 100 1°;f * ?- tLr��a\.ice £9+-IQQr� N led 2 .R s, r ��t� +4~ -1°O "� at 1 LL\ -� •t! 7�= JA�O r 511 4 t lydd .A �1-01%6�, s"S tit, 21,♦a ' "+` t �- b,1.�� ' t `t 9txwtt 6rs1 9.�1 ',� s%��: t ttti 1 Ct``�+8 7 LEI r`b►.to0 f o O � J 691tw1t a �{ L zt t t 1 Q g Y C yv,�h' tt Lba -+Oa �v C. Lrt o2-0* 4�t,\00 +t * " v' �bl_A0° OW 69 �tlgbQ_VOD ..t �t IO•Gi++-100 `r .L4�\\ � + _�• +w r N F• y.�oL ` Z .J coo 001 , 1� rp �� Y A 7' EIginCounty Z016 July 5, 2016 ?AUNICIPALITV of BAYHAM Municipality of Bayham 9344 Plank Road P.O. Box 160 Straffordville, ON NOJ 1 YO Attention: Mr. Paul Shipway, CAO RE: Proposed Woodlands Clearing on Lot 13, Concession 4 Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin Under Section 135 (2) of the Municipal Act all abutting landowners shall be notified of impending woodlot clearings. This letter hereby notifies you of the proposed woodland clearing by Steven and Victoria Svirida. The proposed clearing of 0.094 hectares (0.23 acres)on Lot 13, Concession 4 in the Municipality of Bayham is for the purpose of constructing an irrigation pond. The Elgin County Woodlands Conservation Bylaw contains a"no net loss"provision to ensure the protection and enhancement of forest cover in the county. Approval of this clearing exemption would be conditional on trees being replanted in a suitable location under the direction of a qualified forester at the applicant's expense. If you have objections to this proposed clearing please reply in writing to the Elgin County Tree Commissioner, c/o Kettle Creek Conservation Authority, R.R.#8, 44015 Ferguson Line, St. Thomas, Ontario,N5P 3T3, by the 4th day of August 2016. If you have any questions regarding this notice,please contact the undersigned at(519)- 631-1270. Yours truly, Jef wrence Elgi ounty Tree Commissioner Encl. County of Elgin Administrative Services 450 Sunset Drive St.Thomas,ON N5R 5V1 Phone:519-631-1460 www.elgincounty.ca ELGIN MAPPING LOT is Lcrru CONS LOT 15 LOOT is CON 5 LOT17 Legend Elgin Parcels ❑ Lot Lines • -, concessions i �v = Local Arterial Highways � ` 9 , L? Boundary World Street Map LOT it A LCYr 12 i LOT 13 CON a LOT 14 oT�c L,oT1s �d L£iT is CON LO717 q T. n nrr 1 w a 4 'ON 3 iOT 1� LO711 CONS 107,2 1: 18,056 Notes Lxrr,i 0.9 0 0.46 0.9 Kilometers This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only.Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere current,or otherwise reliable. Latitude Geographics Group Ltd. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION NOTIFICATION OF SPECIAL EVENT Special Event Name- �c. �� �j2t�t.�f_s� Date of Event: LVA- 3 Start-time - 2 p^, Finish - cl n.1 Maximum Number of people expected to attend - e4? � LD Equipment or vehicles to be used - t,nS�-r llc,-h�t a'^ ee ►e, "`I Special Needs - Vkc-�^�, Gr C'�e✓� {�y��S 4ej &rr ITS I Special Request(Signage/fencing etc.) - Sponsoring Organization: C Signing Officer Name & Signature- Municipal Approval Signature- Upon approval by Coltntil, copies of this notice must be forwarded a minimum of one month (30 days) prior to event to the following: ^'Ontario Provirlt0al Police Fire Chief& Station Chiefs 42696 John Wigiline,RR 5 Municipality of Bayham St.Thomas,ON N5P 3S9 9344 Plank Rd.,Box 160 Phone: 519-631-2920. Straffordville,ON NOJ lYO Fax: 519-631-2923 v 519-866-5521 Cell: 519-878-6029 Fax: 519-866-3884 ,.,Central Ambulance Communications Centre Tillsonburg Fire Dispatch 1510 Woodcock Street,Suite#20 80 Concession Street East London,ON N6H 5S1 Tillsonburg, ON N4G 4Z8 519-661-1784 519-842-2905(non-emergency#) Fax: 519-661-1799 V Fax: 519-842-2190,/ Public Works Manager ;Clayton Watters,Engineer Municipality of Bayham County of Elgin Box 160 450 Sunset Drive Straffordville,ON NOJ IYO St.Thomas,ON N511 5V1 519-866-5521 Fax: 866-3884 519-631-1460 Fax: 519-633-7661�: V/Elgin-St.Thomas EMS Duty Manager Fax: 519-637-3484 Phone: 519-637-3098 File: Forms/Event Notice 25 Appendix "A" MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Municipal Alcohol Policy "CHECKLIST FOR RENTERS" Date of Event (s) : 1. Location of Event: �r�- cwe\1 �c,� 7jec'C� 2. Number in Attendance: 2rj C7 3 . Will persons under 19 years of age be attending this event? _. _�. Yes No Note: *2 extra floor monitors are required for events with attendance over 100 people and allowing participants under the age of majority, and adequate volunteer or paid security personnel may be required. 4 , Name of person and/or group sponsoring this event: 5. Type of Identification for event workers 6. Has proof of a Special Occasion Permit been provided? YES NO 7. Has proof of Insurance been provided? YES NO 8. The safe transportation strategy(s) that will be used at this function are: I- ( 1 b) S� ar � i vu Cli1�/I�� c) PLEASE SEE OVER 26 (2) "CHECKLIST FOR RENTERS" 9. The names and certification numbers of Smart Serve trained program event workers are: 1) Name Certification # 05o1Z8Z23U35 2) Name a� �, ���o _ Certification # 3] Name �1W�- C,wcar\ -.- - Certification # 9 1305 a-�0 u' 4) Name Certification # O(v07-(2525 YOa 2 5) Name �Abe_ mrAr t�.u�ll _ Certification # L16 6) Name TCrrtA \A!15teyery t Certification # aS32.0-1- �2 10 . I have reviewed the Municipal Alcohol Policy with a municipal representative , _-_X_ Yes No 11 , I understand all the policy regulations. Yes No 12 . I and/or my group will observe and obey all policy regulations during the event. Yes C No If No, explain: W-0- 2) ,,44e- Aro__- Sio\low L�'-�3c� ry\tS c�•�� $'erye. Ca.•aS� �<<c ,� a:cctl�al�le Signature of Special Occasion Permit holder Address 55094 C kv1 Erie Ltn-2 V142 31- a Telephone Number !&\ci- SSO^ 4(1!!l Signature of Municipal Representative Date: _ � - \l 2t)lGQ 27 Appendix "B" MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Municipal Alcohol Policv r T OUTDOOR SPFCIAL OCCASION PERMITS APPLICATION TO MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM COUNCU Date of Event (s) a ot- 3 1 Type of Event: 1. Location of Event: ?aCT gi r,KwC( E-,s.+ �e 2 . Number in Attendance; _MmmT p�rj 3 . Will persons under 19 years of age be attending this event? Yes No 4. Name of person and/or qroup ponsorin this ent: g 5 . Will there be extra staffing above the guidelines set out by the Municipal Alcohol Policy? ` -e-5 Describe i.e. #, Adequate volunteer or paid security personnel, security company, volunteers (trained or untrained) : 6 , Government Approvals that are necessary: OPP Health Unit Fire Building Other 7 . Transportation Strategies that will be used at this function are: a) i anUC- Iil J (4 b) PLEASE SEE OVER 28 2) OUTDOOR SPECIAL OCCASION PERMITS APPLICAT ON TO MUNICIPALITY OF RAYHAM COUNCIL 8 . Drawing of service area showing entrances, service area, seating area, fencing etc. Please attach. 9. Type of Fencing (i.e. Single or double fencing, snow fence etc. ) 10. Glass or Plastic Glasses to a used? etc r%Aes. 11. Parking arrangements: 12 . Type of identification for event workers: 13 . Percent of event workers that will be Smart Serve trained to untrained: /oo Z 14. The Municipal Alcohol Policy has been reviewed with a municipal representative. Yes No Signature of Applicant S50---7 q 6(en 1-- r�.. . IJ<<K�� Address Telephone Number_ Date: �� ZJ 29 APPENDIX "C" MUNICIPALITY OF RAYHAM MUNICIPAL ALCOHOL POLICY CCIMMENT FORM Please comment on the affects that this policy had relating to your rental. ------------------------- Date of your event: Location of event: Type of event: c.C. Comments: l�l't Thank you for your co-operation! STAGE F Tables Tables Tables Entrance Event Staff BAR i6til ECEIVE a2 �,2 R Li i JUL 12 2016 MUNICIPALITY BAYHAM Z� � e 'Meet' �2 > a1z"a Q AV U r�rcc�iz.Q J P(4'3 � 9 = � � Ll/ Per nck C -�b r -� k--e kif n at- U--f- Wo- ,Ay-� t-Aosk a Ot- C-cl- S P' (c k -T�u(-nGrnen + - Lao, rn s - Yo rn - I I pn\. .. rLc4x9 C\)c-+ 1 7 a o\ - --7 p-n We luLl L (l-oec( I-ke us-& o -f K-1c)r-b Q (-c)l.cnC� -t-A-c Os W,e lt)C:t.c(Q( Wc.e Ltd C),-- OC,n c;�cr\, (Se [(� l�u"�r � hok d(a�,� --e—Ct . CN u (J-ec!r- —I en-4-) bJ-2 cjk I I Su-pp I y ou r OWn 9 f.il�rn-� n r1 U IS Pau-i LL-0 n \� � Pos �i171e. �tija � � � �..�� wvHeve ao unaeiaiNnw stoasL Inr 3 i', i 3 0 3a -Y,a�17( ub11L_ A au C) Y� JJD�-s au,�Cr g,AY REPORT TREASURY DEPARTMENT ortunity TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Lorne James, Treasurer DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: TR-19/16 FILE NO. SUBJECT: 2016 Q2 Variance Report BACKGROUND The Q2 (second quarter) financial reports are provided for Council's fiduciary review. This report provides a summary of current revenue and expenditure to June 30, 2016 and variances to the Operating Budget. DISCUSSION Operating Budget expenses are at expected levels given the cyclical nature of some operations. Capital expenses are well underway in most departments, and with an early passed budget permitted department managers to secure competitive pricings and availability of service providers. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Appendix A: 2016 Q2 Operating Revenue and Expense Variance Report. 2. Appendix B: 2016 Q2 Capital Expense Variance Report RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Staff Report TR-19/16 be received for information; Respectfull bmitte Reviewed by, Lorne James, rk CA Paul Shipway, CAO Appendix'A' Municipality of Bayham Appendix A: 2016 O2 Operating Revenue and Expense Variance Report 2016 2016 % Actuals Budget Consumed Revenues 05.10 General Taxation 1,802,727 3,878,151 46% 05.20 Other Revenues 540,409 1,138,400 47% 10.10 General Government 17,058 55,750 31% entry to be booked 10.20 Council - 20.10 Fire Services 33,268 13,000 256% -Donation 20.20 Police Services 2,097 70,000 3% -transfer from reserve 20.30 Conservation Authority - 20.40 Other Protective Services 78,636 52,000 151% -higher building permits 20.50 Bylaw Enforcement Services 17,272 28,000 62% 25.10 Roads 254,296 448,321 57% -timing of invoicing 25.20 Winter Control 871 12,000 7% -winter invoice in fall 25.40 Street Lights - 30.10 Water 256,468 590,746 43% 30.15 Richmond Water 26,645 53,779 50% 30.30 Waste Disposal 44,838 127,190 35% -timing of grants 30.20 Waste Water 363,009 871,119 42% 35.10 Health Services - 35.20 Cemeteries 1,757 40.10 General Assistance - 45.10 Parks&Recreation 1,100 2,600 42% 45.20 Straffordville Community Centre 17,888 - -Donations 45.30 Vienna Community Centre 7,560 9,000 84% Eden Community Centre - 45.40 Libraries 16,887 66,500 25% -2nd q rent in July 45.50 Museums 6,841 20,100 34% -timing of grants 50.10 Planning,Development&Tourism 28,201 27,000 104% 25.30 Business&Commerce Tourism&Marketing 1,362 5,500 25% 50.20 Environmental Services 11,969 0% Capital 94,526 2,501,300 4% -No Richmond Grant,yet to receive gas tax Expenditures 05.10 General Taxation - - 05.20 Other Revenues - 10.10 General Government 631,880 1,157,912 55% 10.20 Council 38,630 76,254 51% 20.10 Fire Services 223,716 490,964 46% 20.20 Police Services 378,717 937,181 40% timing of billing 20.30 Conservation Authority 75,513 75,513 100% -2016 Paid in Full 20.40 Other Protective Services 49,606 90,606 55% 20.50 Bylaw Enforcement Services 17,674 36,818 48% 25.10 Roads 679,180 1,672,413 41% -inventory adjustment to be booked 25.20 Winter Control 38,697 138,100 28% 25.40 Street Lights 17,295 45,000 38% 30.10 Water 175,076 590,746 30% 30.15 Richmond Water 19,101 53,779 36% 30.20 Waste Water 211,103 871,119 24% 30.30 Waste Disposal 198,348 479,224 41% 35.10 Health Services - 35.20 Cemeteries 5,465 18,000 30% 40.10 General Assistance 4,100 10,000 41% 45.10 Parks&Recreation 26,064 61,601 42% 45.20 Straffordville Community Centre 23,828 37,036 64% 45.30 Vienna Community Centre 32,856 58,286 56% 45.35 Eden Community Centre 4,365 4,690 93% -utilities paid by MoB 45.40 Libraries 10,885 66,500 16% 45.50 Museums 21,632 53,023 41% 50.10 Planning,Development&Tourism 44,934 91,585 49% 25.30 Business&Commerce - Tourism&Marketing 25,027 48,500 52% 50.20 Environmental Services 12,220 24,438 50% Capital 2,790,441 0% -refer to capital sheet Appendix'B' Municipality of Bavham Appendix B: 2016 Q1 Capital Expense Variance Report 2016 2016 % Actuals Budget Consumed General Government -Liability Transfer $ 30,000 0% -yet to be booked -Election Reserve Transfer $ 10,000 0% -yet to be booked Fire -Standby Generator $ 14,241 $ 20,000 71% -Extrication Hydraulics $ 33,129 $ 50,000 66% Roads -Power Washer $ 13,447 $ 15,000 90% -Maple Groove Line $ 45,718 $ 100,000 46% -Stafford Road $ 46,741 $ 155,000 30% - Libbey Street $ 20,000 0% -Turnarounds $ 10,640 $ 80,000 13% -Schafer Road $ 19,260 $ 25,507 76% -Sidewalks $ 56,959 $ 50,000 114% -Storm Sewer EA $ 26,931 $ 50,000 54% -Guard Rails $ 1,888 $ 10,000 19% - B &C Inspection $ 10,000 0% - Road Signs $ 3,000 0% Water - Richmond Distribution $ 1,800,000 0% -on hold till grants Waster Water -Upper Discharge Piping $ 25,000 0% -Equipment Replacement $ 8,300 0% -Storage Building $ 31,941 $ 32,000 100% -UV Upgrades $ 3,705 $ 25,000 15% - Process Automation $ 8,014 $ 25,000 32% - Manhole Rehabiliation $ 10,000 0% - Pump Equipment $ 8,558 $ 41,667 21% Parks - Public Space Recycling $ 30,000 0% -Cornith Pavilion $ 21,071 $ 20,000 105% -Transfer to Trail Reserve $ 10,000 0% -yet to be booked Library -PB Concrete Repairs $ 2,000 0% Museum -MM Envelope Repairs $ 4,050 $ 5,000 81% Planning -Official Plan Review $ 16,000 0% Facility -Facility Transfer $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 100% REPORT CAO j'tunity Is TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-44/16 SUBJECT: SMALL CRAFT HARBOURS (SCH) — HARBOUR LANDS DIVESTITURE On June 16, 2016 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution: THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham direct staff to submit a request to the Port Burwell Provincial Park for a permanent easement over Part 1 and Part 2 of Plan 11 R990, as required, to provide access to the West Pier Boardwalk; AND THAT staff be directed to post a historical overview report, and relevant studies, of the federal harbour divestiture process; AND THAT the staff report and relevant studies be posted on the Municipal Website under `Studies' when prepared; AND THAT the historical overview report be within the July 21, 2016 Council Agenda for information purposes. On June 17, 2016 staff sent formal correspondence to the Port Burwell Provincial Park requesting consideration of an easement over the provincially owned lands providing access to the West Pier Boardwalk as an attempt to legally and formally provide access over the same. Further background pertaining to the historical access rights is included within this report. This report has been prepared in an attempt to provide a holistic assessment of available information pertaining to Small Craft Harbours (SCH) Divestiture discussions to date utilizing available information. The historical information also includes facts about assets surrounding and associated with the harbour lands. In 1995 the federal government made port and harbour divestiture an official policy. The Canada Marine Act received Royal Assent in 1998, and implemented the National Marine Policy, which introduced commercial principles for managing marine infrastructure to achieve greater efficiencies. The goal of divestiture was designed to improve the efficiency of Canadian marine transportation by rationalizing port systems and placing decision-making in the hands of users and local interests best placed to operate them. Since implementing the National Marine Policy, the federal government has attempted to strengthen the public port and harbour system by transferring management and operation of major ports to not-for-profit organizations. The Canada Marine Act allowed for divestiture of public port facilities to local interests, provincial or municipal governments, allowing communities to own and control local facilities and determine appropriate levels of service and maintenance. In the absence of any local interest in taking over public port facilities, the Canada Marine Act allowed the government to terminate its' interests in these facilities. SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR DIVESTITURE PROGRAMME Fishing has historically been very important to the Canadian economy and culture. As such, the DFO-SCH programme operated and maintained >1000 harbours (comprising of 900 fishing and 135 recreational harbours) across Canada to provide commercial fishers and recreational users with safe and accessible facilities. Mandated in 1973, in accordance with the Fishing and Recreational Harbours Act, the DFO-SCH programme maintained harbours "critical to commercial fisheries at an acceptable standard". Prior to the implementation of the National Marine Policy and Port Divestiture Programme (PDP), the federal government began transferring ownership of recreational and fishing harbours with minimal activity to community- based groups. The DFO-SCH programme retained only essential harbours to the commercial fishery and expanded private sector involvement in the management of core harbours. The DFO-SCH programme mandate is to maintain harbours open and in good repair, and is managed by five regions across Canada: Newfoundland and Labrador; Maritimes and Gulf; Quebec; Central and Arctic; and Pacific. Each year the Canadian government spends significant funds on harbour maintenance and upgrades, including sediment dredging to maintain navigable access. The current vision for DFO-SCH is to maintain only a network of essential harbours, and to transfer ownership of all non-essential harbours through divestiture: "Port divestiture improves the efficiency of Canadian marine transportation by rationalizing the port system and placing decision making and operations in the hands of users and local interests"'. CHRONOLOGICAL PORT BURWELL HARBOUR BACKGROUND The origin of Port Burwell is closely linked to harbour facilities and was established as a small fishing wharf in 1833. Lumber was harvested from the area and exported from the harbour to the United States during the 1900's. The 1900's also saw major improvements to the wharf for coal shipping and the harbour was used largely as a commercial fishing and bulked goods (coal, potash and fuel oil) trans-shipment point2. ' Harbour Divestiture in Canada: Implications of Changing Governance—Journal of Marine Policy,Walker et al. August 2015 2 Staff Report D-03/99-Municipality of Bayham, March 10, 1999 In 1906 the Ashtabula railroad car ferry was launched, providing daily service between Port Burwell and Ashtabula, Ohio. Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) tracks and related rail infrastructure were built to serve the ferry dock on the east side of the harbour, as seen on aerial imagery from 1956 shown on Appendix 'A". The community of Port Burwell was part of Bayham Township as a Police Village until 1949 when the community was incorporated as a Village. This separation was the result of a referendum held in 1948 sparked by a desire for local autonomy and procurement of water and sewer services for the community. The Village flourished until the 1960's when the need for coal diminished as a result of the demand for natural gas, electricity and oil. By 1964 the coal shipping was transferred to Port Stanley4. In 1948 Graham Oil constructed two, 700,000 litre (600,000 imperial gallons) oil tanks off-site visible on aerial imagery from 1973 shown on Appendix `B'. The 1950's see a fire within the area of an 8,000 ton (8,130 MT) coal pile'. In 1958 the Ashtabula ferry sinks in Ashtabula Harbour, and the railcar ferry service is discontinued. Dredging of the harbour to 24 feet (7.3 metres) is discontinued sometime between 1962 and 1970. The turning basin begins to fill with sediment. In 1976 transfer of the Harbour Lands from Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWSGC)/Transport Canada (TC) to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Small Craft Harbours (SCH) is completed. Port Burwell was designated as a Commercial Harbour under the jurisdiction of TC until the transfer when SCH assumed authority and the designation was changed to a Recreational Harbour. The change in designation meant that TC no longer operated the harbour. The operation of the harbour was offered to the Village and the harbour was required to operate with monies generated from leases, user charges and levies. Dredging of the harbour by the Federal Government ceased to be carried out in 19736. On March 23, 1977 the Village of Port Burwell passed By-law No. 301 authorizing the construction of the East Beach Breakwall, built under the Shore Protection Works Program - 1800 & 600 Feet(1974 & 1978). As a result of local political pressure, in 1977, an agreement with the Federal Government was reached whereby the Federal Government purchased an $180,000 dredge in order to reduce the financial burden of harbour operations. In return for the equipment, the Village would be responsible for providing the expertise and labour for dredging activities. The dredge was burned beyond repair in 1983 and as a result dredging stopped until 1989. As part of the original provision of the dredging equipment, DFO indicated that a stipulation for the purchase of the equipment was that the Village would make no further requests for dredging funding to the Federal Government. Again, increased political pressure led to an annual cost sharing of dredging fees on a 50/50 basis to a maximum of$30,000 per year between DFO and the Village of Port Burwell. The dredging cost each year had exceeded $30,000. Donations from a few users, Federal grants and some licence fees and recreational marina operations assisted in covering the Village's 3 Remedial Options Analysis and Remedial/Risk Management Action Plan—Stantec Engineering.2015 4 Staff Report D-03/99-Municipality of Bayham, March 10, 1999. a Gartner Lee Limited, 1997 s Staff Report D-03/99-Municipality of Bayham, March 10, 1999 share of the costs, however, the majority of the Village's funding came from the municipal tax base'. The Village of Port Burwell first adopted an Official Plan in 1988 which contained strong acknowledgements of the need for an operational harbour and a long term solution to costly annual dredging activity by building an outer harbour facility. The Village of Port Burwell commissioned a Tourism and Recreation Study and Master Plan (Hanscombe Report) which was adopted in 1991. A background report was prepared in 1989 by Johnson Sustronk Weinstein & Associates (JSW) entitled `Port Burwell Outer Harbour Study'. The Port Burwell Outer Harbour Study recommended an Outer Harbour Facility at an estimated cost of $8,135,000 as the inner harbour was subject to continuous silting while the near shore is subject to an active littoral drift$. A financial partnership between various levels of government was recommended. Prior to this development, the Village of Port Burwell had tried to sell dredged material to the United States Army Corps of Engineers to re-nourish the beaches along the south shore of Lake Erie, however due to environmental concerns, a sale could not be made. The JSW study included analysis for maritime development and provided a comprehensive review of recreational and commercial boating activity within the Lake Erie Basin and the economic benefits resulting from the construction and operation of a harbour facility. In 1991 at the peak of recession, Port Burwell attempted to attract a private developer for the Outer Harbour Development. This process consisted of requests for proposals of which only one was received. The developer was an architect who modified the project and proposed a complex $110,000,000 development consisting of hotels, condominiums, commercial buildings and a 300 berth marina...an agreement was immediately executed between the developer and the Village of Port Burwell. In 1992, the dream of a large Outer Harbour was tied to a bid to have Ontario's first gambling casino. The bid was apparently one of three seriously considered. However the licence was given to the City of Windsor. Financing of large projects had now become difficult and caused the project to be shelved permanently. Both the JSW and the Hanscombe Reports contemplated implementing their programs for improvements by obtaining Provincial and Federal grants. On May 22, 1991 the Village of Port Burwell executed Contract No. CO-023, with DFO, to build a Boardwalk on Federal Lands. This Boardwalk was authorized under Section 11 of an Operating Lease Agreement between the Village of Port Burwell and DFO (multiple, identical, yearly operating contracts existed. The final operating contract was authorized by Municipality of Bayham By-law No. 1999-077, which ended May 31, 2000 as a decision of DFO). Funding for construction of the Boardwalk was provided by DFO, Employment & Immigration Canada— Canadian Jobs Strategy and the Village of Port Burwell. The completion date of the Boardwalk project was July 26, 1991. Further, in relation to the West Bank Parking (Provincial Park Parking Lot), which provides access to the Boardwalk, there was discussions about a permanent granted use over the lands, however an agreement or easement was never finalized, confirmed or registered during closure of Chatham St. and during new Provincial Park Staff Report D-03/99-Municipality of Bayham, March 10, 1999 Remedial Options Analysis and Remedial/Risk Management Action Plan—Stantec Engineering. 2015 entrance discussions. As such, access across the lands is at the leisure of the Province/Provincial Park. Additionally, the Village of Port Burwell also subleased land and items known as the Boat Launch, Black Docks and Finger Docks (Plan 11 R-990 Parts 7,8,9 — Federal Lands), attached hereto as Appendix 'C', as a component of Agreement No. 0069. On April 23, 1993 The Village of Port Burwell acquired Parts 1, 2 and 3, Plan 11R-5136 and Parts 1 and 2, Plan 11 R-5137 from SCH in the amount of$37,000. These acquisitions included the East Pier and lands indicated in Appendix 'D' attached hereto. In 1993 fog horns were removed from all ports in Lake Erie contrary to protests from municipalities. The Canadian Coast Guard is responsible for navigation aids and mariner information with respect to safe harbours and they had concerns with the Port Burwell Harbour. Canadian Coast Guard did not want boaters attracted to unsafe harbours because of the lack of depth and navigational markers. Various weather conditions can cause the Port Burwell Harbour to 'fill in' causing boats to run aground. There are several regulations regarding navigational aids and harbour conditions. These aids were historically continually being removed from the bodies of water or being 'downloaded' to municipal governments to look after9. From 1994-2000 the Municipality of Bayham was a partner in the Lower Big Otter Remedial Action Project which focused on tree planting, erosion mitigation and education in efforts to lessen the siltation issues within the Big Otter. ALUS has effectively taken over the initial concept of the Lower Big Otter Remedial Action Project. In 1994 and 1995, a 'Tri-Party Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)' had been prepared by the Canadian Coast Guard, but was never executed as the Village of Port Burwell did not satisfy the MOU requirements. The parties involved were DFO, Canadian Coast Guard, and the Village of Port Burwell. The MOU had been prepared in view of the limited safe access from Lake Erie to the harbour. The Coast Guard was willing to undertake the continued provision of its services only if the conditions allowed for safe navigation of small craft. DFO advised that they took back the lights and only obstruction lights existed which warn mariners of obstructions. In 1995, Pembina Resources Limited (Talisman Energy Inc.-Dundee Energy) purchased, from the Village, approximately four acres along the mouth of the Big Otter Creek at a price of $160,000 as a result of their concerns for access to the inner harbour and the central location of the community to its existing gas wells in Lake Erie. A visual of the land is attached hereto as Appendix 'E' (Part Lot 11, Concession 1, Part 3, RP 11 R-5136). A draft Memorandum of Agreement between the Village and the gas company requiring the gas company to provide a minimum of$7,500 per year towards dredging activities existed but was never executed or formalized. It is assumed it was drafted in lieu of the property purchase. In an attempt to recover costs associated with harbour maintenance and operation, on June 24, 1996, the Council of the Village of Port Burwell gave first and second reading to a User Fee By- law which was subject to significant opposition from marina operators and commercial fishermen. As a result, the by-law did not receive a third reading and Council agreed to permit harbour users to instead make donations for maintenance. The total sum of funds received by 9 Staff Report D-03/99-Municipality of Bayham, March 10, 1999 donations was $600 from the commercial fishermen. The defeat of the by-law and significant shortfall in donation revenue contributed to a Village of Port Burwell municipal year end deficit of $52,00010 In 1996 an inspection of the harbour was conducted by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC)for SCH, which found the harbour to be considered in 'fair condition'. Additionally in 1996 Aquafor Beech completes a study of the potential effects of plough dredging at Port Burwell (Aquafor Beech Limited, 1996), and determines that the methodology, as well as dredging and in-water disposal in general, is acceptable at the Port Burwell Harbour. Numerous techniques have been developed to dredge sediments from the bottom of a creek or a lake. The amount of resuspension associated with each method is variable and certain techniques tend to minimize the amount of resuspension while others are more disruptive. Prop washing is one of the most disruptive techniques currently used as the method is intended to hydraulically push the material away from the boat propeller(prop.) The method known as "Plow-dredging"is an experimental method of using a large plow attached to the stern of a tugboat. Due to the close proximity of the plough to the prop, a significant amount of material is re-suspended with this method. However, it was expected that less material would be re-suspended than solely using prop washing. In addition, the plough methodology provides better control of the accuracy of the depth of dredging. A combination of this method and prop washing was conducted on June 4-6, 1996 by Dan Minor& Sons. This experiment was met with initial objections from the Ministry of Environment and Energy who concurred only for this experiment. In a letter dated May 31, 1996, they cautioned that any future dredging using this technique will be evaluated at that time based on the monitoring results from this experiment. The Ministry of Natural Resources was cautious about the experimental technique and are not in agreement with prop washing in the inner harbour. They commented on behalf of the Lake Erie Management Unit and the Long Point Area Team (Aylmer District) on aspects of the monitoring study which dealt with the potential impacts on fish and the aquatic organisms and habitats on which they depend. For this method to proceed, the Village of Port Burwell was required to hire a consulting firm to monitor the process and its effectiveness. Aquafor Beech prepared a monitoring study at a cost of$22,000. The third and more traditional, but costly approach to dredging is referred to as `Dragline'which is a method by which the silt is physically removed from the bed of the harbour. Testing of the sediment samples and approvals for disposal must be to the satisfaction of Long Point Region Conservation Authority, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of Environment. Maintenance dredging requires approval of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans which relies on approval from the Ministry of Natural Resources since they manage the Federal Fisheries Act, Long Point Regional Conservation Authority, Canadian Coast Guard and the Ministry of Environment. The Long 10 Staff Report D-03/99-Municipality of Bayham, March 10, 1999 Point Regional Conservation Authority is concerned with the flood plain management issues and The Ministry of Environment is concerned with respect to the disposal of the dredging material on land". Department of Fisheries and Oceans have concurred with information contained in a document prepared by the former Village of Port Burwell Clerk-Administrator that on average, depending on the type of vessel, commercial fishing boats require a depth of 6 feet. The single commercial harbour user, Talisman energy have several boats needed to access and service existing gas wells in Lake Erie. Their boats require a depth of 9 feet. The majority of recreational boats are power boats which require a depth of between 2 and 4 feet. Sail boats typically require a depth of 6 feet. Fixed keel sail boats have been discouraged by the Canadian Coast Guard from entering the harbour because of the fluctuations in depth of the inner harbour During 1997 Gartner Lee conducted a Phase I Property Transfer Assessment (Gartner Lee Limited, 1997)for DFO to support transfer of harbour lands to the Village of Port Burwell. The report concludes that there are no significant environmental issues with the Site, however Gartner Lee Limited recommend soil sampling to determine if the coal handling operations may have resulted in soil impacts. On December 29, 1997 the Village of Port Burwell passed By-law No. 1997-021, being a by-law to authorize an agreement in principle with DFO pertaining to the future ownership of the harbour lands. On March 5, 1998, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution voiding the potential agreement as an action out of line due to amalgamation: THAT the Fisheries and Oceans Canada Agreement in Principle endorsed by the former Corporation of the Village of Port Burwell dated December 29, 1997, be received In March, 1998, Council members and staff met with representatives of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), Small Craft Harbours (SCH) to discuss the issues involving the proposed transfer of SCH holdings in Port Burwell to the Municipality. SCH provided the following information: Dwayne Blanchard of the DFO has confirmed that there is absolutely no federal funding available for dredging and that harbour fees are no longer specified because of de-regulation. Market rates must now be applied and they have no record of area rates. He noted that the Big Otter Marina can't be charged except for berthing rights in the harbour. Further, he noted that Port Burwell is a derelict fishing harbour and with the current water levels, the deeper the channel is dug, the faster it fills in with silt. He suggested following up with Ministry of Natural Resources about restrictions for disposing of removed silt and sand. He added that a 300-400 berth outer marina is the only long term solution, but would still require about$50,000 annually to dredge by the private sector. To dredge now with floating equipment would cost approximately$100,000 to $200,000 to maintain a 6- 10 foot depth. For a 20 foot depth, the cost would be about$300,000. " Aquafor Beech-Port Burwell Harbour Dredge Monitoring Study, dated July, 1996 Therefore, the federal government couldn't afford the dredging costs for commercial fishing vessels. Notwithstanding past practices and situations, this year has been unique with the speed of drop in depth. 1980 DFO CORRESPONDENCE TO MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE A marina development should be able to ensure its viability without reliance upon continued maintenance dredging at public expense, especially at the exorbitant cost such as proposed in Port Burwell.' Dwayne Blanchard stated that if the Municipality is no longer interested in leasing or acquiring the harbour, they would attempt to market it, however, they would be prepared to discuss the future ownership with other parties. They are anxious to receive a written response from the Municipality about intention of future ownership. On March 10, 1999 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham considered the following options: Option No. 1 - Municipal Ownership Supported by Municipal Levy This option would require the Municipality to accept ownership of the harbour and structures currently under the control of the Federal government and develop a long term plan for the operation and maintenance of the entire harbour to be funded by the municipal tax base. The Municipality would maintain control of the facility and set the service levels. However, the question of whether all ratepayers should be required to fund the costly dredging projects for a limited number of users must be considered. There is also the question of liability, long term maintenance of structures and administration which needs to be taken into consideration. Option No. 2 - Municipal Ownership Supported by User Charges and/or Donations This option does not warrant serious consideration given the recent discussions with the users of the harbour. There are a limited number who have indicated their level of business couldn't support this option and would force them to either relocate or close their business. When a scenario of seeking donations was undertaken in 1996, a total of only $600 was received. There is still the question of long term maintenance of the structures, liability and administration. Option No. 3 - Municipal Ownership - Abandonment of Harbour to Develop as a Natural Habitat This option would have the Municipality assume ownership of the harbour lands from the Federal government and cease dredging activities or attract boaters. The watercourse would be allowed to naturalize into a fish and wild life habitat. Option No. 4 - Municipal Ownership and Purchase of Dredging Equipment This option would have the Municipality assume ownership of the harbour lands from the Federal government and take on full responsibility for the costly dredging and long term maintenance of structures and liability. With the purchase of dredging equipment and hiring of expertise, the dredging could be continuous, but determination of how the acquisition would be funded, maintained and operated would need careful and detailed analysis before serious consideration. Option No. 5 - Municipal Ownership With Harbour Being Operated by a Committee This option would have the Municipality assume ownership of the harbour lands from the Federal government and appoint a committee or board to take on the responsibility of long term maintenance of structures and dredging activities. The Municipality would still have to address liability issues, a financing structure and would still be ultimately responsible for ensuring all issues are identified and addressed appropriately. Option No. 6 - Private Ownership This option would see the Department of Fisheries and Oceans transfer ownership to the private sector eliminating municipal involvement in all areas. While there would be the hope that there is a market for the private sector to assume ownership, they would also require the funds, resources and capabilities of returning the harbour to a viable port of entry for at least small commercial vessels and recreational boats. Option No. 7 - Establishment of a North Shore Lake Erie Harbour Authority On March 26, 1996, the Village of Port Burwell enacted a resolution to explore the option of establishing such an authority to address specific concerns with respect to maritime activities to various provincial and federal ministers toward cost effective and efficient solutions. The resolution requested that other Lake Erie North Shore communities consider the appointment of a political or administrative representative to an inter-municipal committee to address specific concerns. The resolution was circulated to the following and listed are their responses: a. Eastern Lake Erie Fishermen's Association i. Response was positive, they expressed an interest in learning more about the proposal. b. Township of Norfolk i. A resolution was passed in support. C. City of Port Co/borne i. A resolution was passed to endorse Port Burwell's resolution. d. Village of Port Stanley i. A Councillor was appointed to attend and represent the Village at the initial meeting of an inter-municipal committee. Council ultimately passed the following resolution: THAT Staff be directed to research the approval process for dredging the harbour using the drag-line process; AND THAT Staff obtain three quotes from excavators for Council's consideration at the meeting scheduled for April 1, 1999, for work to be performed this spring; AND THAT Staff arrange a meeting with the businessmen having an interest in the Port Burwell Harbour. As previously stated the Federal Government leased the harbour to the Village and subsequently after amalgamation, the Municipality, which is restricted by Provincial legislation including the Municipal Act, Wharves and Harbours Act, Occupational Health and Safety Act, Territorial Division Act, Environmental Protection Act, etc. Federal legislation includes the Fisheries and Harbours Act, Great lakes Fisheries Convention Act, Harbour Commissions Act, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Act, Public Harbours and Port Facilities Act and the Public Works Act. As a note there is a common law right extending back to 1806 that no entity, whether private or public may fully obstruct waterways. This common law right has been abrogated in a number of ways recognizing modern society including damming creeks on farmland, diverting water for public hydro-electric utilities, etc. As a result, the federal government, as the Crown, has sought to codify navigable water rights through statute. The Municipality was also a silent party in a three party lease agreement for the Big Otter Marina. As per a Memorandum from LPRCA to Big Otter Marina, dated May 13, 1999, the Municipality of Bayham was released from the Big Otter Marina land lease agreement: IT IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED that the annual rental rate for the lease of the Port Burwell Conservation Area (Big Otter Marina & Campgrounds) property will be $3,750.00 for the period January 1, 1999 - December 31, 2003 inclusive, payable in two semi-annual installments of $1,875.00, due on July 15 and December 15, AND FURTHER that the Municipality of Bayham (formerly Village of Port Burwell) is hereby released from the lease agreements. In 2000 Dillon Consulting prepares the 'Port Burwell Assessment and Management Strategy for the Municipality of Bayham (Dillon Consulting Limited, 2000), a planning document that recommends conditional transfer of SCH lands to the municipality assuming a partnership with SCH, and a commercial marina built outside of Big Otter Creek to avoid ongoing dredging expenses, in partnership with the Province of Ontario. In 2001 Environment Canada completes an assessment of Lake Erie tributaries, including sediment analyses from Port Burwell. Further in 2001 MacViro prepares an enhanced Phase I ESA. One surface soil sample finds metals concentrations below applicable Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) criteria. Concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in excess of Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) interim sediment quality guidelines, as well as concentrations of metals, nutrients and pesticides in excess of MOE guidelines, are identified from six sediment samples collected. The study recommends further delineation of sediment impacts. A review of the Phase I ESA is completed by Murray Brooksbank at Environment Canada (Environment Canada, 2001)— Murray Brooksbank notes that sediment quality is relatively good at Port Burwell and comparable to background conditions within Lake Erie. On February 6, 2003 Council is presented with an offer from SCH to transfer ownership of all of their current holdings and facilities in the Port Burwell Harbour area, in return for a one-time capital contribution of$1,000,000. The offer is conditional on the Municipality maintaining the harbour at generally its current state for a minimum of five years. On February 21 st, 2003 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution: THAT Council consider acceptance of the offer received from Mr. Dwayne Blanchard on behalf of Small Craft Harbours, conditional on the following: i. Establishment of an appropriate Reserve Fund for capital contribution, with requirements that interest revenue only be utilized for current maintenance/operations, and capital amount only for Harbourfront development supporting an outer harbour marina development; ii. Clarification, to the satisfaction of Council, of the level of maintenance required for the five-year requirement of DFO; iii. Confirmation of insurance ramifications; iv. Investigation of inclusion of hold harmless provisions in any transfer from Environmental Liability. On March 24, 2003 the Municipality received a legal review of a proposed transfer agreement which provided recommended language changes and the following comment pertaining to environmental liability: This writer would urge great caution in connection with the environmental aspects of this transaction. The Phase 1 investigation prepared by Public Works and Government Services Canada does indicate some areas of concern. It is recommended that this environmental site assessment be reviewed by an independent environmental testing company experienced in this type of work for their views. In addition, some form of indemnification from the transferor to the Municipality ought to be included in the Agreement relating to environmental contaminants that may be discovered on the subject property in the future. On March 28, 2003 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution: THAT Council advise Mr. Dwayne Blanchard of SCH that its position remains as previously outlined February 21, 2003, namely that Council will consider acceptance of the conditional offer received, conditional on the following: i. Establishment of an appropriate Reserve Fund for capital contribution, with requirements that interest revenue only be utilized for current maintenance/operations, and capital amount only for Harbourfront development supporting an outer harbour marina development ii. Clarification, to the satisfaction of Council, of the level of maintenance required for the five-year requirement of DFO. iii. Confirmation of insurance ramifications. iv. Investigation of inclusion of hold harmless provisions on any transfer from Environmental Liability. In 2008 SCH produced a letter report summarizing the impacts of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) on Port Burwell operations (SCH, 2008). SCH identifies two fish species that may be at risk, and outlines the habitat compensation requirements for future dredging work, a copy of which is attached hereto as Appendix `F'. In 2005 and again in 2010 the Municipality, in partnership with proponents conducted Ferry Feasibility Studies. The Municipality went so far as to sign a Memorandum of Cooperation with the Village of Grand River as authorized by By-law No. 2006-070. In both cases no tangible actions resulted from the studies. In 2010 a qualitative assessment of the sedimentation problem at Big Otter Creek is completed by Shoreplan Engineering (ShorePlan Engineering Ltd., 2010). The study concludes that regular dredging is likely the most cost-effective solution for maintaining the harbour. On December 8, 2010 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham was presented with a Port Burwell East Pier Report from CJDL Consulting Engineers estimated required East Pier repairs ranging in cost from $49,000-$256,000. On September 12, 2011, as a result of on-going discussions with SCH Council acted on the determination of the need for a peer review and analysis of environmental risks for the Port Burwell Harbour. In lieu of providing any firm transfer grant amounts, SCH determined it would fund a peer review up to approximately $20,000. Stantec Consulting Ltd. was awarded the project in the amount of$19,778 plus applicable taxes. The assessment concludes that data gaps must be filled with a new Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) as well as a Phase II ESA to support an eventual risk assessment for the Site. THAT Stantec Consulting Ltd be retained to conduct a peer review for the Port Burwell harbour area, as outlined in their proposal dated September 9, 2011, subject to confirmation of funding from Small Craft Harbours. On September 29, 2011, pertaining to East Pier repairs the Administrator advised Council as follows: The lowest reasonable construction cost of$318,420+HST is considerably over the budgeted amount of$252,000 and does not include engineer costs. He added that there is no advantage to delay the project to spring. Should the project proceed, it was recommended that the difference be financed over a 2 to 3 year term rather than use capital reserves for the shortfall. Delay in commencement of the work may limit the ability to complete this fall. On October 6, 2011 Council passed By-law No 2011-089 authorizing Agreement No. 0082 for East Pier repairs to be completed in the amount of$320,072.50+HST As a note, the actual costs of the 2011 East Pier works were not fully accounted for until 2016 when Council allocated funds in the amount of$81,673.44 for unfinanced East Pier repair work. In 2012 the Municipality of Bayham prepares the Official Plan (Municipality of Bayham, 2012). This includes a Specific Policy Area (No.2), Mapping of Hazard Lands and Zoning information is attached hereto as Appendix 'G'. 3.3.2 Specific Policy Area No. 2 - Port Burwell Harbour In addition to the policies of Section 6.1, the lands within the "Hazard Lands" designation in Port Burwell which are generally situated south of Robinson Street, and east of the Big Otter Creek and extending into Lake Erie, are designated as "Specific Policy Area" on Schedule "D" to this plan and may be used to develop a marina and ancillary facilities. These lands will remain in a holding zone until such time as the conditions regarding development as outlined in Section 6.1 of this Plan can be accommodated to the satisfaction of the Municipality, in consultation with the Province and the Conservation Authority. In 2013 Terrapex conducted a Phase 1/II ESA on behalf of DFO (Terrapex Environmental Ltd., 2013). The report defines three areas of potential environmental concern (APECs)) located both on and off-site. The Subject Lands are all associated with Terrapex's APEC 1. Three monitoring wells are installed and three sediment sampling locations are placed within the harbour lands, in addition to three additional background sediment sampling locations outside of the harbour lands. Analytical results for soil indicated the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons (PHC) petroleum hydrocarbons fraction 2 (F2) in one sample and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in three samples that exceed the applicable Federal and/or Provincial guidelines. Groundwater in three locations exceeded the applicable guidelines for arsenic and iron. In sediment, PHC F3 and F4, PAHs and pesticides exceeded the applicable guidelines in up to five locations, including background sampling locations. An NCSCS score of 56.8 for the land lot portions of the Site (CS0001) categorizes the Site as `Class 2: Medium Priority for Action'. For the water lot portions (CS0002), the Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) aquatic sites classification system (ASCS) is applied and a score of 79.4 is assigned, corresponding to 'Class 1: High Priority for Action'. The study recommends additional soil sampling, including vertical delineation, as well as a round of groundwater sampling from all monitoring wells, in support of a Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PQRA) and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA) for the land lot portions. For the water lot portions, supplemental surficial sediment sampling, toxicology assessment and benthic survey are recommended to support a risk assessment. In 2014 IBI Group prepares a waterfront master plan study for Port Burwell (IBI Group, 2014). The report focuses on the valued economic and tourism aspects of the area although may not be in line with the economic realities of the Municipality of Bayham or Port Burwell. In 2014-2015 SNC-Lavalin completes a soil and groundwater assessment of the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) automation building (previously referred to as the PWGSC automation building by others) located on the west shore of Big Otter Creek (SNC Lavalin, 2015). PAHs, arsenic or selenium are observed in soil in excess of Federal and/or Provincial criteria in 4 of 7 sampling locations, while PAHs are observed in groundwater in excess of Federal and/or Provincial criteria in 3 of 3 monitoring wells. In 2015 SCH provided the Municipality with the following studies and corresponding summarized findings: i. Final Remedial Options Analysis & Remedial-Risk Management Action Plan - Sediments ii. Final Remedial Options Analysis & Remedial-Risk Management Action Plan - Soil & Groundwater iii. Site-Specific Human Health & Ecological Risk Assessment of Sediment at Port Burwell iv. Preliminary Quantitative Human Health Risk Assessment & Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment of Soil & Groundwater at Port Burwell FINAL REMEDIAL OPTIONS ANALYSIS & REMEDIAL/RISK MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN - SEDIMENTS ADMINISTRATIVE MONITORING The risk management plan for the Site while under Federal ownership would consist of administrative monitoring of land use changes by internal DFO staff to ensure that the risk assessment exposure and receptor assumptions are maintained. The identified contaminants that exceed guideline values at the site are considered unlikely to trigger remediation or additional risk management measures in the future, given the Site's restricted land use potential. A change in land use triggered by a change in jurisdiction (i.e., federal to provincial transfer) has an uncertain outcome with respect to risk assessment results, and new or additional assessment, and remediation and/or risk management work may need to be completed under a new land use scenario. If the property is divested to the Municipality of Bayham, the land use is expected to remain the same, although the jurisdiction would change. As a result of the jurisdictional change, the risk assessment may need to be re-evaluated to screen in parameters that specifically exceed provincial criteria, which have not been considered in the SSRA. If risk was identified as a result of this re-evaluation, further investigation and/or development of remediation/risk management options may be warranted. The administrative and operational considerations involved in the transfer of an active port and associated facilities from SCH to the Municipality of Bayham are considered outside the scope of this Remedial Options Analysis and Remedial/Risk Management Action Plan. PORT MAINTENANCE Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour is likely to continue providing dockage and marina services to recreational and commercial fishing vessels regardless of future ownership. Siltation of the harbour due to the accumulating sediment load from Big Otter Creek will require regular dredging in order to maintain small craft access. Past dredging works at the Site have used a direct in- water sediment disposal approach, as historically approved by the MOECC based on project-specific sediment analyses (Riggs Engineering Ltd., 2011). The results of the core sampling conducted as part of the SSRA indicate that concentrations of COPCs (i.e., PAHs and DDTs) vary with the depth of the sediment but at their maximum are not significantly different from the surface sediments. The results from the three cores do not indicate a consistent pattern with one showing a significant increase of COPC concentrations with depth; the other showing a decrease and the third showing no change. These apparent contradictions are likely the product of the heterogeneity associated with historical sediment deposition, making it difficult to predict the quality of the sediment at any particular location or depth; however, since the COPC concentrations at depth were not found to be greater than those assessed in surface sediments, if buried material was disturbed and brought to the surface during dredging activities, it is unlikely to represent a significant concern. Due to the limited number of cores collected and the observation that in one location the COPC concentrations increased with depth, dredging activities should be accompanied by monitoring of COPC concentrations in sediment in order to provide the information necessary to properly manage any material that contains significantly elevated concentrations (i.e., above the sediment quality standards). It is recommended that future dredging works for the purpose of maintaining port access should include the following elements to support the administrative monitoring approach and ensure that it remains protective of human health and the environment: i. Dredging design, sediment sampling/analysis plans and MOECC in- lake disposal approvals to be submitted to and reviewed by all site stakeholders. ii. Dredging works must maintain appropriate silt containment measures (e.g. silt curtains). iii. As-built dredging and disposal plans (including bathymetry of dredged channel and disposal area relative to IGLD 85) to be provided to all site stakeholders. FINAL REMEDIAL OPTIONS ANALYSIS & REMEDIAL/RISK MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN - SOIL & GROUNDWATER RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN The risk management plan for the Site while under Federal ownership will consist of administrative monitoring of land use changes by internal DFO staff to ensure that the risk assessment exposure and receptor assumptions are maintained. The impacts above AGRC at the Site are considered unlikely to trigger remediation or additional risk management measures in the future given the Site's restricted land use potential within a flood zone. The administrative and operational considerations involved in the transfer of an active port and associated facilities from SCH to the Municipality of Bayham are considered outside the scope of this Remedial Options Analysis and Remedial/Risk Management Action Plan. PRELIMINARY QUANTITATIVE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT & SCREENING LEVEL ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SOIL & GROUNDWATER AT PORT BURWELL RISK CHARACTERIZATION In surface soil, maximum concentrations of benzene, toluene, molybdenum and select PAHs (i.e., 1-methyl naphthalene, 2-methyl naphthalene, total methyl naphthalene, naphthalene and phenanthrene) exceeded ecological guidelines protective of aquatic life. Additionally, in groundwater, maximum concentrations of arsenic, iron, manganese and select PAHs (i.e., anthracene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, chrysene, fluoranthene, phenanthracene and pyrene) exceeded guidelines protective of aquatic life. TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT None of the COPCs identified in surface soil were found at concentrations that exceeded guidelines protective of terrestrial life. This includes plants, soil invertebrates, birds and mammals. All of the exceedances noted during the COPC screening were of guidelines protective of aquatic receptors (i.e., protective of the soil to groundwater to surface water exposure pathway). More specifically, the maximum concentrations of benzene and toluene were less than the CCME soil contact guidelines for the protection of plants and invertebrates and were less than the MOECC component guidelines protective of terrestrial receptors (i.e., plants, soil organisms, mammals and birds). Similarly, maximum concentrations of molybdenum, naphthalene and phenanthrene were less than the MOECC soil guidelines protective of terrestrial receptors (i.e., plants, soil organisms, mammals and birds). For 1-methyl naphthalene, 2-methyl naphthalene and total methyl naphthalene, guidelines for the protection of terrestrial receptors were not available from the CCME or MOECC. However, the maximum concentration of all low molecular weight PAHs (3 aromatic rings) was 8.3 mg/kg which was less than the ecological guideline of 29 mg/kg from the USEPA (2007) , which is based on the lowest guideline for the protection of soil invertebrates and avian and mammalian wildlife. Therefore, it is not anticipated that benzene, toluene, molybdenum, 1 - methyl naphthalene, 2- methyl naphthalene, total methyl naphthalene, naphthalene or phenanthrene pose a significant risk to terrestrial receptors (i.e., birds, mammals, soil invertebrates, terrestrial plants) at the Site. This includes species of conservation concern. AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT Concentrations in soil of benzene, toluene, molybdenum and select PAHs (i.e., benzo(g,h,i)perylene, 1 -methyl naphthalene, 2-methyl naphthalene, total methyl naphthalene, naphthalene and phenanthrene) exceeded guidelines protective of aquatic life. However, given the long-term nature of Site activities, it is reasonable to assume that the soil and groundwater has reached a steady-state in which groundwater concentrations are representative of leaching from soil. As such, the assessment of potential risks to the aquatic environment at the Site focused on COPC concentrations in groundwater. Therefore, although concentrations of benzene, toluene and naphthalene in soil exceeded the CCME groundwater check values for protection of aquatic life, concentrations of these COPCs in groundwater were less than guidelines, indicating that these COPCs do not pose a risk to aquatic receptors. This also includes species of conservation concern at the Site. Similarly, although soil concentrations of molybdenum, 1-methyl naphthalene, 2-methyl naphthalene and total methyl naphthalene exceeded MOECC guidelines protective of aquatic life, concentrations of these COPCs in groundwater were less than guidelines. Therefore, it is not anticipated that these COPCs pose a significant risk to aquatic receptors, including species of conservation concern, at the Site. In groundwater, maximum concentrations of arsenic, iron, manganese, anthracene, benzo (a) anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, chrysene, fluoranthene, phenanthracene and pyrene exceeded guidelines protective of aquatic receptors. However, for PAHs, all exceedances of CCME and MOECC groundwater guidelines were sampled in the vicinity of the vacant automation building, which is located greater than 100 m from the water's edge. Given the distance from the aquatic environment and the small number of exceedances (i.e., 4 out of 13 samples), it is considered unlikely that PAHs in groundwater pose a significant risk to aquatic receptors, including species of conservation concern, at the Site. For arsenic, the maximum concentration exceeded the CCME guideline, but all arsenic concentrations were below naturally occurring background concentrations in Ontario (i.e., 13 pg/L; Table I Full Depth Background Site Condition Standards). Therefore, arsenic is considered unlikely to pose a significant risk to aquatic receptors, including species of conservation concern, at the Site. Although an essential element required by all living organisms, high iron concentrations in well- aerated aquatic environments can result in the formation of a precipitate that can smother benthic organisms (e.g., benthic plants, benthic invertebrates, fish eggs). All samples exceeded the guideline; however, observations made during field sampling of sediment and benthic invertebrates in support of the assessment of the aquatic environment (conducted by Stantec under separate cover), did not find any evidence of iron precipitate. Therefore, it is not anticipated that iron poses a significant risk to aquatic receptors, including species of conservation concern, at the Site. For manganese, only one out of nine samples exceeded the freshwater chronic guideline for the protection of aquatic life from the BC MOE. Given that manganese is an essential nutrient required by all living organisms and is only slightly-to-moderately toxic to aquatic organisms (BC MOE, 2015), it is not anticipated that manganese poses a risk to aquatic receptors, including species of conservation concern, at the Site. In summary, it is not anticipated that COPCs identified in soil or groundwater pose a significant risk to aquatic or terrestrial receptors, including species of conservation concern, at the Site. SUMMARY The purpose of the human health preliminary quantitative risk assessment (PQRA) and screening level ecological risk assessment (SLERA) was to identify the presence or absence of impacts to soil and groundwater at the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (the "Site") in Port Burwell, Ontario, to determine whether or not concentrations of contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) pose unacceptable risk to human or ecological receptors. The PQRA/SLERA was completed using soil and groundwater data collected by Terrapex in 201 2, SNC in 2014, and Stantec in 2015. For the human health preliminary quantitative risk assessment (PQRA), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes exceeded risk based guidelines for commercial land use, for direct contact with soil and were carried forward into the PQRA. Groundwater is non-potable and not used as a source of drinking water, therefore it was not carried forward for further risk assessment. The results of the PQRA suggest that there are no risks to any of the four human receptors (Toddler Site Visitor , Adult Site Visitor, Landscape Worker and Construction Worker) due to direct exposure pathways (i.e., soil ingestion, soil dermal contact, inhalation of suspended soil particulate); exposure to all identified non-carcinogenic COPCs from soil resulted in HQs less than 0.2. Additionally, for the Adult Site Visitor and Landscape Worker receptors, average daily ingestion, dermal contact and inhalation exposure to benzene in Site soils resulted in a cancer risk that was less than 1 in 10 million. These results indicate that, as per Health Canada and MOECC guidance, the cancer risk associated with exposure to benzene at the Site can be considered to be "essentially negligible". For the SLER A, benzene, toluene, molybdenum, 1 - methyl naphthalene, 2- methyl naphthalene , total methyl naphthalene , naphthalene and phenanthrene in soil, and arsenic, iron, manganese, anthracene , benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene , benzo(ghi)perylene , chrysene , fluoranthene , phenanthrene, and pyrene in groundwater, were carried through for risk assessment. However, the results suggest that there are no significant risks to aquatic or terrestrial receptors at the Site, including species of conservation concern. The results of the site-specific risk assessment (SSR A) of the aquatic environment (Stantec, 2015) determined that there were no human health risks to the selected human receptors due to applicable exposure pathways (i.e., inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish caught at the Site) for all non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic COPCs. Similarly, the results of the ecological risk assessment suggested that, based on a weight- of-evidence approach, which used surface water chemistry, sediment chemistry, fish tissue residues and benthic community analysis, the COPCs identified within the surface water and sediment did not appear to pose an unacceptable risk to the viability of the aquatic community within Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie. Overall, these results suggest that there are no risks to any of the four human receptors due to direct exposure pathways (i.e., soil ingestion, soil dermal contact, inhalation of suspended soil particulate), and no risks to ecological receptors due to COPCs identified in soil and groundwater at the Site. However, should potable drinking water wells be proposed in the future, the groundwater should be resampled and reassessed for potential human health risk, prior to consumption by any individuals. Should the land use of the Site change, or should any camping facilities or buildings be constructed on the Site, further environmental assessment may be required to confirm the absence of risks (i.e., to confirm acceptable soil and/or groundwater quality). SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH & ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL RISK CHARACTERIZATION UNCERTAINTY EVALUATION The risk characterization step in the risk assessment integrates the information from the Problem Formulation, the Exposure Assessment and the Toxicity assessment. As a result, it is subject to all of the uncertainties already discussed. However, the use of multiple lines of evidence to investigate a causal relationship between the sediment quality and indices of environmental quality rely on a number of assumptions which also contribute to the uncertainty. These assumptions include the following: i. The TRVs act as an accurate benchmark for the effects noted with the benthic indices. ii. The reference stations provide a suitable benchmark for evaluating the benthic characteristics quantified within the Site area. iii. The physical and chemical characteristics of the sediment were complete in representing the contributing factors to the state of the benthic community. iv. The COPCs do not interact, other than within their own chemical classes (i.e., the toxic potential of manganese does not contribute to that of the PAHs or DDT (and metabolites)). Additional samples would reduce the uncertainty with most of these assumptions, but the study area is relatively large and diverse with each sediment sampling station having its own dynamic. Effort was made to accommodate this during the field program and subsequent analysis but a number of factors including sediment type and time of the year influenced how representative the data was. In many respects, the sampling program provided only a "snapshot". However, the potential toxicity of sediments predicted to be of concern were identified based on the presence of chemical parameters that exceeded either the ISQGs or the PELs. As previously discussed, the uncertainty and inherent conservatism in both of these environmental quality values results in the possibility that toxicity will not be observed even when chemical concentrations are found above their respective benchmarks. The fact that there was no clear relationship between the predicted toxicity and any observed adverse effects to the benthic community structure in samples collected within the Port Burwell study area, suggests that the chemical quality of the sediment is of minor importance and the results reflect other causal factors (e.g., physical/nutrient conditions of the sediment). CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The results of the ERA indicate that there are no unacceptable risks to semi- aquatic receptors from surface sediment and surface water at the Site. These results are also considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure through the ingestion of surface water. Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to terrestrial receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi-aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. The viability of the aquatic health community was assessed using a weight-of- evidence approach. Taking into consideration the results of the surface water chemistry, sediment chemistry and benthic community analysis, two of the three lines of evidence indicate that there are no significant effects on the aquatic life community. Based on a comparison of the sediment physical characteristics with the COPC toxic potential and benthic community indices, the strongest influence on potential adverse effects appears to be substrate composition, mainly the proportion of clay and silt, and the concentration of TOC. Consequently, the COPCs identified at the Site are not expected to pose unacceptable adverse effects to the viability of the aquatic community within Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie within the study area. SUMMARY The purpose of the site-specific human health and ecological risk assessment (SSRA) was to identify the presence or absence of impacts to sediment and surface water at the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (the "Site") in Port Burwell, Ontario, to determine whether or not concentrations of contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) pose unacceptable risk to human or ecological receptors. The SSR A was completed using sediment, surface water, benthic invertebrate, and fish data collected by Terrapex in 2012, and Stantec in 2015. For the human health risk assessment (HHRA), thallium, zirconium, and benzo (a) pyrene exceeded the guidelines for inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with surface water, and cobalt, iron, and uranium exceeded selected guidelines in fish tissue. In addition, acenaphthylene, and pyrene in sediment exceeded the selected sediment guideline for potential bioaccumulation in fish tissue. These COPCs were carried forward into the HHRA. The results of the HHRA suggest that there are no risks to the selected human receptors (Toddler Site Visitor, and Adult Site Visitor) due to inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish caught at the Site; exposure to all identified non- carcinogenic COPCs from soil resulted in HQs less than the target benchmark of 0.2. For the Adult Site Visitor, chronic inadvertent ingestion of surface water, chronic dermal contact with water, and ingestion of fish from the Site resulted in an estimated cancer risk greater than 1-in-100,000, the risk level considered to be "essentially negligible" by Health Canada. The fish consumption pathway was the primary exposure pathway for this estimated cancer risk. However, given the numerous conservative assumptions necessary in the exposure and risk estimation process, Stantec anticipates that actual on-Site risks posed by benzo(a)pyrene are negligible. Overall, the results suggest that there are likely no risks to human receptors due to exposure to sediment, surface water, or consumption of fish at the Site. For the ecological risk assessment (ERA), manganese, select PAHs and DDT (and metabolites) in sediment, and zinc in surface water were carried through for risk assessment. The results of the ERA indicate that there are no unacceptable risks to semi-aquatic receptors from surface sediment and surface water at the Site. This includes the potential for DDT and its metabolites to biomagnify in the food chain, thus resulting in a higher level of exposure for the top predators. Concentrations measured in fish tissue did not represent a concern to piscivorous birds and mammals. The results of the ERA are also considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure through the ingestion of surface water. Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to terrestrial receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi-aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. The viability of the aquatic health community was assessed using a weight-of- evidence approach. Taking into consideration the results of the surface water chemistry, sediment chemistry and benthic community analysis, two of the three lines of evidence indicate that there are no significant effects on the aquatic life community. The bioaccumulative potential of the COPCs was also assessed within fish but the results were more relevant to the assessment of birds and mammals than to the fish themselves as tissue-based toxicity limits were not available. Based on a comparison of the sediment physical characteristics with the COPC toxic potential and benthic community indices, the strongest influence on potential adverse effects appears to be substrate composition, mainly the proportion of clay and silt, and the concentration of TOC. Consequently, the COPCs identified at the Site are not expected to pose unacceptable adverse effects to the viability of the aquatic community within Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie within the study area. The results of the Preliminary Quantitative Human Health Risk Assessment and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (PQRA/SLERA) of the terrestrial environment (Stantec, 2015) determined that there were no human health risks to the selected human receptors due to direct exposure pathways (i.e., soil ingestion, soil dermal contact, inhalation of suspended soil particulate) for all non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic COPCs. Similarly, the results of the SLERA suggested that there are no significant risks to aquatic or terrestrial receptors at the Site, including species of conservation concern, from soil or groundwater at the Site. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi-aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. Overall, these results suggest that there are no human health risks to any of the human receptors due to inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish caught at the Site, and no risks to ecological receptors due to COPCs identified in sediment and surface water at the Site. Based on the results of the SSRA and the current land use, no further work and no remedial actions are currently being proposed for the Site. However, should the land use of the Site change, further environmental assessment may be required to confirm the absence of risks (i.e., to confirm acceptable sediment and/or surface water quality). The below chart provides a description of previously identified APECs at the Site with respect to the land parcels described in the 1998 land survey of the Subject Lands and surrounding properties (Kim Husted Surveying Ltd., 1998). Land Covet Jha) a.l a .3.Sallo flood zone 0.2g t'" Part 6 0.21 4.50 24.80 ..Pert 7 0.66 Qo0 a1.52 Total 79-06 Tablo N:Site Land Cover in Percentage 4 481. _ 0.25% l0.-O% J.359C T 0.63% 3147% 0.00 a 0.00 S2.52% Pall 1 unknown NIA NIA Pori Burwek Municipal East Beach and shore protection olong the Lake Erie shoreline east of Big otter Creek Port 2 DFO APEC 1 CS0001 (land) Includes piers,harbour walls and appurtenances and land parcels CS0002 fwaler) about the harbour,and west extension wall and associated water lots at the mouth of Big Otter Creek.Also includes the CCG oulornotion building fopprox'Matery 30MYJ oral a portion of the building's fenced enclosure (approxiinotaty 140MI).and tt,o municipal sewer oultal and related pipinrl and rnanhoies. Port 6 DFo N/A Wales lot In Lake Erie that includes the stone Ofeak wall and signal tower east of the mouth of Big Otter Creek Part 7 DFO NIA Water Sot in take Erie to the east of Part 6 Multiple Muhiple APEC 2 NIA off-Site kends odjoeenI to and west of owners properly boundary Multiple Multiple APEC 3 N/A Off-Site lands odjacent to and east of owners the property boundary DISCUSSION FINANCIAL BACKGROUND As has been noted numerous times, including within the 2016-2026 Capital Budget Report, the Municipality utilizes a mix of reserves, grant funding and tax levy to fund operations and capital projects. The Capital Budget does not rely on debt financing due to the financial realities of the Municipality and the need to preserve debt capacity. The Treasurer has attempted to minimize the capital impact on the levy by creating a dynamic reserve funding scheme. This scheme suits the Municipal financial reality and provides the greatest opportunity to minimize the impact of levy increases, however it is not considered a risk adverse scheme, and unplanned capital requirements have the capability to cause complications and financial strain within the 2016- 2026 capital funding model. In plain language the Municipality incorporated OMPF reductions, OPP cost increases, Ojibwa debt payments and associated legal through two methods: 1) Internal staff operating efficiencies; 2) Significantly reducing the annual Capital Levy The current funding strategy, which is the staff recommended funding strategy, requires adherence to core infrastructure funding and a dedicated path to restore capital funding, which over time, when funding has obtained semi-sustainable levels, would mitigate the risk of the strategy as it is currently funded. The above is the same reason staff have recommended Council consideration of asset portfolio reductions as at current funding levels the Municipality cannot adequately fund all assets, which results in a growing spectrum of liability. The above strategy coupled with the fact that the Municipality of Bayham has not historically held a normalized and stable capital levy increase, results in staff recommendation for Council to avoid any ventures, where possible, which are not risk averse as the Municipality has limited financial resources to allocate. Capital Levy 2011-2016 2011 $762,465 2012 $973,302 2013 $801,000 2014 $825,000 2015 $597,851 2016 $289,141 In addition to the chart above and below, which demonstrates the annual underfunding of the Capital Levy, staff also attach additional charts hereto as Appendix `H', which visualize the historic capital underfunding and sporadic nature in which asset categories have been historically funded as per Financial Information Return (FIR) data. Municipality of Bayham - Capital Levy Capital Tax Levy 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Average 2015 Levy $597,851 $615,787 1 $634,260 $653,288 1 $672,887 $693,073 $713,865 1 $735,281 $757,340 1 $780,060 $803,462 $705,930 2015 Levy- $933,180 $961,175 $990,011 $1,019,711 $1,050,302 $1,081,811 $1,114,266 $1,147,694 $1,182,125 $1,217,588 $1,254,116 $1,101,880 Corrected Five Year Historical Average $791924 $815,682 $840,152 $865,357 $891,317 $918,057 $945,599 $973,967 $1,003,186 $1,033,281 $1,064,280 $935,088 2016-2025 Capital $473,507 $1,780,594 $1,327,581 $1,107,024 $1,049,054 $1,039,535 $817,936 $1,018,541 $940,484 $1,190,000 $1,074,426 Budget Deficit -$335,329 $345,389 -$355,751 -$366,423 -$377,416 -$388,738 -$400,400 -$412,412 -$424,785 -$437,528 -$450,654 -$395,950 The Municipality is in deficit of funding in the amount of$395,950 annually on capital programs over the 10 year capital levy for an aggregate total of$3.95 million as noted above. The Municipality has several large life cycle asset replacements, betterments and rehabilitations over the next ten years both in linear assets, equipment and infrastructure which will be challenging to complete based on the current financial implications. Deferring the capital programs and replacements in the years projected only increases the funding deficit as the replacement or rehabilitation costs will inflate annually and make the capital deficit increase. In addition to funding capital programs as required, proper financial management requires the reserves to be replenished to be able to fund needs/events outside of the capital budget scope. The 2016-2018 years of the capital budget do not sustainably fund reserves for future years (i.e. unexpected asset failures) based on current projections and current asset conditions. The above is relevant in the context of harbour divestiture discussions and any asset acquisition discussions as historical capital funding, underfunding and Ojibwa and related liability requirements would dictate staff to strongly recommend Council not take on any additional liabilities unless said asset or venture has tangible benefits which outweigh the risks in the determination of Council. DIVESTITURE This report has been prepared, at the direction of Council, in an attempt to provide a holistic assessment of available information pertaining to Small Craft Harbours (SCH) Divestiture discussions to date. In assessing the historic actions, by the Municipality, pertaining to harbour divestiture and associated properties, it is evident that the process has been repetitive. The fact remains that the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham has continually explored the concept of harbor divestiture, from SCH to the Municipality, largely predicated on the considerations of Council in 2003: THAT Council advise Mr. Dwayne Blanchard of SCH that its position remains as previously outlined February 21, 2003, namely that Council will consider acceptance of the conditional offer received, conditional on the following: v. Establishment of an appropriate Reserve Fund for capital contribution, with requirements that interest revenue only be utilized for current maintenance/operations, and capital amount only for Harbourfront development supporting an outer harbour marina development vi. Clarification, to the satisfaction of Council, of the level of maintenance required for the five-year requirement of DFO. vii. Confirmation of insurance ramifications. viii. Investigation of inclusion of hold harmless provisions on any transfer from Environmental Liability. Described in further detail those conditions include: 1) Environmental Liability a. The environmental studies conducted to date by SCH have been based on Federal environmental standards where the Municipality would be held to Ontario Provincial environmental standards. i. `The administrative and operational considerations involved in the transfer of an active port and associated facilities from SCH to the Municipality of Bayham are considered outside the scope of this Remedial Options Analysis and Remedial/Risk Management Action Plan' This condition is about risk avoidance. Proceeding without specific language and protections possesses too great of unknown financial and environmental liabilities and risks given the financial realities of the Municipality. PSAB 3260 Liability of Contaminated Sites, which requires environmental degradation of land to be reported and accounted for on financial statements, reinforces this position. 2) Public Use Provisions a. Clarification, to the satisfaction of Council, of the level of maintenance required for the five-year requirement of SCH. b. Detailed accounts of funds expended by SCH over the five years proceeding potential transfer. Given the limited capital resources of the Municipality and the potential financial and insurance implications of harbour activities detailed understanding of the above provisions is required. This fact is furthered given the natural sedimentation forces and historical evidence of the same, in Bayham. Scholarly research from the peer reviewed Journal of Marine Policy reinforces the careful consideration of the above conditions: Because many of these divested harbours have legacy contaminant issues, divestiture transfers a variety of potentially complex environmental liabilities to new custodians, who may lack specific risk assessment experience or financial resources to implement costly remediation or monitoring programmes. For many federally owned harbours undergoing divestiture, the choice of dredge disposal options is often limited, because sediment contaminants often exceed sediment quality guidelines (SQGs). For example, in Nova Scotia recent changes in provincial environmental regulations related to disposal of dredge material under Division IV-Section 10 (1) (c) of the Environment Act, now means that some traditional land- based disposal methods are no longer acceptable. Dredge disposal at licensed waste disposal containment cell facilities (on land) or conventional landfill sites are viable, but expensive options. Because of these issues, many third party owners are reluctant to assume ownership due to liability concerns related to environmental contamination". 3) Transfer Payment a. An amount which would fully maintain all infrastructure or improve all 12 Harbour Divestiture in Canada: Implications of Changing Governance—Journal of Marine Policy,Walker et al. August 2015 infrastructure for a specified period of time, as determined by a qualified consultant, so that no levy requirements are utilized on the harbour lands. Divestiture is a complex discussion and possibility with various associated opportunities, risks and expenses. Council is proceeding, as it has over the past years, with extreme caution and only down a path with clear, objective net benefits to the Municipality that does not add additional risks to the current municipal risk portfolio. Report CAO 44/16 re Small Craft Harbours— Harbour Lands Divestiture has been prepared, at the direction of Council, utilizing available information for public information purposes. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-44/16 re Small Craft Harbours — Harbour Lands Divestiture be received for information. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO IX-, i o.p ' / � �-1 � ,, `•�(' ..�' � - .'. It�. ) ,} ICJ_ j ' ��( T w• l •i- M A" / J APPENDIX T' o- > • st _ A, - r� i.• . F , } ,t e� fi C 0 100 200 ca.aag m suN mis 251® Legend aien{/Pmie°t ® APp.otlmWe rorce:tdd site Areo Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Stantec ®Appmxim°te Aquoli,Site Are° Remedial Options Analysis and Remedial/Risk Management Action Plan Foperty Boundary Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour,Ontario Fg, N. Notes Z5 I.Co°rdnate System:NAn 1988 UTM Zane 19N Title 2.M,y 1,1973:National Arc Photo t,19 1 Ott Pod N:l),l a"r Photo. May 19.19I3,1:30,OD0.A23285.Photo 196.Ottowa,ON:peparlment of C-nergy'iom °ndRe°°o,°°°" Port Bunnell in 1973 3.PropeBy Boorda ry:Kim Hosted S—eying Lid.(19%).Plon I IR-626g, Project 92-45621.Reference HF 1,Feb-12,1998.1illsorburg,ON. AM I., ySchedule B - Port Burwell Facilities APPENDI �ck Legend 2010 Aerial Photography i' Red: Band 1 Green:Band 2 — 3 Blue: Band v, _ ato __ y1 —7 As 1 t fi r rh; - i • r R _ , r i a II. 1:3,046 0c 0 0.08 0.2 Kilometers Notes This map Is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and Is for reference only.Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be Port Burwell Facilities accurate,current,or otherwise reliable. ®Latitude Geographics Group Ltd. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 4 N A'. M A d • S T A E E T NV-AOE OF PORE MMNaL b 3r� � J/ � � v /* � fS€iFl� .e a •1 sn_ ®r � _ �, ° i T �.i�-r,er ,•w 1 �� 4 ti� `�,i �._ �` r,+nT r,i �*� I R - .e. fw!!r�` 'v ,f/�.c ,/\,�'�,•\�r —` \y j`, �- F } s� '! q,Wa'8 fj,•n G• \ �� —.�. . t _ ILI w i l T F r b JIM— .17 as •.w. — t''— —_� �4U'^S'R" `�1�^� !0.eFN1AE81.1�uTbA;].C.• APPENDIX Y T------ KEY MAP -17 ...1.1—A..f. PLAN I I R-JI :07 ......t..'"" .... ... . R.0,...V An -L 7- SCALE IISOOO(METRIC) '10'.'All ------------- L.,,d -ITE ----------�j ...... D"I .0 Eq..0114 —4 GROWN PART I LAKE E141E PART 2 LAKE ERIE CROWN POINT SCHEDULE POINT TYPE IDENTIFICATION N R-1- EASTING PART I PART P, CONTROL Zi E MONUMENT $IS 6 URONZE CAP 472,28"aa 545521I.?2D L-4 LN'i r ll CONTROL PENNY EPDXY TO THE MONUMENT STEEL PLATE OR t,K9 4?2O243.414 51S�52.591 OU GC E cc -ILL.?04 SISTS6.660 I-J F cc 4720S35.647 L4KE ERIE Ste 4721035.544 2 sill T IO�--Ti R—--AImS 14-977 ------------ ------ IN I IV L 9 ----------- 4 L 4,yf FRIf ...... PLAN OF SURVEY 1,I,-- OF PARTS OF LOTS 2 & 3 (WEST OF CRiCUS STREETI R AND LOTS I,2 & 3 (EAST OF ERIEUS STREETI AND PARTS OF LOTS 4 & 5 (CAST OF ERIEUS STREET) AND LOTS I,2,3 & 4 (WEST Or STRACHAN STREET) AND PART OF LOT 5 (WEST OF STRACHAN STREET) AND LOT 5 [EAST Of STRACHAN STREETI It AND T15UNNUMBERED BLOCKS CAST OF ERIEUS STREET, WEST OF STRACHAN STREET AND P A R T I P A R T 2 UNNUMBERED BLOCK AREA 14.297 HECTARES AREA • 21.687 HECTARES N EAST OF STRACHAN STREET, SOUTH FROM HAGERMAN STREET AND PARTS OF HAGERMAN STREET, ERIEUS STREET & STRACHAN STREET 7 REGISTERED PLAN 12 AND w E LOTSAND 6,7,8 & 9 SLOPE OF BANK AND PARTS OF LOTSPA 1 55 10 & 15 AND Rf O GEORGE STREET REGISTERED PLAN 197 AND PART OF THE ORIGINAL BED OF LAKE ERIE LYING INFRONT OF LOTS II & 12 CONCESSION I (FORMERLY TOWNSHIP OF SAYRAMI VILLAGE OF PORT BURWELL COUNTY OF EL6lN SCALE I . 1500 METRIC J.C.RUPERT LTD. ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS 1992 SURVEYOR CERTIFIC-A TE c— NOTES LESENO .T..r- 1"ll'%T— ree —1 — N"ene Ina�e..lel lane Nn —rr ............. , TO ITTT.1 111-111..1 F"wyj c'. CAUTIdONs 1 raaul.e rn•s cn 'o PLAN I I R We91s1TY 'Jr/�6 ae daaawAa1.ram a da, Tha Retelvea Deaaslraa APPENDIVE' Thls atah.e nal m 0aleo SePYemtrer 8!99? + A+an of Sua w�ras loa - '��j /.o�`�ff .1 The Plan—q A0.. /y,yE, y(�_(Th�{,e___- ❑etr.�5t 1Y Land Re9lerrar_. SY 0. RAITE fa the We 6,AtrY LAND SURVEY TEEN NICIAN p, slary a1 Elgin III Y. SCHEDULE I _ PART! LOT TRAY NT AWEA 'y � _ III III I 11 19552i 0 I�Ngt:l r ,, 1 11 -f'_ ^F 2 25Oa5 0 Hnttares �/` PART I 'ii 3 AC FR6TED 6AxNp5 FEDERAL CHOWN PROPERTY 1.762 H crates � POINT SCHEDULE POINT TTPE^DENTIf1E3_Ttprj H II INO EASTINS CONTROL .• I I - _ ''-""r• 31a NUYENT 5iB S BRONZE LAP tT2129+1.123 518328.228 6750122 :l'AR-0 ' trf -- CONTROL .PENNY EPO:Y TO THE R.I R.JF'1F �- � 77 CTRL / Y0NUUENT STEEL PLATE ON THE •17202A].s TA 513752.$ST II `'r 1 !� I JP I� )I 79 4!9 HT-HOIl I.--..._i__-, __`_,•'Y..yg_w�s.-R,. _ _ A IB 51554 6.16J ------' SSIS _ _ FT 2_i fl.69s 5r5519.90Y _51B 4T �q IYI KEY NAP � I . `5 SCALE 1.6000 INETRKI .J fl x PART I J i I J r►Rr 2� Y.cF77 Pl.All t :ri•R.W} II a . t ? w E - �T .. r,�• �•�. LAKE ERr£ LAKE ERIE LAKE E.RIE I— PLAN OF SURVEY xr �' OF PART OF LOT I I CONCESSION I AND PART OF THE ACCRETED LAND IN FRONT OF LOT II •rI CONCESSION I r3 I FORMERLY TOWNSHIP OF SAYHAM R,zFrT f i AI,�::rr•R.4rt .? r •.,„�, y N0Y4 VILLAGE OF PORT BURWELL •.W;.xq-=.-..: COUNTY OF ELG.1 N SCALE tl SOO 3 � METRIC d.G.RUPERT LTD. ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS / 1992 x �\ NOTES v\ aEanvr+ry h€NCW AAt&AIC eEArtl Nq] ErEwxEq ra T.E A K K'T LOnrn [A` xx� _ eNmx�aYgWq x sTevdEs er w�oX^iieM.a vri E JYST.f i ar E a.}TL�pR FN aA `\ awugn Wr aF a[NviaiEa i . CP Y.d v rXEN Ey `\ CgIVENSIaN eKYdlr of 0. ,�M � NCC vxn rol 5 hE -T—.0 Lan![ ,CET U eMveII+IA .0 Rr tVIalAcra LEGEND r a.awa. tw tren .. ..«.•,.,.;Xe� �' r� oY i.nnle:dN.aeJ a �t vrddrrwa+ R.P. erNlafr frdaPlen r� xen. srara•red n� � k 1. P A R T 3 "t — r, s �' V +1`n 1 - '• •.1� zSII..Uce2.+R 1r.VYed.EdrIL rrYrur�O e.Rt<r.w�rr'xS.. dC=.nIEn,.csR w:T.I eInF r.I rCrdA.T•E ] s. THE Rr r _ti -----—----_---------- ___ ....................... adrn`a..r.....Y....cl..•a.I.n. z. s, I N/,Ri F, v t x i on a�x rl dne f�..ero. Y-r AN RupEffr L ED'..ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR'S, _ 90 CuR T15 STREE r, S r... rNOMA S,ON IA X0 RRON,<(3I9)631-T327 FAX(5191 CJJ-BA OJ P i,A-g2 I l2tIT]6•d• I Y e � T APPENDIX'G' 3.3.1 Specific Policy Area No. 1 — Elliott Road Notwithstanding the"Agriculture"policies of this Plan to the contrary,the lands comprising approximately 43 hectares in Part Lot 15,Concession 10 of the Municipality of Bayham and bounded by Green Line to the north, Provincial Highway 3 to the south, Elliott Road to the east and a wooded area to the west,and occupied by ten (10)existing non-farm residential dwellings may accommodate a total of twenty(20)non-farm dwellings in the area designated as "Specific Policy Area" on Schedule"Al"to this plan. 3.3.2 Specific Policy Area No. 2— Port Burwell Harbour In addition to the policies of Section 6.1,the lands within the"Hazard Lands"designation in Port Burwell which are generally situated south of Robinson Street,and east of the Big Otter Creek and extending into Lake Erie, are designated as"Specific Policy Area"on Schedule"D"to this plan and may be used to develop a marina and ancillary facilities. These lands will remain in a holding zone until such time as the conditions regarding development as outlined in Section 6.1 of this Plan can be accommodated to the satisfaction of the Municipality, in consultation with the Province and the Conservation Authority. 3.3.3 Specific Policy Area No. 3—Chateau Wyndemere The re-development of the former church retreat lands comprising 22.1 hectares of land located south of Nova Scotia Line in Part Lot 6, 7,8, Concession 1,will require an Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment prior to any development.The approval authority will identify the required studies,through pre-consultation,prior to any amendment to this Plan, which shall include, at a minimum, the following. a) Studies completed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Environment and the Municipality with respect to the proposed sewage and water services in accordance with Sections 3.1.3.2 and 5.1 of the Official Plan; b) Completion of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) in accordance with Section 2.2.3.3 of the Official Plan; c) Cultural and An archaeological assessments to be completed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture as per Section 2.6.3 of the Official Plan; d) An agricultural impact assessment, to be completed to the satisfaction of the approval authority. e) Adequate and appropriate access to a public road. f) A development agreement entered into between the developer and the Municipality, which shall address, but is not limited to, vehicular access to the lands Official Plan of the Municipality of Bayham Revised 2012 Page 3-13 SECTION 6 NATURAL HAZARD LANDS 6.1 HAZARD LANDS DESIGNATION 6.1.1 General 6.1.1.1 The "Hazard Lands" designation applies to areas which exhibit or potentially exhibit a hazardous condition as a result of their susceptibility to flooding,erosion,dynamic beach hazards,subsidence, slumping, inundation or the presence of unstable soils, unstable bedrock, or steep slopes. 6.1.1.2 In the Municipality of Bayham the boundaries of the "Hazard Lands" designation have been generalized on Schedule"A2","B","C",and"D"to follow the regulation limit determined by the Long Point Region Conservation Authority due to the absence of detailed engineered flood line mapping in the Municipality. These areas may be used for any of the uses permitted in the underlying land use designation found on the map. In all cases the location of buildings and structures for purposes other than flood or erosion control will be regulated through the provisions of the Zoning By-law after Municipal Council has consulted the Conservation Authority where applicable. 6.1.1.3 The "Hazard Lands" designation within Port Burwell, adjacent to Big Otter Creek was determined through the simulation of the 100-year hydraulic flood as established by the Conservation Authority. The lands within the"Hazard Lands"designation represent the engineered Flood plain for the Big Otter Creek. Bridges, culverts, hydro structures and boathouses without residential quarters, are permitted. 6.1.2 Buildings and Fill No buildings and structures shall be permitted in the "Hazard Lands" except where a permit or written clearance is obtained from the Conservation Authority or where such buildings, structures or fill are intended for flood or erosion control and are approved by the Municipal Council and/or the Conservation Authority. 6.1.3 Flood Control Work Whenever any flood control or other works are undertaken which result in changes in any area designated as "Hazard Lands",such changes will be incorporated into the appropriate Land Use Plan, by an amendment to this Plan. 6.1.4 Land Dedication Under the Planning Act Where new development is proposed on a site, part of which is designated as"Hazard Lands"in the plan,then such lands shall not necessarily be acceptable as part of the dedication for park purposes as required under the Planning Act. All lands dedicated to the Municipality shall be conveyed in a physical condition satisfactory Official Plan of the Municipality of Bayham Revised 2012 Page 6-1 to the Municipality. 6.1.5 Setbacks and Lotlines Building setbacks will be imposed from the margins of hazard lands in relation to the kind,extent and severity of the existing and potential hazards after consultation with the Conservation Authority. 6.1.6 Consideration of Amendments 6.1.6.1 Where any land designated as"Hazard Lands"is under private ownership,the Plan does not intend that this land will necessarily remain as hazard land indefinitely, nor shall it be construed as implying that such land is free and open to the general public or that the land will be purchased by the Municipality or any other public agency. Applications for the redesignation of"Hazard Lands"for other purposes may be considered by the Municipal Council after consultation with the Conservation Authority and various Ministries or agencies and after consideration of the following: a) The existing physical hazards; b) The potential impacts of these hazards; c) The proposed methods by which these impacts may be overcome in a manner consistent with accepted engineering techniques and resource management practices; and, d) The costs and benefits in monetary, social and biological value in terms of any engineering works and/or resource management practices needed to overcome these impacts. 6.1.6.2 There is no public obligation, however, either to redesignate or to purchase any area designated "Hazard Lands"particularly if there is an existing or potential hazard that would be difficult or costly to overcome,and furthermore,any studies or plans required by the Municipality or the Conservation Authority must be prepared by the applicant/landowner at his own expense. 6.1.7 Valley Walls and Top of Bank 6.1.7.1 Valley walls and banks adjacent to the actual flood plain or valleylands system in the "Hazard Lands"designation may be subject to erosion or instability due to soil and slope characteristics. In many cases, these lands also possess unique physical features, which further warrant their preservation. 6.1.7.2 Valley walls and the top of bank shall be considered to extend from the flood plain to a distance of 30 metres from the top of bank of all flood plain areas. Valley walls are the area of lands between Official Plan of the Municipality of Bayham Revised 2012 Page 6-2 the watercourse and the top of bank. The top of bank is defined as the highest point of the valley walls as determined by a 3:1 (run:rise)elevation,which begins 15 metres back from the toe of bank of the watercourse. 6.1.7.3 Lands within the valley walls and top of bank areas are intended primarily for the preservation of the natural landscape. Such uses as agriculture,outdoor recreation, nursery gardening,forestry,public or private parks, or other outdoor recreation functions, may be permitted. 6.1.7.4 The erection of buildings, grading, or any other construction may be undertaken in this area provided that: a) Engineering reports are prepared at the cost of the owner/applicant to ensure that the proposed construction will not be endangered by possible erosion or land slippage and that adequate tableland exists to ensure proper sewage servicing. b) The development is compatible with the natural landscape and does not adversely alter the valley features or result in extensive clearing of wooded areas. c) Written permission is received from the Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources. 6.1.8 Lake Erie Shoreline 6.1.8.1 The Lake Erie shoreline area is a strip of land immediately adjacent to Lake Erie that is influenced by flooding,erosion,and dynamic beach hazards and may present a hazard to any structures within this area. For the purpose of the Official Plan the"Hazard Lands"will begin at the furthest landward limit of these three shoreline hazards. a) The flooding hazard limit will extend for a distance determined by the following formula: 100 yr. + 15 metres (engineered flood allowance for wave flood level uprush and other water related hazards) b) The erosion hazard limit will extend for a distance determined by the following formula: D = 3h + 100r(or) 30 metres (whichever is greater) Where D = Setback(metres) measured from toe of bluff h = Difference in elevation between top of bluff and toe of bluff which Official Plan of the Municipality of Bayham Revised 2012 Page 6-3 may or may not be below or above lake level elevation Note: Lake level is elevation 173.85 metres ASL(GSC datum)(average for last ten (10)years during November to March period) 100 = Constant representing 100 years of protection r= Rate of erosion in metres per year at the point under consideration, as determined by the appropriate Conservation Authority. c) The dynamic beach hazard limit will extend for a distance determined by the following formula: flooding hazard limit as + dynamic beach allowance determined by subsection 6.1.8.1 of 30 metres a) 6.1.8.2 The policy of this Official Plan is to allow structures within this area only if the erosion at the building site in question has been decreased to zero by a stabilization project. Such stabilization project must be: a) Designed and supervised by a registered Professional Engineer; b) Approved by the appropriate Conservation Authority, Municipal Council and the Ministry of Natural Resources. 6.1.8.3 In some cases, buildings and structures may be erected closer to the waterline than the distance calculated through the application of the formula in subsection 6.1.8.1 a) of this Plan. Such buildings and structures may be associated with water-related uses such as marinas, docks and boathouses,and in all cases,the erection or expansion of all such buildings and structures shall be subject to the approval of the appropriate Conservation Authority. 6.1.8.4 For areas that are exposed to the 1:100 year lake level and wave uprush as defined by the Ministry of Natural Resources, new development,and additions to,or relocations of existing structures,shall incorporate floodproofing measures and shall be subject to the approval of the Municipal Council, Ministry of Natural Resources and the appropriate Conservation Authority. 6.1.9 Development Policies 6.1.9.1 The following policies will apply for any proposed development within the "Hazard Lands" designation: a) Development within the defined portion of a dynamic beach, or in areas which will initiate or increase existing flooding hazards, erosion rates, or dynamic beach Official Plan of the Municipality of Bayham Revised 2012 Page 6-4 processes along areas of the Flood plain, valley walls and Lake Erie shoreline will not be permitted. b) On the Lake Erie shoreline, the approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources will also be secured before Council gives favourable consideration to any shoreline- related development. c) Vehicular and pedestrian mobility to and from sites within the "Hazard Lands" designation must be ensured during times of emergency(ie.flooding, erosion etc.). d) No new development of buildings or other structures will be permitted on the toe of slope if it is unstable and susceptible to erosion. Slope stabilization measures shall be undertaken in accordance with the advice of the appropriate Conservation Authority. e) No development involving institutional uses, essential emergency services, or involving the disposal, manufacture,treatment,or storage of hazardous substances will be permitted. 6.1.10 Docks and Waterfront Structures 6.1.10.1 Docks, waterfront and marina structures on property abutting water shall: a) Be subject to the approval of the appropriate Conservation Authority,and where title to the bed of the waterway is vested with the Crown, the Ministry of Natural Resources; b) Be designed,constructed and maintained in a manner that contributes to the amenity of the Municipality; c) Be capable of withstanding damaging storms, ice and high water conditions, or alternatively be designed to be removed during winter months. Seasonal structures are to be removed prior to winter freeze-up; d) Not contain sanitary facilities unless connected to municipal sewers; e) Be located so as not to interfere with navigation or aids to navigation; f) Be constructed and placed so as to minimize the impact on natural vegetation and topography; g) Not contain any residential accommodations. Official Plan of the Municipality of Bayham Revised 2012 Page 6-5 OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE MUNICIPALITY of BAYHAM SCHEDULED' W PORT BURWELL: o N LAND USE z and CONSTRAINTS H Land Use Residential ti Multi Unit Residential ° Harbour Residential/Commercial a Commercial LLI M S Institutional N Industrial wA Lo T A" A s m Open Space X X LUN - Conservation Lands Specific Policy Areas O LIBB EST N � ' Constraints oHazard Lands Sewage Treatment Facilities �I Fyq�F Existing Petroleum Wells Base Features � County Roads a Local Roads e��eq �y qLF v SPECIFIC POLICY Lake Erie a AREA NO.2 m c 0 U 2 N N C O . U W �� L � ; S co 0 125 250 500 o Metres Q 9 1:10,000 o Schedule'D'forms part of Official Plan 0 of the Municipality of Bayham and must M be read in conjunction with the written text. January 2012 3.3 Holding Zones In any zone which is accompanied by the holding symbol "h", the uses normally permitted by that zone for lands, buildings or structures may only be allowed when the holding symbol is removed by amendment to this By-law or any subsequent holding by- law. Permitted uses, when the holding symbol (h) is applied, are limited to those that existed on the date when the holding by-law was passed. The purpose of individual holding zones is as follows: a) hl Purpose: To ensure public health and safety, an agreement with the Municipality, or the satisfying of conditions of severance, which address impacts of Z611-2012 new development to the applicable proposed water supply system and/or sewage treatment and disposal system; and which may include issues relating to water capacity, water quantity, water quality, and financial costs will be required prior to the removal of the"hl"zone symbol. b) h2 Purpose: To ensure orderly development, a subdivision agreement with the Municipality,which addresses financial and servicing impacts of new development to the Municipality,will be required prior to the removal of the"h2"zone symbol. c) h3 Purpose: To ensure the mitigation of impacts to natural heritage features and their ecological functions, an Environmental Impact Study will be required prior to the removal of the"h3"zone symbol. d) h4 Purpose: To ensure parcels of land do not become landlocked,proof of access to a public right-of-way by the proponent will be required prior to the removal of the"h4" zone symbol. 3.4 Application of Regulations No person shall within any zone use any land or erect, build, construct, reconstruct, relocate, excavate for, alter, add to, enlarge, extend or use any building or structure, except in conformity with this By-law for the zone in which such land,building, structure or use is located. 3.5 Defined Areas All zones may be subdivided into one or more defined areas within which greater or lesser restrictions shall apply. These defined areas shall be designated by reference to the symbol of the zone within which each such defined area is located together with a number so as to differentiate different defined areas within a zone from each other and from other areas within the zone. 3.6 Exceptions for Defined Areas Within any zone there may apply exceptions with respect to a defined area and, in addition to such exceptions, all provisions of this By-law including the general use regulations and the special use regulations applicable to the zone within which the defined area is located shall apply to the defined areas; provided that, unless a contrary intention appears from the exceptions,the following shall apply: a) If the exceptions establish regulations different from the general provisions of this By-law, including the general use regulations and special use regulations applicable to the zone within which the defined area is located, the exceptions shall supersede and prevail over such corresponding regulations of this By-law. 3-3 b) If the exceptions establish one (1) or more specifically permitted uses of the defined area, such permitted use or uses shall be the only purpose or purposes for which land, buildings or structures within the defined area may be used; and c) If the exceptions specifically permit one (1) or more uses in addition to those otherwise permitted in the zone within which the defined area is located, any and all of the other exceptions applicable to the defined area shall also apply to the additional permitted use or uses and not only to the uses not otherwise permitted in the zone. 3.7 Multiple Zones Where a lot is subdivided into more than one zone, the regulations applicable to these zones shall apply to the respective areas so zoned, and the zone lines shall be deemed to be lot lines for the purposes of this By-law. 3.8 Interpretation of Zone Boundaries Where any uncertainty exists as to the location of the boundary of any of the said zones as shown on the zoning maps,the following shall apply: a) Unless otherwise shown, the boundary of the zones as shown on the zoning maps are the centre lines of the road allowance or lot lines and the projection thereof b) Where a zone boundary is indicated as approximately following lot lines, such lot lines shall be deemed to be the said zone boundary; c) Where a zone boundary is indicated as approximately parallel to the line of any road and the distance from such road is not indicated, such zone boundary shall be construed as being parallel to such road and the distance therefrom shall be determined by the use of the scale shown on the zoning maps; d) Unless otherwise indicated, a road, railway right-of-way, or watercourse included on the zoning maps is included within the zone of the adjoining lands on either side thereof; and where such road, right-of-way, or watercourse serves as a boundary between two or more different zones, a line midway in such road, street, lane, right- of-way, or watercourse and extending in the general direction of the long division thereof is considered the boundary between zones unless specifically indicated otherwise; e) In the event a road, street, lane or railway right-of-way shown on the zoning maps is closed, the land formerly in said road or right-of-way shall be included within the zone of the adjoining land on either side of the said closed road or right-of-way, and the zone boundary shall be the former centre line of the said closed road or right-of- way; f) Where any zone boundary is left uncertain after application of the preceding provisions, then the boundary line shall be determined according to the scale on the zoning maps in the office of the Municipality. 3.9 Conservation Authority Regulation Limit 3.9.1 Any zone which is accompanied by the hatch/shading symbol identified as"conservation authority regulation limit",the uses normally permitted by that zone for lands,buildings or structures may only be allowed when written approval is obtained from the Conservation Authority. Permitted uses, when the"conservation authority regulation limit" symbol is applied, are limited to those that existed on the date when the holding by-law was passed. 3.9.2 The conservation authority regulation limit does not delimit the extent of all the areas regulated by the Regulation(Ontario Regulation 178/06). Mapping will be periodically updated by the Conservation Authority as more detailed information becomes available. The areas described in the text of the Regulation prevail over the delineated boundary or where a line is absent. 4-21 By-law shall apply to prevent the continued use of the lot as reduced as if no such acquisition had taken place,provided that: a) No further change is made in the dimensions, area or any other characteristics of the lot as reduced, subsequent to the date of such acquisition, that would increase the extent of the said non-conformity; and b) No building or structure or addition thereto is erected on the lot as reduced, subsequent to the date of such acquisition, except in accordance with all the provisions hereof for the zone in which such lot is located. 4.52.2 In the case of a road widening dedication,the land that has been or will be dedicated shall be included in any calculation for the purpose of determining lot area, coverage,height, parking, landscaped open space, floor area, floor area ratio, and the location of any permitted building or structure relative to the required side or rear yards,provided any building or structure is located wholly within the boundary of the land remaining after the dedication. 4.53 Ancillary Sale of Automobiles Sales of automobiles ancillary to a motor vehicle service station, public garage, or motor vehicle body shop shall be limited to maximum of six 6 automobiles being stored, kept or displayed for sale on the site at anytime. 4.54 Adult Entertainment Parlours 4.54.1 Notwithstanding any other provision of this By-law, an Adult Entertainment Parlour shall be prohibited in any zone or on any site or location that is situated less than 500 metres from an existing residential or institutional use. 4.54.2 An Adult Entertainment Parlour shall also be prohibited in any zone or on any site or location that is situated less than 500 metres from any zone that permits residential or institutional uses. 4.55 Minimum Distance Separation Formulae 4.55.1 The Minimum Distance Separation Formula I shall be applied to any proposed development in all zones, excluding any hamlet or village zones. 4.55.2 The Minimum Distance Separation Formula II shall be applied to any new or expanding livestock or poultry facility. 4.56 Conservation Authority Regulation Limit Notwithstanding any other provisions of this By-law, where lands are located within the defined area labelled as "conservation authority regulation limit" on any schedule to this By-law, no development shall be permitted without written approval from the conservation authority. Development shall mean the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind; any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or potential use of the building or structure; increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure; site grading; or the temporary or permanent placing, dumping or removal of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere. 11-1 SECTION 11 VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL (R2) ZONE REGULATIONS 11.1 Permitted Uses No land shall be used and no buildings or structures shall be erected, used, or altered in the Village Residential(R2)Zone except for the following purposes: Double duplex dwelling; Multi-unit residential use; Triplex dwelling; Townhouse and rowhouse dwelling; Apartment building; Boarding house or rooming house; Senior citizen home; Group home; Home occupation; Accessory buildings and structures. 11.2 Permitted BuildinEs and Structures Buildings and structures for the permitted uses; Accessory buildings and structures for the permitted uses. 11.3 Minimum Lot Area Triplex, double duplex, Port Burwell,Vienna: 340 m2 per dwelling unit townhouse, or rowhouse dwellings: Straffordville: 400 m2 per dwelling unit 325 m2 for each of the first four (4)dwelling units and 93 m2 for 10 units or less: Apartment buildings or each additional dwelling unit multi-unit dwellings: thereafter More than 10 units: 340 m2 per dwelling unit Boarding or rooming house, senior citizens home, 557 m2 for the first ten(10) nursing home or group homes: rooms capable of being occupied and 46 m2 for each additional room thereafter. 11.4 Minimum Lot Frontage Triplex, double duplex,townhouse, or rowhouse dwellings: 25.0 metres All other dwellings: 10.0 metres.per dwelling unit or 40.0 metres.,whichever is less 11.5 Maximum Building Coverage 50% 11.6 Minimum Floor Area Triplex, double duplex dwelling units: 80.0 m2 Apartment building units: 50.0 m2 Boarding or rooming house, senior citizens/nursing home or group homes: 40.0 m2 11.7 Minimum Front Yard Depth 6.0 metres. 11.8 Minimum Side Yard Width Dwelling with an attached garage or 1.2 metres plus 0.5 metres for each additional carport: or partial storey above the first storey Dwelling without an attached garage 1.2 metres plus 0.5 metres for each additional or carport: or partial storey above the first storey for one side and 3.0 metres on the other side Dwelling situated on a corner lot: 4.5 metres on the side abutting a public street and a minimum of 1.5 metres on the other side 11.9 Minimum Rear Yard Depth 9.0 metres. or one-half the height,whichever is greater. 11.10 Resulations for Accessory BuildinEs Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 4.2,the following shall apply: Previous a) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph a), no accessory building shall be Section located within 6.0 metres of a public street. 11.11 a) removed by b) Maximum Height- 3.5 metres. Z556-2008 c) Maximum Floor Area- 18.5 square metres. 11.11 Exceptions-VillaEe Residential(R2)Zone 11.11.1 11.11.1.1 Defined Area R2-1 as shown on Schedule"H"to this By-law. 11.11.1.2 Permitted Uses Dwelling,Four-Unit Restaurant, drive-in or take-out, as an accessory use. 11.11.1.3 Permitted Buildings and Structures Existing buildings and structures for the permitted uses. 11.11.1.4 Minimum Floor Area 55.0 square metres per dwelling unit. 19-1 SECTION 19 TOURIST COMMERCIAL (C3) ZONE REGULATIONS 19.1 Permitted Uses No land shall be used and no buildings or structures shall be erected, used, or altered in the Tourist Commercial(0)Zone except for the following purposes: Bed and Breakfast Lodging or Tourist Home; Bus depot; Commercial fishing operations, excluding any commercial processing operations; Hotel,motel; Marina and accessory uses, including boat storage and repairs; Restaurant; Retail service shop; Tavern; Travel trailer camping park; Accessory use including one dwelling unit as an accessory use; 19.2 Minimum Lot Area Public sanitary sewage disposal service,but no public water supply: 900m2 Public water and sanitary sewage disposal services are available: 55W Tourist commercial uses providing lodging / accommodations: 555 m2 for the first ten (10)rooms capable of being occupied and 46 in for each additional room thereafter 19.3 Minimum Lot Frontage 15.Om 19.4 Maximum Lot Coverage 50% 19.5 Maximum Building Height 12.0m 19.6 Minimum Floor Area Commercial Use: 1 W Accessory dwelling units: In accordance with Section 4.45 Accessory single detached dwelling: 6W 19.7 Minimum Front Yard Depth 6.0 metres 19.8 Minimum Side Yard Width 4.5m 19.9 Minimum Rear Yard Depth 10.0m 19.10 Buffer Strip Where a C3 Zone abuts a Residential, Institutional or Open Space Zone, a buffer strip shall be provided along the abutting lot lines having a minimum width of 2.0 metres. 19.11 Regulations for Travel Trailer Park Regulations related to the establishment and operation of a travel trailer park shall be as set down by the Tourism Act, and regulations thereto as amended from time to time. 19.12 Dwelling Units No commercial building wherein gasoline, petroleum products, paint or any other highly flammable, toxic or explosive products are handled in quantity shall have accessory dwelling units. Where such dwelling units exist and the use of the commercial building changes to a use involving the aforementioned products, the said dwelling units shall cease to be occupied as dwelling units. 19.13 Exceptions-Tourist Commercial(C3)Zone R1 w \ SEE SCHEDULE A-MAP No.14 I hl ° OS1 SEE SCHEDULE A-MAP No.13C2 / OS2 C3 OS1 R1 a R1 OS2' d 1 c• �,� R1 -- Ln ° C OS1 q I C2 A R1 C3(h2) �go � R2 M4 1-2 o1v R1 7 C2 R2(h2) - R17 C3(h2 C3 rssYEsr R1 SEE INS7" h2 R1 ( ) �\ Fy R2 h2 R1 OS2 "NSET MAP \�\ =I� R1_ — eANNAHsz MH y R2 WATERLOOS — R1-7 OS2 R1-10 � ': R1� �� R1(h2) R2 ° R1 OS2-9 1 N� C1 I R2 buNGTONSI C2 y C1 C2 --- I OS2-5(h2)y 5 I I I R2 $—R1 e w MIH C2 MH \ OS2 5 h \ \ r � R2 r N OS2=5(h2) � R1 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Legend SCHEDULE I NORTH (� LPRCARegulationLimit o 00 200 NUR aoo PORT BURWELL Metres APPENDIX'H' 2009 Annual 2009 Capital Budget 2009 Capital Levy Percentage(%)of Levy 2009 Closing Percentage(%)of Net Book Amortization Funding/Asset Class Net Book Value Value/Asset Class Ge' $14,488 $40,650 $32,000 221% 1.45% Fire $65,284 $330,675 $31,412 48% $1,219,492 Protective inspection and control $3,502 $0 $0 0% $21,149 Emergency measures $0 $0 $0 0% $0 SU, $330,675 $31,412 46% $1,240,641 2.33°/0 Roads-Paved $654,112 $387,000 $47,869 7% $26,958,379 Roads-Unpaved $36,748 $148,600 $19,220 52% $648,121 Roads-Bridges and Culverts $20,085 $0 $0 0% $125,721 Roadways-Traffic Operations&Roadside $19,334 $0 $0 0% $640,742 Winter Control-Except sidewalks,Parkin Lot $1,731 $0 $0 0% $11,730 Parkin $510 $0 $0 0% $509 Street lighting $2,214 $20,000 $20,000 903% $23,057 Other $111,796 $240,000 $25,000 22% $955,347 SUB TOTA $846 530 795 600 $112,089 13% $29,363 606 Wastewater collection/conveyance $234,573 $625,605 $0 0% $15,106,601 Wastewater treatment&disposal $72,456 $0 $0 0% $1,932,366 Urban storm sewers stem $0 $0 $0 0% $0 Rural storm sewers stem $0 $0 $0 0% $0 Water treatment $50,719 $0 $0 0% $1,938,050 Water distribution/transmission $24,216 $2,216,978 $0 0% $2,033,235 39.38%a Public health services $257 $10,000 $10,000 3891% $3,352 Cemeteries $0 $6,093 $6,093 NA $19,932 Other $0 $0 $0 0% $0 SUB T' 257 $16,093 SEEM0.04% Parks $14,029 $7,886 $7,886 56% $494,878 Harbour/Beach $0 $13,972 $13,972 NA $0 Rec.Fac. $6,867 $15,000 $15,000 218% $207,852 Libraries $3,778 $0 $0 0% $51,348 Museums/Culture $7,3471 $21,662 $21,662 295% $184,061 SUB TOTAL 183% $938,139 1: $1,344,046 $4,084,121 $250,114 $67 $53,351,124 $1 Relied Heavily on 2008 Unexpended Capital NOTES ($600,000+),thus basically no capital levy in 2009 and that would indicate little to no Capital was completed in 2008 2010 Annual 2010 Capital Budget 2010 Capital Levy Percentage(%)of Levy 2010 Closing Percentage(%)of Net Book Amortization Funding/Asset Class Net Book Value Value/Asset Class Ge" $13,093 $25,500 $25,500 194.76% $76 1.40% Fire $69,552 $869,000 $170,500 245.14% $1,314,135 Protective inspection and control $2,299 $6,000 $6,000 260.98% $31,850 Emergency measures $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 SUBiMTAL 16 245.65% 2.47% Roads-Paved $544,187 $811,220 $309,900 56.95% $26,590,776 Roads-Unpaved $19,938 $92,000 $0 0.00% $628,183 Roads-Bridges and Culverts $3,837 $33,000 $0 0.00% $198,884 Roadways-Traffic Operations&Roadside $12,682 $0 $0 0.00% $647,014 Winter Control-Except sidewalks,Parking Lots $1,013 $0 $0 0.00% $10,717 Parking $76 $0 $0 0.00% $433 Street lighting $1,678 $15,000 $5,000 297.97% $21,379 Other $26,189 $311,000 $0 0.00% $984,911 SUB TO $609,600 $1,262,220 $314,900 51.66% $29,082,297 Wastewater collection/conveyance $204,806 $508,843 $0 0.00% $14,955,772 Wastewater treatment&disposal $77,938 $0 $0 0.00% $2,435,120 Urban storm sewer system $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 Rural storm sewer system $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 Water treatment $52,244 $0 $0 0.00% $1,888,468 Water distribution/transmission $41,995 $1,249,100 $0 0.00% $2,972,000 SUB TOTAL $376,983 0.00% $22,251,360 Public health services $193 $0 $0 0.00% $3,159 Cemeteries $0 $10,000 $10,000 NA $19,932 Other $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 5181.351/6 0.04% Parks $16,063 $90,000 $20,0001 124.51% $668,452 Harbour/Beach $0 $88,900 $88,900 NA $0 Rec.Fac. $8,436 $193,000 $78,000 924.61% $199,416 Libraries $1,787 $25,000 $25,000 1398.99% $49,561 Museums/Culture 1 $4,2311 $22,665 $22,665 535.69% $179,830 SUB TOTA $419,5E NOW 768.64% 7,259 2.01% $2,592,285 104.99% ,101 AMNON $1,102,237 $4,350,228 $761,465 $64 $54,562,101 $1 NOTES 2011 Annual 2011 Capital Budget 2011 Capital Levy Percentage(%)of 2011 Closing Percentage(%)of Net Book Amortization Funding/Asset Class Net Book Value Value/Asset Class Ge._ $11,713 $51,000 $51,000 435.41% $763,127 1.41% Fire $71,308 $1,089,300 $164,500 230.69% $1,295,092 Protective inspection and control $1,585 $6,000 $6,000 378.55% $12,355 Emergency measures $2,180 0.00% $15,730 SUB=TAL 111110473 227.11% 2.44% Roads-Paved $682,402 $748,822 $245,000 35.90% $25,908,374 Roads-Unpaved $12,841 $41,563 $0 0.00% $615,342 Roads-Bridges and Culverts $4,128 $0 $0 0.00% $544,198 Roadways-Traffic Operations&Roadside $0 $0 $0 0.00% $647,014 Winter Control-Except sidewalks,Parking Lots $1,013 $0 $0 0.00% $9,704 Parking $0 $0 $0 0.00% $433 Street lighting $1,374 $10,000 $0 0.00% $20,005 Other $0 $609,000 $0 NA $1,045,561 SUB TO $1,409,385 245 00 34.91% $28,790,631 53.20% Wastewater collection/conveyance $203,948 $304,743 $0 0.00% $14,751,379 Wastewater treatment&disposal $80,546 $0 $0 0.00% $2,354,574 Urban storm sewer system $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 Rural storm sewer system $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 Water treatment $53,075 $450,000 $0 0.00% $1,908,508 Water distribution/transmission $60,719 $0 0.00% $2,711,213 SUB TOTAL $0 0.00% Public health services $193 $0 $0 0.00% $2,966 Cemeteries $0 $3,000 $3,000 NA $19,932 Other $0 $0 0.00% $0 3,000 1554.40% Parks $23,174 $107,925 $65,925 284.48% $645,278 Harbour/Beach $5,867 $274,800 $131,900 2248.17% $419,822 Rec.Fac. $5,744 $174,000 $91,500 1592.97% $205,000 Libraries $1,787 $40,000 $0 0.00% $47,774 Museums/Culture $2,704 $55,500 $55,5001 2052.51% $177,126 SUB T $39,276 $652,225 877,95% 5,000 2.76 r/Wastewater) $828,013 IMIl7 $1,226,301 $3,965,653 $814,3251 $31 $54,120,507 $1 Relied Heavily on 2010 NOTES Unexpended Capital ($170,000+) 2012 Annual 2012 Capital Budget 2012 Capital Levy Percentage(%)of 2012 Closing Percentage(%)of Net Book Amortization Funding/Asset Class Net Book Value Value/Asset Class Ge 17,226 66,000.00 47,000.00 272.84% 1.38% Fire 114,766 1,254,500 170,000 148.13% 2,276,143 Protective inspection and control 1,970 6,000 6,000 304.57% 10,385 Emergency measures 1,796 0 0 0.00% 13,934 SUB TOTAL 18,532 148.48% ,462 4.22% Roads-Paved 689,495 406,000 0 0.00% 25,218,879 Roads-Unpaved 15,424 54,000 0 0.00% 599,918 Roads-Bridges and Culverts 19,558 0 0 0.00°% 524,640 Roadways-Traffic Operations&Roadside 2,680 0 0 0.00% 644,334 Winter Control-Except sidewalks,Parking Lots 1,736 0 0 0.00% 7,968 Parking 357 0 0 0.00% 76 Street lighting 2,363 10,000 10,000 423.19% 17,642 Other 93,818 574,000 270,000 287.79% 1,198,661 SUB TO 825,431 1,044,000 280,000 33.92% 28,212,118 51.75% Wastewater collection/conveyance 238,653 225,972 0 0.00% 14,512,726 Wastewater treatment&disposal 96,891 0 0 0.00% 2,257,683 Urban storm sewer system 0 0 0 0.00% 0 Rural storm sewer system 0 0 0 0.00% 0 Water treatment 29,377 450,000 0 0.00°% 1,968,039 Water distribution/transmission 100,721 0 1 0 0.00% 2,780,362 SUB TOTAL 465,642 0 0.00% Public health services 258 0 0 0.00% 2,708 Cemeteries 0 12,500 11,500 NA 19,932 Other 0 0 0 0.00% 0 NEESE-, NOW 4457.36% Parks 47,936 57,000 10,000 20.86% 633,944 Harbour/Beach 0 162,400 32,400 NA 419,822 Rec.Fac. 9,827 136,500 75,000 763.20% 318,698 Libraries 3,789 100,000 0 0.00% 164,387 Museums/Culture 7,367 7,800 5,500 1 74.66% 169,759 SUB TOTA 68,919 463,700 1.78.33"% 1,706,610 3.13% 1,030,366 0 1,702 $1,496.008 $3,522,672 $637,4001 $51 $54,511,702 $1 Relied on 2011 Unexpended NOTES Capital($80,000) 2013 Annual 2013 Capital Budget 2013 Capital Levy Percentage(%)of 2013 Closing Percentage(%)of Net Book Amortization Funding/Asset Class Net Book Value Value/Asset Class Ge" 14,126 73,500.00 45,000.00 318.56% 736,936 1.37% Fire 131,317 198,500 183,500 139.74% 2,144,826 Protective inspection and control 1,423 5,000 5,000 351.37% 8,962 Emergency measures 2,180 0 0 0.00% 11,754 SU TAL 139.71% 4.02% Roads-Paved 706,547 212,990 0 0.00% 24,574,401 Roads-Unpaved 15,391 188,000 0 0.00% 1,009,092 Roads-Bridges and Culverts 19,504 15,000 0 0.00% 505,136 Roadways-Traffic Operations&Roadside 2,680 0 0 0.00% 641,654 Winter Control-Except sidewalks,Parking Lots 1,731 0 0 0.00% 6,237 Parking 0 0 0.00% 76 Street lighting 1,372 10,000 10,000 728.86% 16,270 Other 52,491 945,000 320,000 609.63% 1,259,909 SUB TO 799,716 1,370,990 330,000 41.26% 28,012,775 52.02% Wastewater collection/conveyance 237,014 62,300 0 0.00% 14,417,846 Wastewater treatment&disposal 96,627 0 0 0.00% 2,161,056 Urban storm sewer system 0 0 0.00% 0 Rural storm sewer system 0 0 0.00% 0 Water treatment 6,772 0 0 0.00% 1,961,267 Water distribution/transmission 127,372 18,000 0 0.00% 2,735,552 SUB TOTAL 80,300 0 0.00% Public health services 257 0.00% 2,451 Cemeteries 0.00% 25,584 Other 0.00% 0 00000k--0-00% Parks 49,562 36,000 24,000 48.42% 584,382 Harbour/Beach 0 152,000 96,000 NA 419,822 Rec.Fac. 13,331 157,000 48,000 360.06% 305,367 Libraries 7,219 30,000 0 0.00% 157,168 Museums/Culture 7,348 6,000 1 2,500 34.02% 162,411 SUB TOTA 77,460 170,500 220.11% ._AdNOW9 Ing 734,00 �0- $1,494,2641 $2,109,290 $734,0001 $7 $53,848,159 $1 NOTES 2014 Annual 2014 Capital Budget 2014 Capital Levy Percentage(%)of 2014 Closing Percentage(%)of Net Book Amortization Funding/Asset Class Net Book Value Value/Asset Class Ge" $11,783 $72,000 $17,000 144.28% $7 1.41% Fire $131,299 $410,000 $174,000 132.52% $2,009,363 Protective inspection and control $1,300 $5,000 $5,000 384.62% $7,662 Emergency measures $2,180 $0 $0 0.00% $9,574 SUB TOTAL $134,7: 132.81% '_ 3.79% Roads-Paved $758,408 $230,000 $230,000 30.33% $23,962,505 Roads-Unpaved $25,588 $166,400 $166,400 650.30% $983,504 Roads-Bridges and Culverts $19,504 $55,000 $55,000 281.99% $537,517 Roadways-Traffic Operations&Roadside $2,680 $0 $0 0.00% $638,974 Winter Control-Except sidewalks,Parking Lots $1,242 $0 $0 0.00% $4,995 Parking $0 $0 $0 0.00% $76 Street lighting $1,372 $10,000 $10,000 728.86% $14,898 Other $4,159 $825,000 $25,000 601.11% $1,255,750 SUB TO $812,953 $1,286,400 486,400 59.83% $27,398,219 Wastewater collection/conveyance $234,035 $63,300 $0 0.00% $14,196,850 Wastewater treatment&disposal $97,866 $0 0.00% $2,063,190 Urban storm sewer system $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 Rural storm sewer system $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 Water treatment $5,772 $10,000 $0 0.001/ $2,626,069 Water distribution/transmission $129,764 $0 0.00% $2,822,162 SUB TOTAL $467,437 .00% Public health services $257 $0 $0Z:90 .00% $2,194 Cemeteries $0 $0 $0 .00% $25,584 Other $0 $0 $0 .00% $0 .00% Parks $49,240 $36,000 $24,0001 48.74% $535,142 Harbour/Beach $0 $120,000 $95,000 NA $419,822 Rec.Fac. $13,331 $160,000 $48,000 360.06% $292,036 Libraries $7,219 $30,000 $0 0.00% $149,949 Museums/Culture $7,347 $6,000 $2,000 27.22% $155,064 TAL $77,137 $352,000 219.09% $1,552,013 2.90 cluding W 6,909 $2,125,400 82.11% $53,466,999 a. $1,504,346 $2,198,700 $851,4001 $6 $53,466,999 $1 NOTES REPORT CAO ��po �o�`•cy -rtunity IS TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-45/16 SUBJECT: UNOPENED ROAD ALLOWANCE— HARMONY ACRES LINE BACKGROUND The 2016 Capital Budget contained Capital Item PW-6 Turnarounds, which included turn grounds at the termination of Harmony Acres Line and Ottergate Line. During 2016 Public Works was also called to approve an entrance permit for a property at the termination of Ottergate Line DISCUSSION During the above noted projects the Unopened Road Allowance between Concession 8 and Concession North Gore, West of Little Jerry Creek, as outlined within Appendix `A', was identified as an area which traverses land which is not conducive to road building. Further connecting Harmony Acres to Ottergate Line has not been identified as a road project to consider in any forward looking capital plans. The abutting property owners have expressed an interest in acquisition of the unopened road allowance. Should Council support the conveyance of the unopened road allowance to the abutting owners the process would be handled in accordance with the Sale & Disposition of Land Policy, By-law No. 2015-021, as follows: 1) Notice 2) Title Search 3) Survey of Lands 4) Appraisal 5) Legal Fees/Registration 6) Conveyance By-law All costs would be funded by the abutting owners and any proceeds from sale allocated at year end. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry and the LPRCA have no concerns with a potential closure and conveyance of the subject lands. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-45/16 re Unopened Road Allowance - Harmony Acres Line be received for information; 2. AND THAT Council declare the unopened road allowance between Concession 8 and Concession North Gore, West of Little Jerry Creek, known as Harmony Acres Line, as shown on Appendix `A', surplus to the needs of the Municipality. 3. AND THAT Staff be directed to convey portions of the unopened road allowance between Concession 8 and Concession North Gore, West of Little Jerry Creek, known as Harmony Acres Line, as shown on Appendix 'A', to abutting owners in accordance with the Municipality of Bayham Sale & Disposition of Land Policy as outlined within Report CAO 45/16. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO ELGIN MAPPING Unopened Road Allowance Legend �r ❑ F Parcels Concessions � --- ❑ Lot Lines r' Lagoons TY f Local Arterial _ — Highways World Street Map z. m I ;* r If r i' ] : r IL 1: 13,317 Notes 0.7 0 0.34 0.7 Kilometers This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only.Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary—Sphere current,or otherwise reliable. ©Latitude Geographics Group Ltd. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION - REPORT o� y CAO portunity Is�o TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-46/16 SUBJECT: SANDYTOWN RD. BACKGROUND On April 5, 2012 Report PW 07/12 re Sandytown Rd. was presented to Council and outlined the condition of a segment of Sandytown Rd. as follows: Sandytown Road in the northerly section of Lot 16, Concession 8, has been identified as a concern for a number of years. The current road alignment leads to erosion of the banks thereby relating to some concerns for the future. The Municipality of Bayham had acquired some lands around January of 1996 with the intent of realigning this road in the future, but this had not been pursued as of yet. Currently however, staff do express some concerns with the condition and safety of this road. It is currently requiring some means of protection from the erosion and amount of water which flows through the area for on-going maintenance, and expected that in the near future, some significant investment should be undertaken to keep the road passable. The lands which were purchased allow for the best realignment possible in this situation, but the affects may not be what Council was hoping to gain in realigning the roadway. Even with the designed realignment, a 12% grade would remain. This is problematic for safety, particularly relating to winter months, and the maintenance on such a road would continue to be very expensive and ongoing. In addition, the cost to construct the realignment would be somewhat prohibitive, with an engineering estimate of$2.4 million dollars. As an alternative, staff suggests placing a cul-de-sac at the top of the hill at the southerly side of the ravine, and a cul-de-sac prior to the creek at the bottom of the hill on the northerly side, to allow traffic to turn around. The construction cost for these cul-de-sacs is estimated at$314,000. It is recognized that eliminating a through road would have an impact on the convenience of residents in the area, however continuing with the current or realigned road are financially difficult. Such a change would save on on-going maintenance, particularly on the hill area, as well as the culvert across the creek, in addition to the significantly reduced capital cost. Staff simply wishes to advise Council that this may be a project in the future which would require work and Council may wish to consider this project within the next 5 years for a Capital Project. Staff wishes to propose some financial means of dealing with a concern in the not too distant future so Council will have a better idea of what concerns may be addressed in the future. In speaking with the Fire Department Chief Gord Roesch has no concerns with the fact there may be two cul-de-sacs on the road instead of a through road. Council received the report for information and provided commentary as follows: That upgrades to Sandytown Road are cost prohibitive, however if the drainage issue isn't addressed the road may wash out. Staff are to look at this right away. DISCUSSION Maintenance, drainage and safety continue to be a concern at the subject location on Sandytown Rd as no permanent solution was/has ever been developed or implemented. The previously considered road realignment project, attached hereto as Appendix `A', is cost prohibitive and not feasible, in the opinion of staff, for a road classification such as Sandytown Rd. Staff would again bring forward the option of constructing turnarounds in the approximate outlined locations on the mapping shown in Appendix `B'. This would close a portion of Sandytown Road and make it dead end at turnarounds from both directions. Staff are not in concurrence with the 2012 cost assessment of `cul-de-sacs' and would be able to incorporate the turnaround expense into 2016 Capital Budget Item PW-6 Turnarounds, baring issue with LPRCA, as significant savings have occurred as a result of local land owner preference for `agreement turnarounds'. Should Council proceed with turnarounds and the permanent closing of a section of Sandytown Rd. the Municipality would be required to provide notice in the newspaper of the same, pursuant to Municipal Class Environmental Assessment procedures. Likewise staff would suggest posting the physical location for two weeks and posting notice on the website. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-46/16 re Sandytown Rd. be received for information; 2. AND THAT Council provide staff direction. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO B.M. — NAIL IN South SIDE OF TREE 39.5m West OF STA. 0+147 ELEV-85.152 EXISTING ROADWAY PROPOSED ROADWAY ALIGNMENT HECTARES +--" 0.522 PART 3 1.29 ACRES A- Alip X. TOP OF SLOPE-\. + B.M. TOP OF West END OF CMP. B.M. NAIL IN East ROOT 0.8m0 TREE N. 4.25m West OF STA. 0+285.5 ELEV-72.133 4.Om West OF STA. —0+001.8 ELEV-100.672 NEW PROPERTY UNE PART 1 4.54 ACRES LOT 16 CONCESSION 8 TOWNSHIP OF BAYHAM o PART 2 3.72 ACRES 105 A, --4-46.40.0rr KEY PLAN N.T.S. 104 — HIGH POINT ELEV 101.555 HIGH POINT STA = -C+0139.4 70 -m-STA -- 103 I = I n1 A00 A.0. 12.20) 1 11 1 1 P > K = 12.000 102 23 0. 00%-- 7- 101 100 m 99 97 1 197 1--EX. 12 PRCRLE C14 0 96 -- CF) —96 P C.) 95 95 93 93 2 k. 92 91 -- -PROPOSED Z OF ROD PRC FIL4 I I I I I 1 1 91 DESIGN SPEED 60 K.R.H. 90 90 89 -- ag as as �VI STA = 0+ 34.88-) PV1 ELEV = 73.672 87 K 1-9-nao---- W vyl. m vr as -85 84 82 82 81 81 No, REVISIONS DATE BY 110 so 79 79 78 LOW T ELEV = 72. 04 78 CENTENNIAL RD. NORTH 77 PVI STA = 0434' .10 77 PVI ELEV 72.)79 76 -A-.D. 15J 78 ROAD REALIGNMENT COUNTY ELGIN MUNICIPAL DISTRICT - No. 2 75 -- o 75 TOWNSHIP BAYHAM LOCATION - LOT 16, 'rj 0*�u I M N M C' CONCESSION 8 74 + r-- +r' 74 0 LU 0 73 73 OWNER TOWNSHIP OF BAYHAM ROAD SUPERINTENDENT BOB BARTLEFr 72 -- —72 Scale Drawn J.D.A. 71 — 71 Design M.P.D. SCALE — 1 1000 5. m Approved J.R.S. 70 -- 70 HORIZONTAL Date JAN. / 1996. 88 89 SCALE — 1 : 100 Field Book TS2 0.5m 0 1.0m VERTICAL Job No. 95111 —1 67 — 87 SPRIET ASSOCIATES --68 LONDON LIMITED CONSULTING ENGINEERS El 155 YORK STREET LONDON (519) 672-4100 116A 1A8 kn 4 70 IR OR Inn r, .9 4 �i d 14 14 c4 .10 .10 16 9 OD OD (0 00 9 LO 0i C" 01 T mro STATION —0+100 —0+050 0+000 0+050 0+100 0+150 0+200 0+250 0+300 0+350 Drawing No. DEPLANCKE PROPERTY 1 of 2 ELGIN MAPPING Sandytown Rd Legend ❑ Parcels Lagoons Local i Arterial Highways " World Street Map #1 J 'J sl II r, 1: 6,659 Notes 0.3 0 0.17 0.3 Kilometers This reap is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only.Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary—Sphere current,or otherwise reliable. ©Latitude Geographics Group Ltd. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION - REPORT o� y CAO portunity Is�o TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-47/16 SUBJECT: ONTARIO 150 FUND BACKGROUND As noted within Report CAO 41/16 re East Beach Design Consideration the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport has launched the Ontario 150 Program. This is a repurposing of the Ontario Trillium Fund — Capital Component Program. This new program is a one-time $25 million program of the Government of Ontario that is administered by the Ontario Trillium Foundation (OTF) and will award one-year grants that range from $5,000 to $500,000 to support local capital needs. More precisely, this program will strengthen communities by repairing, renovating and retrofitting existing infrastructure to better address the diverse needs of Ontario communities while fostering economic growth. The application deadline for the Ontario 150 Community Capital Program is September 14, 2016 at 5 PM. There are three application-based Ontario 150 grant programs. They include: • The Community Capital Program—a $25 million fund to renovate, repair and retrofit existing community and cultural infrastructure to increase access, improve safety and maximize community use (application period opens July 18 and closes September 14, 2016); • The Partnership Program—a $5 million program to support new partnerships and collaborations that engage, enable and empower youth as the next generation of Ontario leaders (application period opens July 6 and closes September 30, 2016); • And the Community Celebration Program—a $7 million fund to help communities celebrate this historic year(application period opens July 6 and closes September 2, 2016). DISCUSSION As noted above the Ontario 150 Community Capital Program aims to assist municipalities to improve existing infrastructure through repairs, renovations or retrofitting. The grant amounts range from $5,000 to $500,000 and projects must be completed by March 31, 2018. After eliminating projects based on grant program criteria the focus came to the following outline of projects, in no particular order: i. PR-6 —Accessible Viewing Platform — $20,000 ii. East Pier Section - $175,000 a. To be added within 2017 Capital Budget considerations iii. Vienna Memorial Park— Electrical/Misc. - $20,000 a. To be added within 2017 Capital Budget considerations iv. Port Burwell Ball Diamond Shed to Pavilion Conversion - $35,000 a. To be added within 2017 Capital Budget considerations V. Museums Bayham Capital Expenditures a. To be determined based on the outcome of Edison Museum discussions vi. Cenotaph Area Rehabilitation vii. Straffordville Library Elevator a. The County has requested the Municipality consider placement of an elevator in the facility as the facility is the second highest use library in Elgin County. Depending on what Council does with the East Beach Design Considerations this project may be a prime candidate for application to the current Enabling Accessibility Fund call for proposals. As a note, the above does not consider projects which the Municipality has made application for under other, current grant programs. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-47/16 re Ontario 150 Fund be received for information; 2. AND THAT Council provide staff direction. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO X-yHAjt REPORT CAO urtunity ILS 0 TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-48/16 SUBJECT: RATES & FEES BY-LAW BACKGROUND On January 21, 2016, during Financial Assistance Application discussions, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed a resolution containing the following excerpt: AND THAT all groups be advised in 2017 no fee waiver's will be granted and the fee by-law will be amended for reduced rates for Service Clubs' as defined by the Municipality. DISCUSSION The review of the Rates & Fees by-law worked to incorporate fee reductions for 'Community Partners' a term utilized in place of the 'Service Groups' as outlined in the January 21, 2016 resolution. The revised Rates & Fees By-law aimed to simplify the rental process for users of facilities and also mitigate delays for ball diamond and parking lot usage by placing the requirements for use within the by-law, versus going to Council for each individual request. The Rates & Fees By-law did consider the rates submitted by the Straffordville Community Centre Group in January 2016, however ultimately utilized generally lesser rental values, for the fees to remain consistent and standardized between the two municipal halls. The changes to the Rates & Fees By-law included: 1) Removal of Large Item printing fees. A service the Municipality cannot provide. 2) Addition of previously established Over-Dimensional Load Permit Fees and Museums Bayham Fees. 3) Restructuring of Hall Fees The proposed Rates & Fees By-law is attached hereto as Appendix 'A'. The previously utilized Vienna Community Centre and Straffordville Hall Fees are attached hereto as Appendix `B' The fee proposal submitted by the Straffordville Hall Committee in January 2016 is attached hereto as Appendix 'C' RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-43/16 re Rates & Fees By-law be received for information; 2. AND THAT staff be directed to bring forward the Rates & Fees By-law for Council consideration. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW 2016-XXX BEING A BY-LAW OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM TO ESTABLISH AND REQUIRE THE PAYMENT OF FEES FOR INFORMATION, SERVICES, ACTIVITIES AND USE OF MUNICIPAL PROPERTY AND TO REPEAL BY-LAW NUMBER 2014-125 AND ANY AND ALL AMENDMENTS WHEREAS Section 391 of the Municipal Act, 2001,S.O. 2001, as amended, (the Act) provides for a municipality to pass by-laws imposing fees or charges on any persons for services or activities provided or done by or on behalf of it, for costs payable by it for services or activities provided or done by or on behalf of any other municipality or local board, and for the use of its property including property under its control; AND WHEREAS Section 69 of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13 as amended provides that a municipality may establish a tariff of fees for the processing of applications made in respect of planning matters; AND WHEREAS Section 7 of the Building Code Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, as amended authorizes a municipal Council to pass by-laws concerning the issuance of permits and related matters; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS A BY-LAW AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 — General Provisions MUNICIPAL FACILITIES—COMMUNITY CENTRE 1.1 All persons using a municipal facility must provide two (2) weeks prior to event a certificate of insurance in the minimum amount of$2,000,000.00 naming the Municipality of Bayham as additional insured 1.2 Deposit for hall rental is due at time of booking/signing. Balance of rental fee is due a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to date of function 1.3 Failure to cancel in writing two (2) weeks prior to the booking will result in full charges being applied. 1.4 A Damage Deposit is charged for Main Hall or all day use Friday and Saturday which is refundable less applicable damages, if any. 1.5 Damage Deposit based on 50% of rental fee is charged for partial hall use on any day of the week which is refundable less applicable damages, if any. 1.6 "Community Partners" shall mean not-for-profit community organizations, or community organizations with a formal structure and mandate that provide funds or services on a volunteer basis for the good of the community. 1.6.1 Community Partners shall receive a $50 reduction on any Community Centre base rate each use. 1.6.2 Qualification as a `Community Partner' shall be at the discretion of the Municipality. 1.6.3 At the time of passing of this By-law Community Partner shall include, but not be limited to: i. Bayham Historical Society vii. Straffordville Community Committee ii. Eastern Star viii. SERVE Parent's Association / iii. Edisonfest Committee Straffordville Public School iv. Otter Valley Naturalists ix. Vienna Lioness V. Photographers of the Otter Valley X. Vienna Lions Club vi. St. Lukes Anglican Church Guild 1.7 Community Centre renters are responsible for all fire alarm response costs 1.8 Facility use may be revoked as a result of damage, or improperly disposed of refuse. Clean up fees shall be the responsibility of the user. BALL DIAMONDS 1.9 Ball Diamonds formally used by an organized league are subject to $10.00 fee per use, refundable $20.00 key deposit and provision of insurance certificate in minimum amount of $2,000,000.00 naming The Municipality of Bayham as an additional insured 1.10 Ball Diamonds formally used by community group or ball team are subject to $10.00 fee per use PARKING LOTS 1.11 Community Centre Parking Lot use is subject to provision of liability insurance certificate in minimum amount of$2,000,000.00 naming The Municipality of Bayham as an additional insured BY-LAW ENFORCEMENT 1.12 Activities performed pertaining to By-Law Enforcement Infractions are invoiced at full cost recovery plus 25% Administration Fee PLANNING SERVICES 1.13 Any legal or consulting fees over and above established rates will be added to all planning fees and charged per lot, where applicable; WATER/WASTEWATER SERVICES 1.14 Any water or sewer connection and frontage charges that exceed the minimum fee will have full cost recovery for Capital Construction applied (This will include road restoration and all other costs incurred to install services) 1.15 Water and Sewer connection and frontage charges will be indexed annually in January in accordance with the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price Statistics, catalogue No. 62- 007 1.16 Bulk Water cost is metered rate plus $250.00 Section 2—Administration 2.1 Effective upon final passing of By-law 2016-059 the Schedule of Rates and Fees as set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto and forming part of this by-law is hereby adopted and shall remain in effect until amended or rescinded. 2.2 By-law 2014-125 and any and all amendments thereto enacted by the Municipality of Bayham, setting out any such rates and fees shall be and are hereby repealed. 2.3 This by-law shall come into full force and effect upon final passing. READ A FIRST AND SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED this XXst day of XXXX, 2016 MAYOR CLERK SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES ADMINISTRATION ITEM Fee Photocopying Per Page - Black & White (8.5x11 & 8.5x15) $0.75 Per Page - Black & White (11x17) $1.00 Per Page - Coloured (8.5x11 & 8.5x14) $2.00 Per Page - Coloured (11x17) $2.50 Fax $1.00 Per Page - GIS Maps & Plans (8.5x11) $7.00 Per Page - GIS Maps & Plans (11x17) $11.00 Copy of Zoning By-law $25.00 Copy of Official Plan $35.00 Culture-Tourism Councils & Historic Highlights - 5% HST $3.00 Vienna Historical Highlights (from 1853-2003) - 5% HST $10.00 Bayham Memories & Milestones - 5% HST $12.00 Municipal Key Fobs $2.00 Discover Bayham Mugs $5.00 Lottery Licence 3% of cash value of all prizes Lottery Licence ($10.00 Minimum Fee) Lottery Licence Bingo N/A Freedom of Information Freedom of Information Application (established by Provincial Legislation) $5.00 Freedom of Information Application (established $7.50/15 mins plus by Provincial Legislation) photocopying $0.20/page SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES ADMINISTRATION cont'd ITEM FEE Miscellaneous Fees Administrative Search Fee (Routine Disclosure) $50/hr Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario Municipal Information Form $25.00 Preparation and Registration of Agreements $500.00 Ontario Power Authority-Fee-in Tarriff Support Resolution $100.00 Blue Box $10.00 Composter $15.00 County Map $3.00 Municipal Pins Local Charitable/Not for Propfit Group First 15 pins free, each requests for giveaways or exchanges etc. or additional $1.00 (max 25 pins personal use unless approved) Commissioning of Affidavits and Certification of Documents - Travel Letter $20.00 Meeting Investigator Fee $25.00 Livestock Valuer $150.00 Trailer Park Licence $100.00 Civil Marriage Solemnization Services Civil Marriage Ceremony in Municipality $250.00 Rehersal Fee $75.00 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES PLANNING SERVICES ITEM FEE Official Plan Amendment Application $1,000 plus $1,000 deposit Zoning By-law Amendment Application $1,000 plus $1,000 deposit Temporary Use Zoning By-law $1,000 plus $1,000 deposit Temporary Use Zoning By-law Renewal $500 plus $1,000 deposit Zoning Amendment to Remove Holding $500.00 plus $1,000 deposit Minor Variance Application $1,000 plus $1,000 deposit Site Plan Application/Agreement $1,000 plus $1,000 deposit Site Plan Agreement - properties with accumulative commercial/industrial/institutional building area of 150 m2 or less $250.00 plus $250.00 deposit Site Plan Agreement Amendment $250.00 plus $250.00 deposit Development Agreement $1,000 plus $1,000 deposit Plan of Subdivision Application $1,000 plus $1,000 deposit Defense of Ontario Municipal Board Appeals $5,000.00 deposit - full cost to applicant Planning Report $800.00 Land Division Clearance Letter $100.00 Planning Signage - Install and Remove $100.00 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES TREASURY ITEM FEE Tax Certificate $50.00 Zoning Certificate $50.00 Building/Drainage Work Order $50.00 By-law/Fire Services Order $50.00 By-law Exemption Request $50.00 NSF Payment Fee $30.00 Tax Sale Registration Process Full Cost Recovery + $100.00 PUBLIC WORKS ITEM FEE Road Access Permit $160.00 Municipal Consent Application Fee $50.00 Civic Addressing Application Blade, Post, Installation $95.00 Replacement Blade Only $65.00 Replacement Post Only $30.00 Over Dimensional Load Permit Single Use $200.00 Annual $500.00 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES BUILDING DEPARTMENT ITEM FEE Single Family Dwellings minimum fee $1,500.00 $0.50 per sq ft plus $100.00 Garages, carports, etc. over 500 sq ft flat Decks, ramps, wood burning appliances $100.00 flat Accessory building up to 500 sq ft $100.00 flat $10.00 per $1,000.00 const Renovations of accessory buildings & residences value plus $100.00 flat Swimming pools above ground $75.00 Agricultural Buildings Kilns, corn cribs, etc $200.00 flat Renovations to Farm Buildings $10.00 per $1,000 const value plus $100.00 flat $100.00 flat plus $0.35 per sq Farm buildings and additions up to 600m2 ft $100.00 flat plus $0.25 per sq Farm buildings and additions over 600m2 ft Commercial, Industrial, Institutional $100.00 flat plus $0.35 per sq New or additions up to 600m2 ft $100.00 flat plus $0.25 per sq New or additions over 600m2 ft Renovations of buildings and accessory buildings $100.00 flat plus $10.00 per $1,000.00 const value Other structures such as silos, grain dryers etc $100.00 flat plus $10.00 per $1,000.00 const value SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES BUILDING DEPARTMENT cont'd ITEM FEE Miscellaneous Mobile Homes - as a second dwelling on a farm & $100.00 flat plus $10.00 per trailer park $1,000.00 const value $100.00 flat plus $0.50 per sq Modular Homes ft Temporary Mobile Homes (for supplementary revised due to zoning farm dwellings) amendment Temporary Mobile Homes $100.00 flat used for special circumstances approved by Council up to 3 years duration $100.00 renew fee Temporary Mobile Homes (used on site while residence is under construction) $100.00 flat Existing buildings and houses moved to a new site $100.00 flat plus $0.50 per sq Additions to moved-in structures at the time of $0.50 per sq ft move Additions to these moved-in structures at another $100.00 flat plus $0.50 per sq time ft Permit transfer $100.00 flat Temporary special occasion tents $100.00 flat Roof Mounted Solar Panels $200.00 flat Demolition Permits $100.00 flat Municipal Property Damage Deposit $2000.00 flat Exceptions Other inspections $100.00 flat Change of use $100.00 flat SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES BUILDING DEPARTMENT cont'd ITEM FEE Septic System Class 1 exempt Class 2 $200.00 Class 3 $200.00 Class 4 $500.00 Class 5 $500.00 Leaching Beds $500.00 Absorption Trench $500.00 Filter Beds $500.00 Repairs $300.00 Lot Assessments $100.00 Plumbing Permits $80.00 plus $10.00 per fixture Drainage Reassessment $250.00 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES WASTEWATER Sewer Surcharge Rates 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Monthly Charge $46.41 $48.70 $50.96 $53.53 $56.06 $58.89 $62.01 $65.10 $68.47 $72.12 Sewer Connection & Frontage Charges 2014 Frontage/Ft Connection Eden $34.40 $5,059.79 Port Burwell $21.60 $5,142.86 Straffordville $34.40 $5,059.79 Vienna $34.40 $5,059.79 ITEM FEE Sewer Connection Permit $200.00 Sewe Connection Inspection $100.00 Change of Occupancy - New Account Charge $25.00 Add to Tax Roll $50.00 Late Payment Charge 5% Septage Receiving Facility - Disposal Fee $13.50/cubic metre SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES WATER Metered Water Rates (Port Burwell - Vienna) 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 20231 2024 Base Monthly Charge $11.96 $12.17 $12.42 $12.66 $12.92 $13.18 $13.44 $13.71 $13.98 $14.26 Volume Charge per m3 $2.99 $3.17 $3.36 $3.56 $3.78 $4.00 $4.24 $4.50 $4.77 $5.06 Unmetered Water Rates (Richmond-Fire Lines) Monthly Charge 1 $79.801 $83.791 $87.981 $92.381 $97.001 $101.851 $106.94 $112.29 $117.90 $123.80 Connection & Frontage Charges 2014 Frontage/ft Connection Port Burwell $7.20 $1,991.75 Richmond N/A $7,724.91 Vienna $7.37 $2,016.87 Water Connection Permit $200.00 Water Connection Inspection $100.00 Water Meter- Residential (including dual checkvalve and inspection) $425.00 Water Meter Register $310.00 Water Meter Register for Pit Application $350.00 Dual Check Valve $30.00 Water Meter Bottom Plate with Gasket $20.00 Water Meter Non-Residential Full Cost Recovery Dual Check Valve Non-Residential Full Cost Recovery Water Meter Test $300.00 Water Shut off/on $100.00 Change of Occupancy - New Account Charge $25.00 Add to Tax Roll $50.00 Late Payment Charge 5% SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES STRAFFORDVILLE COMMUNITY CENTRE FEE HST TOTAL Main Hall Mon - Thurs & Sun $275.00 $35.75 $310.75 Fri & Sat $330.00 $42.90 $372.90 Damage Deposit $320.00 $320.00 Main Hall Meetings Up to 3 hrs + $30.00 each additional hour $130.00 $16.90 $146.90 Trackless Lounge up to 3 hours + $30.00 for each $75.00 $9.75 $84.75 Funerals 1 $75.00 $9.751 $84.75 VIENNA COMMUNITY CENTRE FEE HST TOTAL Entire Facility with Kitchen Mon - Thurs & Sun $275.001 $35.75 $310.75 Fri & Sat $330.00 $42.90 $372.90 Damage Deposit $320.00 $320.00 Basement with Kitchen $140.00 $18.20 $158.20 Basement without Kitchen $90.00 $11.70 $101.70 Upstairs & Bar Area Only $200.00 $26.00 $226.00 Upstairs & Bar Area Only Meetings - up to 3 hours + $30.00 for each additional hour $130.00 $16.90 $146.90 Funerals $75.00 $9.75 $84.75 FEE HST TOTAL Pavillions $40.00 $5.20 $45.20 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND FEES ADDITIONAL COSTS - COMMUNITY CENTRES Item Fee Additional cleaning/other services Cost Recovery Key Fee (refundable after function) $20.00 Failing to vacate by 2:00 a.m. $50.00/hour Deposit (Non Refundable) 50% of rental fee MARINE MUSEUM AND LIGHTHOUSE ENTRANCE FEES Under 12 years Free Adults (13+) $3.00 per person one site Adults (13+) $5.00 per person for both Marine Museum & Lighthouse Family $8.00 per family one site Family $12.00 per family for both Maine Museum & Lighthouse FIRE SERVICES ITEM FEE MVC Response (Non Bayham Resident) Current MTO hourly rate for pumper, resue tanker Other Response (Non Bayham Resident) Current MTO hourly rate for required apparatus Burn Permit $25.00 per calendar year Cost Recovery - Foam $250 per pail used Fire Report - Post Fire $75.00 Fire Inspection - Real Estate $150.00 Fire Safety Plan Review $100.00 Illegal or unauthorized fire (including arson or an unauthorized burn permit) Full Cost Recovery Hazardous Materials Clean-up (as per Environmental Protection Act, RSO 1990) Full Cost Recovery Fire Response Fees (Indemnification Technology Municipal Act. 2001 391 (1) Current MTO hourly rate for required apparatus APPENDIX'S Rental Rates Without Kitchen With Kitchen Main Hall S+Hrs Weekday 300 350 Weekend 400 450 (Friday-Sunday) Stag and Doe 500 550 (1000 Surety Deposit) Weddings 150 *Set up time - day before 3 hrs **Residents Save 15% off total bill if Stag and Doe and Wedding booked at same time Sunday Tenant 260 315 ( 1 year term ) (35% off) Hourly Weekday 60 110 Weekend 80 130 Kitchen Only Weekday 75 Weekend 100 Funerals and Memorial Services Non Resident 100 Resident 50 Upper Hall Room Daily Rate 100 Hourly Rate 35 Fitness Groups 20 (2-3 hours) Trackless Vehicles Lounge Daily Rate 70 Hourly Rate 25 Special Programming: Main Hall No Kitchen Fitness Groups (2-3 hours) Weekday 35 Weekend 50 Commercial Recreational Activity (2-4 hours) Weekday 85 Weekend 150 Damage Deposit *Damage deposits are formulated at 50% of total rental **Stag and Doe rentals are required to provide $1000 deposit ***Deposits will be refunded less applicable damages, if any Notes: Renters are responsible for all fire alarm response costs Kitchen facilities are available with main hall area only, separate rental of kitchen is available Renters are expected to leave the facility in the condition it was rented Cleaning Fees may be deducted from deposit if facility is left unhygenic STRAFFORDVILLE COMMUNITY CENTRE Residents Non-Residents FEE HST TOTAL FEE HST TOTAL Main Hall(with servery) Mon-Thurs&Sun $275.00 $35.75 $310.75 $350.00 $45.50 $395.50 Fri&Sat $330.00 $42.90 $372.90 $405.00 $52.65 $457.65 Main Hall(without servery) Mon-Thurs&Sun $220.00 $28.00 $248.60 $285.00 $37.05 $322.05 Fri&Sat $275.00 $35.75 $310.75 $340.00 $44.20 $384.20 Damage Deposit $320.00 $320.00 $320.00 $320.00 Main Hall Meetings Up to 3 hrs+$30.00 each additional hour $130.00 $16.90 $146.90 $130.00 $16.90 $146.90 VIENNA COMMUNITY CENTRE Residents Non-Residents FEE HST TOTAL FEE HST TOTAL Entire Facility with Kitchen Mon-Thurs&Sun $275.00 $35.75 $310.75 $350.00 $45.50 $395.50 Fri&Sat $330.00 $42.90 $372.90 $405.00 $52.65 $457.65 Damage Deposit $320.00 $320.00 $320.00 $320.00 Basement with Kitchen $140.00 $18.20 $158.20 $185.00 $24.05 $209.05 Basement without Kitchen $90.00 $11.70 $101.70 $135.00 $17.55 $152.55 Upstairs&Bar Area Only $200.00 $26.00 $226.00 $250.00 $32.50 $282.50 Upstairs&Bar Area Only Meetings-up to 3 hours+$30.00 for each additional hour $130.00 $16.90 $146.90 $130.00 $16.90 $146.90 Kitchen Only-May service basement&entire hall only $55.00 $7.15 $62.15 $65.00 $8.45 $73.45 Funerals&Others(partial) $75.00 $9.75 $84.75 Funerals&Others(whole or main hall) $120.00 $15.60 $135.60 ADDITIONAL COSTS BOTH COMMUNITY CENTRES Residents Non-Residents Additional cleaning/other services Cost Recovery Cost Recovery Key Fee(refundable after function) $20.00 $20.00 Failing to vacate by 2:00 a.m. $50.00/hour $50.00/hour Deposit(Non Refundable) 50%of rental fee 50%or rental fee FEE HST TOTAL FEE HST TOTAL Straffordville Park Pavillion $40.00 $5.20 $45.20 $40.00 $5.20 $45.50 X-YHAlt REPORT CAO urtunity ILS 0 TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-49/16 SUBJECT: EAST BEACH DESIGN CONSULTATION RESULTS BACKGROUND On April 7, 2016 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution: THAT Harbourfront Committee proposal re Port Burwell East Beach Landscape Improvement be received for information; AND THAT staff be directed to elevate and seed Part 'A' within the current confines of the drainage outlet; AND THAT staff be directed to bring back detailed design considerations and East Beach plan with public consultation plan for Council consideration. On June 16, 2016 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution: THAT Report CAO-49/16 re East Beach Design Considerations be received for information; AND THAT Council direct staff to post an East Beach Consultation as contemplated within Report CAO 41/16 and report back to Council July 21, 2016; AND THAT a Public Information Session be held June 30, 2016 from 7:00 —8:00 p.m. at the Port Burwell Fire Hall. On June 30, 2016 the Public Information Session at the Port Burwell Fire Hall was well attended and featured significant discourse on the subject matter. DISCUSSION As per the direction of Council landscape improvements were conducted in the month of April 2016, with the assistance of the Harbourfront Committee and a local soil donor. Staff worked with the Municipal Engineer, Spriets, to develop the East Beach Design Considerations, attached hereto as Appendix 'A'. The Consultation and Feedback information, which closed on July 15, 2016 at noon, pertaining to said design or possible design considerations is attached hereto as Appendix `B'. An excerpt of the `Costing-Funding' commentary pertaining to Report CAO 41/16 and any Easy Beach Design Budgeting is as below: The costing of the project attached hereto is greater than the entire 2016 Capital Levy. To move forward with East Beach Improvements, once directed and approved by council, staff would propose the following options: 1) Conduct smaller line items (rope/posts, bury hydro service) towards year end if budget savings exist and with public works staff where possible. 2) Budget for components of the project in the 2017 and beyond budgets. 3) Report CAO 47116 re Ontario 150 Fund and Report CAO 50116 re Enabling Accessibility Fund incorporate possibilities to fund project components should Council determine proceeding immediately on any qualifying project component is considered prudent. The purpose of the East Beach Design Consultation, as outlined within Report CAO-49/16 re East Beach Design Considerations, was to obtain community input on the proposed design and possible alternatives and options. Further, following Council direction at the July 21, 2016 staff could incorporate direction into the 2017 Budgets for Council consideration during budget deliberation. RECOMMENDATION THAT Report CAO-49/16 re East Beach Design Consultation Results be received for information; AND THAT Council provide staff direction. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO LAKE ERIE .......................... EX,BEACH AREA MA B�O2001ER EX.PIER 1� �� r r 0 n-r�rlrrr -r rlJ r�_ra • o 0 Y . . , RIM$�E EX,BEACH AREA s EX, PIER 1111111J=CrC111J_ o • ® --- --�-- PROPOSED 3 m � , WIDE BOARDALK a- � PROPOSED EX.TREE EX.BE OBSERVATION DECK REMOVED REMOVED -. EX.TREE TO BE -------- REMOVED .._ KEY PLANPROPOSED 3 m WIDE BOARDWALK EX.TREE TO BE _ REMOVED SCALE: NTS EX.TREE TO BE I I REMOVED — _ EX.WASHROOM — — BE FACILITY i I I EX.TREE TO BE REMOVED Gt EX.TREE J TO BE POST AND ROPE FENCE REMOVED O 8" POSTS- 8' O/G IEX. PAVEMENT NATURAL SAND EX.FENCE TO BE REMOVED EDGE OF PROP.PAWING EX.WASHROOM 15 O PROPOSED GRAVEL — L FACILITY TO PRO •DIVIp ISLAN TURN AROUND AREA BE REMOVED ER�EUS SynD EE ING LO ? 10, . 0 z Ex. GRAVEL ? PROPOSED EDGE OF PARKING LOT ASPHALT ON NEW ROUNDABOUT O O O O BM NAIL IN HP 176.086 EX.HYDRO SERVICE s./. TO BE BURIED TRAILER PARKING TRAILER PAWING— — — — — — H.P. EX.GUARD RAIL — 31 s./. . EDGE OF PROP.PARKINCs — EX.CONC.BLOCKS — — _ TO BE REMOVED j H.P. PROPSED SIGN "PORT BURWELL" I O Q O PLAN SCALE: 1 : 250 PROPOSED CONCEPT PLANS JOB 216117 � - _ _ SPRIET ASSOCIATES PORT IMPROVEMENTS architects - engineers PORT BURWELL EAST BEACH MAY 31 2016 1 SPRIET ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS&ARCHITECTS 155 York Street London,Ontario N6A 1A8 Tel.(519)672-4100 Fax(519)433-9351 E-mail: mailfspriet.ca ,vww.spriet.ca Port Burwell East Beach Improvements Municipality of Bayham 8-Jun-16 Item No. Description Estimated Cost 1 Construct concrete curbs and islands $ 19,000.00 I 2 Construct 3.Om ( 10' wide) boardwalk with landing on sono tube piers and 2x611 pressure treated decking $ 160,000.00 3 Supply and Install Rope Fence with posts at 2.4m on centre $ 7,500.00 4 Regrade parking areas with 200mm of Granular'A' $ 55,000.00 i 5 Supply and Install asphalt at entrances $ 15,000.00 6 Bury electrical service including disconnect $ 10,000.00 I i 7 Tree planting( 30 trees) $ 8,250.00 8 Supply and Install Port Burwell sign including foundations $ 67,000.00 I 9 Contigency Allowance $ 25,000.00 i Total $ 366,750.00 Associates:A.M.SPRIET•J.R.SPRIET• K. McILMURRAY • M.P. DEVOS•J.M.SPRIET• C.S. LIERMAN •A.T.ALTENLIU Comments Name I wish to comment on behalf of the PB/HARBOURFRONT Committee Earl Shea on behalf of the regarding an upcoming Public Meeting, to review some Design Harbourfront Committee Proposals for the Port Burwell East beach...I had only read your report after the Council Meeting and thank you for putting together the proposed Considerations. From the Council discussion last evening, it has been proposed to hold a Public Meeting, on June 30th at the PB Fire Hall. I interpreted that this would be a standalone meeting with Drawings, Photos, etc. that would allow the Public to review and comment in written form, emails, etc. There would be no presentations by staff or others. I would assume from your Report that the "ideas"for the Beach area would be primarily from the Consultants' Harbour Master Plan. The Harbourfront, Accessible Stand Expansion, Up graded Parking, and further development of the Grass area adjacent to the East Pier, and the continued placing of Benches along the East Pier, and other Proposals. We concur that this is a good idea and would help in establishing a Beach Area Plan for the Future. Perhaps I misunderstood the timing allotted for such a meeting as to be confined for one hour only at 7:00 to 8: 00 pm. We would like to suggest that it be extended to at least a three hour span, i.e. 5:00 to 8:00 pm giving more people the flexibility to attend. The Harbourfront Committee would be pleased to assist in any way toward this important meeting, (i.e.: set up, pre meeting publicity, attendance during meeting, etc. Considering the situation in Bayham at present regarding the$6 Million Bob Drayson anchored to the Submarine and the fact the East Beach is Wonderful as it is Why Change? I love the beach in its present form and am also impressed at the grooming done this year. I'm good with the status quo! Gentlemen: Doug Park The meeting in Bayham 1 tonight: A few things that I see needed: Very first thing needed is a four way stop top of Pitt street with a safe area for pedestrians to cross. This area here is a potential area for accidents when busy especially for pedestrians when busy. Area for offsite parking is next. A good example of type of parking would be the town of St Jacobs downtown. They have no downtown parking yet have an offsite parking area. Beach area needs washrooms open later in year as well. Possible dog beach since we have to pay for access to provincial park. Far east of beach would be perfect for this. People come from all over our area to walk dogs on west side boardwalk before access was closed. Possibly a dog park needed? Benches for downtown area. Posting board area for events. Recently had someone ask me when and where the Canada Day parade would be and what time. Area between schooners and old hardware store access down to sub. The flat areas beside sub have become park like setting now with picnic tables and areas for people to walk and eat and take their families. This area is key to center of town for pedestrian traffic to allow people to visit sub or wheel house or the flat area park. Perhaps an outdoor theater area. Outdoor movies went well at last beach fest. Parking/parking/and more parking. Something I forgot to mention. Please accommodate this group in design. They work hard They enjoy beach as well I know this group Trained my horse 4 s a �j I attended the meeting tonight. My feelings are that Pt. Burwell has a Pete Wiebe lot of potential with the beach being a great calling card for bringing in people from out of town they come in use our facilities enjoy the day but from a business point I don't feel that they contribute back to the municipality. On the other hand if a committee was formed similar to the "Straffordville Hall Committee" and done fund raisers to match Government grants the people that want the beach could have their beach without effecting the tax payer. The turnaround has worked fine all these years all they need is a sign saying "No Large Vehicles Beyond This Point" First- David and I wish to commend Council and Admin Staff. We have Susan & David Start noticed, and applaud, an increase in this term of Council in a long- range, vision-based, community-wide approach to the management of the municipality's assets. Secondly, we wish to express our support for the suggestion developed by others at last night's public meeting -that Council create an ad hoc focus group to review and revise as necessary the excellent plan developed to date. A focus group of this nature, with a specific mandate and timeline, can be of great assistance to a Council - in more widely eliciting public response to and suggestions for the plan, by naming citizens to it with specific expertise, in canvassing pertinent local organizations, and at minimal cost. Thirdly, speaking both on my own behalf and that of the Port Burwell Historical Society, I would recommend the inclusion of 3-4 narrative/pictorial historic plaques in the design to enrich visitor experience, community pride, sense of place and to connect beach goers with the village centre above. Suggested topics: Along the pier- 1. 19th century shipbuilding and lumber trade at the harbour. 2. 20th century trans-lake shipping, particularly the Ashtabula and the coal era. Along the boardwalk: 1. Shipwrecks and rescues on the lake, specifically the 'Cecil M' in 1938. 2. Holidaying at the beach since the Victorian era, highlighting the 1920s-1950s at Sam Shipp's Casino. Plaques could replicate the format used recently at the Market Square. The Historical Society would be pleased to research and write the narrative, and to source photos and diagrams. Design and construction would be approximately$1200 per plaque - $5000 total in a waterfront plan of millions. Lastly, David and I like the plan A LOT-Traffic flow, parking, boardwalk, natural habitat, aesthetics, pedestrian flow. We also like many of the suggestions made by others: connecting the east end up to Memorial Park in particular. A small amount of money each year can make significant progress in a short time toward a goal as well articulated as this plan. Thank you for your consideration of this input. I am opposed to the spending of any tax dollars to enhance the parking Fred Shelly or other amenities on the East Beach. Tax dollars should be used to provide essential services. I can accept the need for some beach maintenance for sanitary health purposes; further enhancements would provide an unnecessary burden on taxpayers. We have seen over the past couple of years sidewalks that are being repaired with orange paint, roads that need to be repaired, bridges that are near the end of their lifespan, garbage collection that is being reduced to the point where some taxpayers are having to pay additional fees for garbage disposal or seek alternative disposal methods and I am sure that the members of Bayham's Council are aware of many other problems that need to be fixed. Contrary to some of the arguments in support of the Beach Proposal such as the Beach Project improvements serving to increasing property values, this has value only if you intend selling your property in the near future. Those who intend to remain, long term, would find their property values increase and thus have their property taxes increase accordingly, they receive a beautified beach they may or may not use and the definite burden of increased property taxes which they may not be able to afford. While I do not have a magic Crystal Ball, the past realty records I am sure will indicate that property values will continue to increase even without the East Beach enhancements. Allowing a Natural verses Manicured beach. I do not think this is something that is desired by many; however some naturalization such as the formation of dunes in from the shore could be an idea that could be a cash savings to the municipality. Water levels by my recollection have reached sustained levels that would be near the southern side of the washroom facility, so some dune formation and allowing of a natural berm formation could be useful and allowing this would reduce the amount of beach that would need to be groomed for sanitation purposes effectively reducing maintenance costs In conclusion my vote is" No" to the East Beach Proposal and I am not interested in any expenditure of tax dollars to continue with this matter. I implore you, Bayham's Councilors in this matter and all Budget considerations to be frugal in your spending. Wisely concentrate your expenditures to essential services such as garbage collection, road repairs, and water and sewer items and let those who want the luxuries find funds from other sources than the general tax coffers. I would like to see a band shell, some type of a water park, a Rick Vernon boardwalk. Thank-you for providing both the opportunity and the conduit to provide Barry W. Parker public input into the subject planning activities. I have read with mixed interest the July 14, 2014 IBI Group Port Burwell Waterfront Master Plan and studied the proposed re design of the beach area as submitted by Spriet Associates dated 31 May 2016 and Mr.Wades letter of December 2015. 1 acknowledge the input and assimilation of various interests culminating in all presentations which are both visionary and socially responsible. The cost benefit analysis, however, is non-existent and conspicuously absent. My concern as a taxpayer at this juncture lies with the fiscal uncertainty surrounding the legal situation regarding the Elgin County Museum and the Township of Bayham. I respectfully suggest it to be more prudent to hold this exercise in abeyance until such time as Ba ham Township knows for certain it's rights and ownership with respect to the Oberon submarine: now a presumably permanent fixture on the riverside. Further, the authors of the Port Burwell Waterfront Master Plan make it abundantly clear that a successful plan would depend upon land ownership rights as articulated several times as tactfully but unmistakably as is possible. Section 3.4, Para 2 Some key issues exist in terms of harbour access, control of adjoining lands areas and the capital costs associated with marina development. Section 3.5 Para 2: In addition to the municipality, other key ownerships in the core reside with private landholders. The quantum of high profile sites held in private ownership may create some challenges for the development of a consistent Waterfront Plan, as in some cases owners have been unwilling to invest in their properties or provide public easements. To this end, ownership may hold back the success of redevelopment of large parts of the Waterfront..........Consideration should be strongly given to the acquisition of privately held lands that might prevent the development of a cohesive Waterfront Master plan. And, of special note, Section 3.5 Para Given the above noted challenges with ownership of the Harbour front lands, it is important the Waterfront Master Plan develop an implementation plan that has staged development in order to accommodate improvements that can be completed absent of the harbour area lands. Similarly, the Master Plan will need to be staged to match financial realities. And even more blunt in Section 5 Para 7 Currently there is a mixture of public and private land owners within the study area which makes investment and the creation of a cohesive waterfront plan difficult. Consolidating ownership within the study area will provide greater flexibility to construct infrastructure and public assets; thus strengthening the functionality and connectivity of subject lands. Indeed, Bayham Township faces some rather unique and unfortunate financial realities and it behooves the corporation to certify its position with respect to the Oberon and lands thereon and then re-visit the Master Plan. If however, council and Bayham Township "damn the torpedoes" (no pun intended) and insist on continuing with the architectural changes as suggested by Spriet et al, and, with all due respect to the stakeholders of said proposal who worked diligently to its end, this writer can't conceive of any argument to justify a beachfront boardwalk. Furthermore, and worthy of note is that on 03 July, 2016, there were approximately 56 cars nonchalantly parked on the parking lot to the east of Robinson and approximately 116 cars/trucks similarly parked on the informal lot to the west of Robinson totalling 170 surpassing the parkin vacancies recommended. f e The aforementioned beach-goers were oblivious to the esthetics of the parking situation and were clearly enjoying the admirably kempt beach. So, to be direct; • Stop all efforts to improve the beach area other than continued maintenance. • Pursue swift legal closure to the Elgin Military Museum debacle. • Explore and act with due diligence upon all options for land ownership and then revise the Port Burwell Waterfront Master Plan accordingly. After all, it is still just a "Plan". First I would like to say the meeting about the beach was very well Jayde Winkworth done! Even with a lot of negativity I think you all did a great job! My thoughts on the beach design is very small. We would need an area in which a stage could be put on the beach for events. On the design with the boardwalk and post there isn't an area for when this needs to be done. I don't believe a boardwalk is a good idea. Yes I love the thought behind it but it makes just another obstacle for people to get to the beach especially those who need a walker, wheelchair or the mother with a stroller. Also the up keep on the boards will cost more in the long run. There needs to be a drain for the water that keeps coming onto the beach that causes the pools of stagnant water. As for parking just leaving it a Gravel and putting up post I think is the best bet low cost and easier to do plus adds the feel of an old harbour town. Thanks again for the chance to put in my ideas. To whom it may concern: In regards to the beachfront project I believe Trevor Shelly funds would be better allocated towards our aging roads and sidewalks. I feel as though orange paint for sidewalks and filling potholes every year are band aids and would rather see these problems fixed. We have already been hit with submarine that raised our taxes and feel that a plebiscite including the entire municipality should be in order so the entirety of the people of the municipality have a say! If you decide to go ahead with the project I do hope you consider paid parking like Port Stanley so the tourists that wish to use the beach can help fund and maintain it. Considering Port Stanley seems to be the desired motto! In regards to the East Beach Design Considerations, I am in favour of Marni Wolfe the CAO's recommendations regarding costing-funding and design proposal. The East Beach is in great need of improvements. It makes sense to approach this project in the most cost-effective manner possible to avoid additional expenses incurred by the tax payers. I feel that applying for grant monies to offset costs for upgrades, stretching the project out over several years, and utilizing our municipal works employees to their fullest potential in this project would be in the best financial interest of our municipality. It makes sense to visit changes the turnabout at a later date at the conclusion of the Port Burwell Storm Sewer Environmental Assessment as drainage is an issue that needs to be addressed as well. The turnabout is functional and serves its purpose well enough for now. The proposed design is modest and realistically represents what is affordable to the municipality at present time. The boardwalk will lend to the aesthetic needs of the beach while accommodating accessibility needs. I like the rope and post design as well as it gives a nautical feel to the beach. I particularly like the proposed signage, this is something our municipal assets lack and I feel it will enhance the aesthetic image of the main street as well as the beach area. In regards to parking, I feel that the proposed parking plan would accommodate more visitors while working within a reasonable budget. I like the Mayor's suggestion that a parking pad be included for motorcycles as it will provide a more stable area for parking. I also feel that imposing a parking fee for non-residents at the East Beach would generate funds that could be utilized for further enhancements to the beach area for years to come. I feel that an exception would be to those visitors whose vehicles have handicapped status; they should be exempt from parking fees as well. To be able to make this possible, the municipality could issue parking permit stickers to residents, and implement parking lot attendants, possibly a future job for a student or two? Regarding other enhancements to the East Beach, the possibilities are endless. I would love to see the addition of a splash pad, amphitheatre, volleyball courts, vendor areas, covered shade areas etc. at the East Beach. The reality is, money is limited at this time and it would not be feasible to incorporate such ideas in the near future without additional funding from an outside source given the current financial obligations of the municipality. Create a Beach front Project Committee that will be transparent to Helen Deltor&Terry Parker municipality and residents of Bayham. The committee should create a survey involving both residents, tourists &vacationers. Change Robinson St. Traffic circle to landscaping as suggested in Storm Water Drain Plans. Colour branding using red& blue on white back ground embraced where appropriate in this project. (as seen on Port Burwell village signage, flower planters, lighthouse etc.) Maintain the whole length of the beach as a recreational beach. Possibly maintain Boardwalk in winter, to facilitate walking. Add beach bathroom facilities to existing change house & remove Port a Potties! Or at least place Port a Potties in a discrete enclosure. 1. Parking should be paid for by any users from outside of Bayham Janet Koost township, as with Port Stanley&Turkey Point, two other great beaches, Port Stanley's decision to charge for parking has not altered the volume usage of the beach. This information was printed in the local papers showing the revenue it generated. I resent the removal of day use garbage, grooming of the beach use of municipal water unless it is paid for by the users of the beach!!! We are not cash machines for persons outside of the township!! To appease residents and take care of our own, the township should issue, -AFFIXED NON VEHICLE TRANSFERABLE parking permits for persons of Bayham township. The parking permits could be gotten from the township with PROOF of residency. Just as we come into get our dog tags. AFFIXED means stuck to the vehicle and non- transferable, means it cannot be used on any other vehicle that it is issued to, and that plate number must be on the permits AND only one vehicle per residence!! NO LOOP HOLES!! -parking regulation could be a summer student job creation, for a student who is a BAYHAM resident THE Prov. park charges for day use, and so should we. When I used to sit down at the boardwalk, several years ago I saw a greyhound bus (coach bus) pull in to the parking lot full of people who disembarked and walked into the back end of the park beach. They were stealing park revenues. The government doesn't give away free beach, so why are we?? Our beach is better than the provincial side because it is groomed for family use. Please do not penalize the residents of Bayham with picking up the costs of day users. Day use costs. The noise pollution, the garbage, the human waste into our systems, the municipal water, and the air pollution from their vehicles, costs Bayham RESIDENTS, and particularly residents of Port Burwell. We like to see them come, but we like to see them go. If you have a nice beach they will come, and they will pay. Compare the costs to use all the other beaches. Turkey point charges, Port Stanley charges, Grand Bend, Pinery. All charge in some form, and for parking. Thank you for reading my submission. I have looked at the design and would suggest that there be more Val Donnell wheelchair accessible picnic area. The shade of the tree is premium and everyone seeking shade tries to utilize the area on the beach under the tree. I have seen also where more than one person needed the picnic table. So additional tables would be wonderful. Now to discuss mobimats so that we can someday afford to have a mobichair. The population that is able to walk is advantaged but those who can't still want and need to be able to enjoy the feeling of sand and surf. I'm sure that this is one your wish list. At least I hope it is. My thoughts.. Serge A Pieters After spending many years working as a Lifeguard on the East beaches of Toronto there are a couple of things I noted during this time.. The number of heat stroke victims was considerable and they often required medical attention. As there is very limited shade areas on the East beach, I think the necessity for an area where people can congregate to get shade is very important.. a large pavilion with potable water access is a feature that should be integrated into the plan. A drinking fountain would be a nice touch as well in this pavilion area. This area should also be easily accessible to the washroom and I suggest a Change area also be considered as the recent change house no longer exists and the current washroom area is not sufficient to accommodate this. A much larger and more easily accessible area for the physically challenged guests in a shady area would be an asset to the beach.. Currently the area set aside for this is neither large enough or easily accessible due to having to push wheelchairs or walkers through sand to get to it.. the current area also needs work as the boards there are falling apart and might even be considered dangerous.. A boardwalk is an expensive luxury we probably don't need but sometime down the road it would also be a nice touch. There is one in the east beaches of Toronto but it also has a running and bike track alongside and is mostly in the shade due to the large and very old tree growth alongside them.. The beach is Port Burwell is our largest asset and needs to be brought into this century.. as a business owner as well as resident, I feel developing it further will ring further prosperity and growth to our community and will increase property values, add further commerce to PB and enhance the quality of life in Bayham for all residents.. Other beach communities have done this and have benefited tremendously from doing so.. Just my thoughts and trying to be reasonable and fiscally responsible... as my Uncle Bob used to say.. "you can't eat a pig like that all at once".. - REPORT o� y CAO portunity Is�o TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-50/16 SUBJECT: ENABLING ACCESSIBILITY FUND BACKGROUND In June 2016 the Enabling Accessibility Fund was launched. The Community Accessibility Stream provides funding to eligible recipients for projects that improve accessibility in communities across Canada. Projects may include: • renovating, retrofitting or constructing community facilities where programs and/or services are or will be offered to people with disabilities; • retrofitting motor vehicles used as community-based transportation; and, • providing information and communications technologies for community use. To be considered eligible for funding, projects must be directly related to removing barriers and increasing accessibility for people with disabilities in Canadian communities. All projects must also meet the specific eligibility criteria identified in calls for proposals, including support from the community. The application deadline is July 26, 2016. DISCUSSION After eliminating projects based on grant program criteria the focus came to the following outline of projects, in no particular order: i. PR-6 —Accessible Viewing Platform —$20,000 ii. Straffordville Library Elevator a. The County has requested the Municipality consider placement of an elevator in the facility as the facility is the second highest use library in Elgin County. As noted within Report CAO 47/16 re Ontario 150 Fund, depending on what Council does with the East Beach Design Considerations this project is a prime candidate for application to the current Enabling Accessibility Fund call for proposals. As a note, the above does not consider projects which the Municipality has made application for under other, current grant programs. Council must also be cognisant that past return of approved EAF Funds may have an impact on future award of the same. For that reason staff have not included Accessible Entrance costing at the Vienna Community Centre. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-50/16 re Enabling Accessibility Fund be received for information; 2. AND THAT Council provide staff direction. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO REPORT o� cao p0l'tunity Is�o TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Paul Shipway, CAO DATE: July 21, 2016 REPORT: CAO-51/16 SUBJECT: MUSEUMS BAYHAM — EDISON MUSEUM BACKGROUND At the Special Meeting of Council on May 11, 2015 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution: THAT staff be directed to bring forward a resolution to declare the Edison Museum and the abutting vacant property surplus to the needs of the Municipality for Council consideration at the May 21, 2015 meeting of Council. At the Regular Meeting of Council on May 21, 2015 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham also passed the following resolution: THAT Report CAO-27/15 re Municipal Property Surplus — Edison Museum be received for information; AND THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham declare 14 Snow Street, being Plan 54 Lot 8-9, Vacant Lot, being Plan 54 Lot 7 and the unopened road allowance between Lot 7 and 8 surplus to the needs of the Municipality for the purpose of sale via a realtor; AND THAT the Municipality provide until June 26, 2015 at 4:30 PM for written public comment on the same. AND THAT staff be directed to circulate the RFP utilizing the Zoning By-law exception and report back to Council. As part of the standard records investigation due diligence when municipal property is to be disposed or transferred, staff sorted through all historical records, which are now digitized and searchable within Laserfiche. No documents of concern were identified. On June 16, 2015 staff were provided with documentation of a donation agreement for the Edison Museum lands from a Museums Bayham member. Staff provided said documents to legal for assessment as follows: The basis for the transfer from Douglas Howard to the Village of Vienna was a conditional gift. The Edison Museum property has conditions that are ongoing, perpetual conditions that were set out in reasonably specific ways. When a Court investigates whether or not the conditions of a gift are being satisfied, it looks to the wishes of the Donor to determine the overall spirit of the gift as well as any specific rules that may have been reduced to writing. In the case of the Edison Museum, the conditions of the gift of land were all reduced to writing and essentially amount to the following: a. The Village of Vienna will create an Edison Museum b. The Village of Vienna will operate an Edison Museum c. The Howards will donate parts 8 and 9 of plan 54 (the Property) d. The gift is binding on successors, assigns, heirs, etc. of the Donor and Donee e. The language included for the length of the conditions is "for all time" As a result, during 2015 and 2016, the Municipal solicitor engaged with the executor of the estate of Mr. Howard, to determine if the Municipality could be released from the conditions of the gift and/or modify the conditions or failing all else transfer the land and structure back to the Howard estate. On January 28, 2016 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolution: THAT the discussion topic of the Edison Museum be referred to Museums Bayham for consideration specifically considering the provision of temporary and static displays and the response be provided to Council in the form of an Advisory Board Committee resolution. On April 21, 2016 the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham passed the following resolutions: 1) Museums Bayham Advisory Board & Committee Resolution re Unstaffed Static Display THAT the Council of the Municipality of Bayham supports the proposal from Randy Breyer for an unstaffed static display in the Bayham Family Table Restaurant for the 2016 season. AND THAT the Curator to be hired develop the static display to be placed at the Bayham Family Table Restaurant. 2) Museums Bayham Advisory Board & Committee Resolution re future of the preservation of the Edison Story THAT the Council of the Municipality of Bayham supports that the current building lot and the current funds that were raised by the building committee be kept in their current state until a final decision is made regarding the Edison Museum. After significant discussions by the municipal solicitor with the heir to the Howard estate it was determined that the heir requested the property be transferred back to the ownership of the Howard estate. As per the direction of Council the transfer process will be completed late August early September. DISCUSSION In assessing the potential future of the Edison Museum or iterations of the same Council has relied on discussions with the Museums Bayham Committee. A key finding of which was that Bayham has a great deal of significant cultural and historical stories to tell beyond just Edison that are not currently being told. The aforementioned is a fact that has been previously identified in numerous studies compiled for the Municipality as indicated below. Likewise, the Edison Museum has had an approximate average annual attendance, between 2010-2015, of 506 persons per year. Subsequently, staff utilized the aforementioned study information, the Council requested Elgin County review of the current Edison Museum, municipal museum, cultural and historical asset best practices and portions of Museums Bayham commentary to develop a proposal for Council consideration to move forward. Studies: 2014 Economic Initiatives & Opportunities Plan Capitalize on Cultural Assets and Resources with a Place-based Approach to Tourism: A comprehensive cultural resource mapping exercise based on current provincial policy and mapping guidelines would further inform Bayham's marketing and promotional efforts and support future community economic development services and programs. Mapping results could assist with the planning and development associated with festivals and events, tourism product development opportunities, and investment opportunities for both the municipality and the county. Rather than focusing on major attractions, place-based cultural tourism provides the visitor with an authentic and memorable experience through discoveries of the destination's history and heritage, its stories, landscape, and culture. This is often a more effective and affordable approach to tourism investment for municipalities. 2014 Port Burwell Waterfront Master Plan The Waterfront Master Plan will expand upon the Bayham Culture Plan (2005) conducted by F.J. Galloway and Associates & IBI Group. Part of the methodology to developing this master plan involved extensive public engagement process for the purpose of identifying current cultural assets as they relate to Bayham's culture, heritage and tourism resources and to explore emerging tourist market potential. Community consultation identified the beach, harbour and shoreline of the Port Burwell area as being a strength in the community. The Bayham Culture Plan lists Four Pillars as the foundation to the culture plan. These are important and should guide the implementation of the Waterfront Master Plan and support the development of a successful area that incorporates recreation and commercial activity. The Bayham Experience is defined in the Plan based on four key opportunity pillars, being: 1) The Lake Erie shoreline, with its beaches, water-based activities, the harbour, marina, vistas and related connections. 2) The heritage and history of the area, involving ship building, lumbering, transportation, the Edison family and numerous other key links that create both attractiveness to the area and unique learning opportunities. 3) Recreation activities that attract visitors to the beaches, waterways, hiking, etc. 4) The natural environment, and the diversity of environmental areas, etc., available within quiet settings, that are not overly developed or threatened, and which provide quality outdoor experiences for both recreational and educational activities. In addition to the Four Pillars, the Bayham Culture Plan outlines a number of relevant goals to guide future development. Most notably: To increase the sense of community pride and engagement in pursuing Bayham's future by encouraging increased participation in community development and a broader understanding and appreciation of the community's tourism potential and heritage resources. 2007 Marketing Strategy & Promotion Initiative for Cultural and Heritage Products In 2006, the Bayham Cultural Committee (BCC) and the Bayham Tourism and Community Marketing Committee (BTCC) determined the need to proceed with implementing some of the recommendations of the Bayham Culture Plan. The document that was produced focused on museum and heritage experiences with the goal of preparing 'a working strategic plan that [would] maximize visitor attendance at heritage events and museums, while preserving their separate and distinct natures.' The study concluded that while there are a wide variety of cultural/heritage resources within the Municipality, they are less distinct and robust from the rest of the County in terms of content and/or quality. The study made a number of recommendations to strengthen this finding that are also applicable to this Waterfront Master Plan, including: i. Emphasize the unique and distinct qualities of the cultural assets will make Bayham more competitive. The cultural assets should be cross- marketed with the other regional attractions. ii. Enhance and make more visible and accessible existing primary heritage and natural resources in Bayham (rather than develop new products). This includes some specific recommendations as follows: a. Design a distinct 'name mark' and graphic identity to be used on all signs and promotional material; b. Install better entrance, banner and event signage in Memorial Park, beach/pier area, Lighthouse, Marine Museum, and all tourist areas; c. Install interpretive and wayfinding signage throughout the tourist areas; d. Use Public Art or Marine Artefacts to enhance the tourist areas, particularly Memorial Park and along trails; e. Install more benches, gathering areas and viewpoints throughout, f. Install a storm shelter for weather viewing near the beach/pier area, g. Develop a mixed-use area adjacent to lighthouse/marine museum that includes food, recreation, crafts and retail opportunities; h. Make improvements to Otter Valley Trail (Glen Erie Line) and Talbot Trail including surface upgrades, signage, access, increased heritage experiences; and i. Install viewing platforms for Big Otter Creek and other significant environmental features. j. Create an identity for Bayham as a place. As a Municipality it doesn't have an identity beyond the local market. In addition to these specific items listed above, the study recommended that three key communication goals be accomplished. These goals are: i. To make the existing heritage resources more visible; ii. To establish Bayham as a place and destination; iii. To create a sense of synergy between cultural assets of Bayham. Elgin County Museum Review Attached hereto as Appendix 'A' is the Elgin County review of the current Edison Museum collection based on the request of the Municipality of Bayham to provide a recommendation on key artefacts currently held and options for reducing the collection size of the Edison Museum. It is important to note the recommendations and considerations within Appendix 'A' provided by the County were provided at the request of the Municipality of Bayham and to the question of refocusing the museum and reducing collection size. Best Practices— Relevant Considerations The following best practices highlight current successes within the municipal and museum world pertaining to effectiveness of programs and initiatives that would align with what staff sense the goals of the Municipality and Museums Bayham are. The focus includes digitization of collections and the changing nature of visitorship and place making through cultural and heritage signage. City of London Culture is a deep and encompassing concept that enhances the quality of life of residents and visitors on a daily basis. Understanding and building upon the complexity of culture, and recognizing the significant value it generates, both from a quality of life and economic perspective, enables the achievement of broader reaching and more meaningful outcomes. Celebrating and promoting London's culture, including its assets, programming, and other defining characteristics, is key to building awareness about the potential value and opportunities culture can bring to the city. i. George Wenige and the Red Bird Bicycle Picnics ii. City Mills: The Legacy of Charles Hunt Grey Roots Museum & Archives: Grey Roots has grown and developed into a unique facility from the County Museum's beginning in 1955 and the later establishment of a County Archives in 2000. With the consolidation of the Grey County Museum, Grey County Archives, and Tourism in 2004, Grey Roots has become a multi- faceted attraction. Innovative programs and demonstrations, rotating exhibits, a heritage village, archival resources and superior customer service come together to create an exciting and educational visitor experience. You can find the Grey County Historic Communities online mapping project at the Grey County Maps Portal, https:Hgeo.grey.ca as well as through Grey Roots Museum &Archives' website Archives Canada Users give Library and Archives Canada low marks for public access to collection. New York Times — Museum Visitorship "Museums in the past are about visitorship, but the meaning of visitorship has changed," he said. "You could be sitting in China, sitting in India, and this will only cause you to put us on your bucket list." Istanbul Modern The redesigned Istanbul Modern allows you to access the museum's exhibitions, events, cinema, educational programs and other activities on your mobile at any time. This new app also offers an interactive museum experience with the brand-new Beacon technology. Aurora Museum &Archives The Mission of the Aurora Museum & Archives is to serve as a repository for the collective stories and experiences of the Town of Aurora. We are committed to preserving, promoting and presenting the vibrant and ever changing character of the Town by making our collection accessible and available. CONCLUSION Considering the above information staff would respectfully recommend the consideration of the following proposal pertaining to the Edison Museum and Museums Bayham: 1) Change the current Curator contract from a fixed term summer contract to a contract for one day/week/year. The estimated financial impact of said change would be approximately $6,000. a. The Curator has rejuvenated and cycled the exhibits at the Marine Museum, provided quality leadership to the students and has a finite understanding of museum operations, collections and displays. Year round application of this knowledge and skill will provide an opportunity for a continued sense of intrigue and evolving experience at the Museum. b. The Curator would be required to rewrite the Museums Bayham Terms of Reference and originating by-law to suit the modified direction, resources and location of Museums Bayham. 2) The Curator design historical/cultural signage to be placed throughout the Municipality commemorating various important, events, persons, places etc. The same to be provided to Museums Bayham for commentary (and/or developed utilizing the expertise of Museums Bayham at the discretion of the Curator). These would be like the Market Square signage with an approximate cost of$1,500/sign. a. This would support place based culture and heritage appreciation and potentially draw visitors into the community to experience the same. Each year additional signage could be developed and placed. Once placed self-guided tours could be designed throughout the Municipality to experience said locations and surrounding amenities. b. A planned and focused use of social media and new age marketing tools would lend additional avenues to assist with drawing persons to the Museum, community and experience. 3) As the Curator develops new exhibits post the same to a dedicated portion of the website and include links to existing Bayham physical locations where persons can experience the culture and history of Bayham in person. This point is closely linked to Point No. 2. 4) Construct an addition to the Marine Museum to account for proper storage of retained Marine Museum and Edison Museum artefacts (in the interim utilize the Municipal Office and Bayham's Family Table location for storage of retained artefacts). The addition would also permit a `Bayham Historical Corner' or like named area specifically for displaying a rotating series of exhibits focused on the history of Bayham, with the focus being the retained artefacts from the Edison Museum. a. Conversations with Reid & Deleye reveal this was contemplated in 2010, with Museums Bayham, and not followed through on. The benefit of an addition to the Marine Museum versus a new build at a new location or even repairs to the historic Edison Museum is an efficiency in resources whereby expenses and resources are consolidated in one location, with a built in audience (a place to get out of the sun on a hot summer day at the beach, etc.). The Marine Museum has proven to have stable annual attendance, with opportunities for attendance improvement as outlined above. The above scenario contemplates the cessation of storing non-municipal artefacts, careful deaccession of the majority of the Edison Museum collection, utilization of existing Edison Museum Reserve Fund (application to Cultural Spaces Fund) and would permit the sale of the `Future Edison Museum' Lands if it is the will of Council". The four point plan, as an option for consideration, outlines a path forward within the current financial realities of Bayham while still achieving key components of previous study information, the Council requested Elgin County review of the current Edison Museum, municipal museum, cultural and historical asset best practices and portions of Museums Bayham commentary to develop a proposal for Council to move forward. ,,The Edison Museum Reserve Fund was originally established by Village of Vienna By-law No. 1997-003, attached hereto as Appendix B'. Subsequently the reserve has been funded by a combination of municipal contributions and a significant amount of Edisonfest/Museums Bayham/volunteer time, with additional financial assistance allocations annually from the Municipality. Utilization of any funds from said Reserve Fund, on the above noted matters, would procedurally require the amendment of the establishing by-law by Council. Operationally, given the volunteer efforts to date consideration of support of Museums Bayham and the Edisonfest Committee on utilization of funds and potentially funds from the sale of land on any path forward, though not procedurally required, would be prudent and give the potential project the best opportunity for success due to support from those who have dedicated so much time and effort to the initiative to date. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-51/16 re Museums Bayham — Edison Museum be received for information; 2. AND THAT Council provide staff direction. Respectfully Submitted by: Paul Shipway CAO APPENDIX 'A' Elgin County - Edison Museum Collection Evaluation The Edison Museum's existing permanent collection numbers approximately 3000 items which includes both artifacts and archival material. Assembled beginning about 1988, the artifact collection is largely composed of furnishings from the Nora Coomb house (535), a large number of Edison Company products - mainly records and players (over 1000), and archival material composed of photographs, letters, newspapers and ledgers. There is a separate collection housed in the museum identified in the database as BHS (for Bayham Historical Society) of which 197 items appear in the database. This material should be returned to the Bayham Historical Society. The Nora Coomb collection is listed in the database at 535 pieces of which 414 are books. The collection was given to the County of Elgin along with her house and several adjacent building lots in 1981, to be used in her words `as a museum to be known as the pioneer Edison Home of Vienna.'She was often referred to as the last of the Edison family to reside in the village. She was a first cousin of Thomas Edison, her father Charles O. Edison being a half-brother of Thomas Edison's father Samuel Jr. The donated house had been built by her father. In 1986 the house and remaining property were transferred to the Village of Vienna. A museum committee was set up to manage the property and carry out Mrs. Coomb's wishes. Shortly after the transfer to Vienna, the house was found to be in poor shape and was subsequently sold and moved to Port Burwell in 1989. In the meantime another house was offered to the museum from Mr. and Mrs. Douglas Howard. This house is the present museum which opened in 1988. The museum committee began to accept donations of artifacts at this point. The current collection has largely been the result of gifts from individual donors. Part of the mandate for Museums Bayham as articulated under Bayham By-Law 2010-059 encompassed a Statement of Purpose that included the intentions of Nora Coomb in her bequest and was extended to include the story of Thomas Alva Edison and his inventions. Present Statement of Purpose: The Edison Museum of Vienna has been established to collect, preserve, promote, research and share the history of Bayham; and Thomas Alva Edison, his inventions and family. The Museum will collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret, in a domestic setting furnishings donated by the late Nora Edison Coomb, as well as artifacts that have been used by, or are relevant to the Edison Family from 1700 to the present. The museum will collect, exhibit and interpret artifacts that tell the story of Thomas Alva Edison, his inventions, and his connection to Vienna and the Bayham area, in addition to other local inventors and famous personalities, in accordance with documented research and records. The Museum will collect, exhibit and interpret artifacts that tell the story of the Bayham area, its hamlets and villages, in accordance with documented research and records. Mission Statement The Edison Museums is committed to collecting, preserving, researching and sharing the history of Bayham and Thomas Alva Edison, his inventions, his family and promoting the Canadian Edison Connection. This is detailed elsewhere under 'Objectives': 'To promote use by the public in recognizing the extent and impact of Thomas Alva Edison, the inventor, on the local area, and world-wide, by his many inventions and family artifacts on display and to promote and preserve the historical artifacts and records of the Bayham area and its inhabitants. The revised Mission Statement and Statement of Purpose put a greater emphasis on Edison and his inventions outside of Bayham than the original museum concept envisioned. Portraying one of the world's most prolific inventors is a challenge for national sites like Henry Ford and is far beyond the capacity of a community museum like Edison. Re-focussing the Statement of Purpose The direction for the Edison Museum should come from refocusing its mandate on the history of Bayham and its communities. This is already contained in the statement of Purpose: `The Museum will collect, exhibit and interpret artifacts that tell the story of the Bayham area, its hamlets and villages, in accordance with documented research and records.' Using this criterion as a means of assessing the collection will result in a collection which can be used to interpret the development of the Bayham community. Artifacts that support the refocused mandate (to interpret the development of the Bayham) can be found in each component of the permanent collection. The collection has been broken into 8 categories: 1) Nora Coomb Collection 2) Edison Company Material 3) Material related to the Village of Vienna and the Municipality of Bayham 4) Clipping files and research files 5) Edison Museum records and archives 6) Edison family records 7) Textiles 8) Other material Process The re-assessment will result in a large number of de-accessions. They should be dispersed under the provisions found in Section 9 - De-accessions, of the Museums Bayham Collections and Records Management Policy. A key objective of the policy is directing de-accessions to other 'cultural institutions' to ensure they `remain in the public domain.' The policy provides for the following methods of de-accession 1) Transfer to education or research collection 2) Donation or trade to another cultural institution 3) Sale to a dealer or by public auction 4) Repatriation to rightful destination (examples human remains ,or illegal ownership) 5) Appropriate permanent physical disposal The De-accessioning policy also provides that funds derived from sales should be used either for `improvement in collections care or by new acquisitions.' This proviso would likely apply to the Marine Museum as it is managed by Museums Bayham. 1) Nora Coomb Collection The collection is composed mainly of furnishings, books and some personal belongings that were located in the Nora Coomb home at the time of her death in 1981. They cover a wide date range. A partial photographic inventory was completed possibly at the time the collection was appraised in 1982. These photographs are stored in a binder in the municipal office. The photographs can be used to identify the Coomb Collection. As well, several of the labels with the photographs contain some information concerning provenance. Books Should be appraised by a competent dealer (Attic Books of London is recommended). An offer from the dealer could be accepted or the collection sent to auction. Art Works by the Edison family and works depicting local scenes should be transferred to the Elgin County Museum. The balance should be offered to area museums with the remainder sent to auction. Furnishings Contains approximately 70 pieces. Several of these pieces were quite possibly made in Bayham and, even if not, represent good examples of furnishings of the period. The following should be retained: Rocking chair-988.01.56 Mantle clock Dining room table 2 pieces of Gouda art pottery The Amberola and recordings given to the Edison family by Thomas Edison The balance of the collection should be offered to neighbouring museums with the remainder to be sold at auction. 2) Edison Company Material Approximately 1000 pieces Includes a number of gramophones and hundreds of recordings, light bulbs and other Edison inventions. Most of this collection has been assembled from various individual donors over time. This collection should be reviewed by the Edison museums in Port Huron and Milan, Ohio and the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn. With one exception, anything not of interest to these institutions should go to auction. Exception, to be retained by Museum Bayham: A restored gramophone donated by Michael Koleada and a selection of recordings. 3) Material related to the Village of Vienna and the Municipality of Bayham For example team uniforms, furnishings made in Bayham or Elgin, such as the large oak and maple sideboard {993.02.01), other items made in Bayham or Elgin, material from Bayham institutions including schools and churches. This material relates directly to the mandate and therefore should be retained. There are perhaps 300 artifacts fitting this description. The largest of which is the sideboard. 4) Clipping files and research files - transfer to the Elgin County Museum 5) Edison Museum records and archives - transfer to the Elgin County Archives 6) Edison family records including correspondence and photographs (some of which are hanging on the walls of the house) - transfer to the Elgin County Archives 7) Textiles -transfer to the Elgin County Museum 8) Other material not covered in any of the above categories should be offered to area museums with the remaining material sent to auction. Conclusion The municipality will undertake a detailed assessment of each artifact and its provenance which will determine whether it fits the refocused mandate. Prior to any dispersal the entire collection should be appraised by qualified people. The Elgin County Museum is prepared to assist with this process. The assessment will reduce the overall size of the collection by at least two-thirds. Storage requirements will likely be on the order of 1000 square feet. De-accessioning should be carried out under the terms of the Museum's own policies. Other Considerations Each artifact's data-base entry should be revised to include its final disposition. Review all terms of the Museums Bayham collection management policy Review all terms and conditions of the Coomb Estate and the Howard House donations Identify and return all outstanding loans Consider what form an acknowledgment of the museum's founders and donors should take. TEUE CORPORATION OF THE VILLAGE OF VIENNA sv-mow NO. 97-03 Being s By-Law to eabbW6 it Reserve end for the Edison Museum of Vienna WHEREAS, Section 163 of the Municipal Act, RS.O., 1990, authorizes a naimiciq�ality to provide for the estsblishment or maintenance of a Reserve Fund in its cmireat esdnoates; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCII. OF THE VILLAGE OF VIENNA HEREBY . ENACTS AS I�YJiuc: 1 . That a Reserve Fund be established and maintained to provide fiords for Operation and/or Capital expenditures of the Edison Museum of Vienna: to be entitled the "Edison Museum of Vienna Reserve Fund Account": Consolidated Reserve Fund General Ledger Account Number 2270 2. 'That any monies provided in the current estimates, by donation, or through fiord raising events, for the said Reserve Fund shall be deposited before the Thirty-First day of December, in that year 3. That the monies raised for the said Reserve Fund shall not be expended, pledged, nor applied for any purpose other than that for which the Fund was established, unless duly authorized by By-law 4. 'I7iat the Clerk treasurer may, from time to time, invest such funds, and the earnings derived from the investment of such -fimds shall form part of the Reserve Fund S. That the Village Auditor shall report annually on the activities and position of the ` ,said Reserve Fund 6. That this By-law shall come into force and take effect as of January 1, 1997. READ A F'IIt.ST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 10TH DAY OF APRIL., 1997. REE V, CLERK File: B/LJ97-03by1 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. Z649-2016 1162291 Ontario Ltd. BEING A BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW No. Z456-2003, AS AMENDED WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it necessary to amend Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended; THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham enacts as follows: 1) THAT By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended, is hereby further amended by amending Schedule"A", Map No. 4 by changing the zoning from Agriculture(A1-1)to Rural Residential Defined Area (RR-30) and Special Agriculture (A2), which lands are outlined in heavy solid lines and marked RR-30 and A2 on Schedule"A"to this By-law,which schedule is attached to and forms part of this By-law. 2) THAT Section 7 Rural Residential (RR) Zone, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding the following section to Exceptions — Rural Residential (RR) Zone: 7.13.30.1 Defined Area RR-30 as shown on Schedule "A" Map 4 to this By-law 7.13.30.2 Minimum Lot Frontage 39.0 meters 7.13.30.3 Prohibited Uses The keeping, raising, and propagation of livestock 3) THIS By-law comes into force: a) Where no notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the expiration of the prescribed time; or b) Where notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21st DAY OF JULY 2016. READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21st DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK SEE SCHEDULE A-MAP No.1 SEE SCHEDULE C- c NIAP NORTH HALL Fyn r w i E w _ L6T I a \ LOT Z LOT 3 [� s� RR-30 " LOT 4 A2 LOT 5 LOT 6 ' LOT 7 LOT 9 E,. a _ � w I d II x En IC H V JF'I ALTT! LOT 109 x LOT 110 y t LOT III if LOT 112 r L 113 OT LOT IIG ' LOT 115 "LOT 116 LOT III 0*0 This is Schedule"A"to By-law HEDULE E RICHMOND No.Z649-2016,passed the ,),19'da Y of�1�y, 2016 1� - �.f Mayor Clerk SEE SCHEDULE A-Pr1AP No.7 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Legend - SCHEDULE A O Z6LA NORTH MAP No.4 LPRCA Regulation Limit o xoo aoo aoo Rktres ZONING BY-LAW Z466-2003 CONSOLIDATED JAN 8,2016 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. Z650-2016 1926662 ONTARIO INC. BEING A BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW No. Z456-2003, AS AMENDED WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it necessary to amend Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended; THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham enacts as follows: THAT By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended, is hereby further amended by amending Schedule "A", Map No. 3 by changing the zoning from Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding to Rural Industrial (M2(h)) Holding and Temporary (T) Zone, which lands are outlined in heavy solid lines and marked M2(h)/T-5 on Schedule "A" to this By-law, which schedule is attached to and forms part of this By-law. THAT Section 26 Temporary (T) Zone, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding the following section to Defined Areas and End Dates: 26.4.2 M2(h)/T5 as shown on Schedule "A" Map 3 permits an outdoor wind turbine blade storage yard, for a period not exceeding three (3) years ending July 21, 2019. THIS By-law comes into force: a) Where no notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the expiration of the prescribed time; or b) Where notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2016. READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK This is Schedule"A"to By-law No.Z650-2016,passed the �rxrs5erxD �S+'dayof ,,�,2016 i d Mayor Clerk . t 4� 0� �g t 4 S� GREEN CINE �z z d 4 jt Do to m m. eu I , x LOT 19 LOT 20 LOT 21 LOT 22 . LQ T-23� �T /r fb LOT 25 0 �q m 4" LOT 26 CCy 5EE SCHEDULED LOT MWPEDEN �j" SEE SCHEDULE A- - MAP No.5 2 SEE SCHEDULE A- MA P No,6 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Legend SCHEDULE A O ZeLA NORTH MAP No.3 LPRCA Regulation Limit o zoo aoo soo s ZONING BY-LAW Z456.2003 CONSOLIDATED JAN 8,2016 ume. THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. Z651-2016 SZORENYI BEING A BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW No. Z456-2003, AS AMENDED WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it necessary to amend Zoning By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended; THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham enacts as follows: 1) THAT By-law No. Z456-2003, as amended, is hereby further amended by amending Schedule "A", Straffordville "F" by changing the zoning from Village Residential Holding (R1(h2)) Zone to a Village Residential (R1) Zone, which lands are outlined in heavy solid lines and marked R1 on Schedule "A" to this By-law, which schedule is attached to and forms part of this By-law. 2) THIS By-law comes into force: a) Where no notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the expiration of the prescribed time; or b) Where notice of objection has been filed with the Municipal Clerk within the time prescribed by the Planning Act and regulations pursuant thereto, upon the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21 ST DAY OF JULY 2016. READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK i SEE S,:HEDU LEA.,MAP No.5 SEE SCHEDULE a.tAA.P No.6 `ty 9 , e lf, t , 5 � I R1 ir ti. I a � L J. _ �, --r� � { _•. _ � I +tee This is Schedule"A"to By-lair No.Z651-2016,passed the J S-f day of j,,/�,2016 ...--: SEE SCHEDu LEA-MARNo,8 S Mayor Clerk MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Legend SCHEDULE F zeL-. STRAFFORDVILLE i LP RCA Reg I1a[bILmrc NORr m wo 20NIN6 8Y-LAW Z456-2003 CONSOLIDATED JAN 8,2016 o THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. 2016-055 A BY-LAW TO ADOPT A FLAG PROTOCOL POLICY WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham recognizes the need for a clear and concise policy concerning the proper etiquette and protocol for the raising and half-masting of flags at municipal facilities; AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it advisable that the Municipal Flag Protocol Policy be confirmed and adopted by By-law; THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT effective upon passage the Municipal Flag Protocol Policy attached hereto as Schedule "A" and forming part of this by-law is hereby adopted as the policies and procedures for the proper etiquette and protocol for the raising and half- masting of flags at municipal facilities for the Municipality of Bayham. 2. THAT this Municipal Flag Protocol Policy By-law may be amended from time to time as directed and deemed necessary by The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham 3. THAT any Municipal Flag Protocol policies previously adopted are hereby repealed; 4. AND THAT this by-law shall come into full force and effect upon final passing. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME and finally passed this 21st day of July 2016. MAYOR CLERK THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. 2016-056 A BY-LAW TO ADOPT A PROCLAMATION — DECLARATION — DONATION POLICY WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham recognizes the need for a clear and concise policy concerning guidelines regarding requests for proclamations, declarations and donations for events and activities that are not within the municipal mandate; AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it advisable that the Municipal Proclamation — Declaration - Donation Policy be confirmed and adopted by By-law; THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT effective upon passage the Municipal Proclamation — Declaration - Donation Policy attached hereto as Schedule "A" and forming part of this by-law is hereby adopted as the policies and procedures in response to requests for proclamations, declarations and donations for events and activities that are not within the municipal mandate for the Municipality of Bayham. 2. THAT this Municipal Proclamation — Declaration — Donation Policy By-law may be amended from time to time as directed and deemed necessary by The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham 3. THAT any Municipal Proclamation — Declaration — Donation policies previously adopted are hereby repealed; 4. AND THAT this by-law shall come into full force and effect upon final passing. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME and finally passed this 21St day of July 2016. MAYOR CLERK BY-LAW NO. 2016-057 OF THE CORPORATION OF MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BEING A BY-LAW TO ADOPT SCHEDULES `A' — `H' FOR THE MANAGEMENT, REGULATION & CONTROL OF CEMETERIES WHEREAS on June 7, 2016 By-Law 2015-116, being a By-Law for the Management, Regulation & Control of Cemeteries for the following cemetery licenses: 00513 00518 00524 00529 00534 00514 00519 00525 00530 00515 00520 00526 00531 00516 00522 00527 00532 00517 00523 00528 00533 was approved by the Bereavement Authority of Ontario; AND WHEREAS the Bereavement Authority of Ontario deems it necessary to remove all schedules as follows from the By-Law for the Management, Regulation & Control of Cemeteries: Schedule 'A' — Contract for Purchase of Interment Rights, Cemetery Supplies or Services; Schedule `B' — Interment Rights Schedule `C' — Interment Rights Resale Endorsement Schedule `D' — Interment Permission Form Schedule `E' — Interment Rights Transfer Form Schedule `F' — Repurchase of Interment Rights Request Form Schedule `G' — Columbarium Schedule `H' — Cemetery Rates & Fees AND WHEREAS the Bereavement Authority of Ontario deems it necessary to enact a by- law to adopt Schedules "A"—"H"; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: THAT effective upon passage of By-Law 2016-057 Schedules `A' — `H' attached hereto and forming part of this by-law are hereby adopted and shall remain in effect until amended or rescinded; AND THAT this by-law shall come into full force and effect upon final passing. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 2V DAY OF JULY, 2015 MAYOR CLERK -V,AYHAA? The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham 9344 Plank Road, Box 160 Straffordville, ON NOJ 1Y0 Telephone: 519-866-5521 www.bavham.on.ca bayham(a--)bayham.on.ca CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF INTERMENT RIGHTS, CEMETERY SUPPLIES OR SERVICES Schedule "A" to By-law 2016-057 Cemetery operator License # 3267732 2016 In Name and Address of Cemetery CONTRACT INFORMATION Contract Reference # Date of issue PURCHASER INFORMATION Name Address PC Telephone Email address Purchaser's relationship to the Recipient(s) RECIPIENT#1 INFORMATION RECIPIENT#2 INFORMATION Name Name Address Address Province Postal Code Province Postal Code Telephone Telephone Email Email This contract is between the Purchaser AND The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham For cemetery Interment Rights, Supplies and/or Services for the recipient(s) as identified in this contract. To be made in DUPLICATE Schedule "A"to B/L 2016-057 - 2 - The Purchaser (if different than the Recipient (s) represents being legally authorized or charged with the responsibility for the Recipient(s) cemetery Interment Rights and cemetery pre-paid supplies and services arrangements specified in this contract. This agreement will be enforceable to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Interment Rights per regular lot may include no more than one full size traditional body interment, plus two (2) cremation interments, provided the first interment is in a vault. Alternatively, up to four (4) cremation interments only, may be made in a regular lot. No more than two (2) appropriately sized urns shall be placed in any single columbarium niche or in a designated 3' x 3' cremation lot. Cremation urns or containers may be used for burials in regular lots when used for cremation burials only. All cremated human remains interred in a regular 4'x10' lot on top of a full body casket in a vault shall be placed in a small flat six by six inch (6"x6") box type container with a depth of no more than four (4) inches to ensure at least two feet (2') of earth coverage over the cremation remains, at surrounding ground level. For each cremation interment on top of an existing body burial with a vault, permission forms must be completed, signed and on file with the Municipality, in advance. **The purchase price per regular lot, cremation lot or niche permits one interment only in the respective lot or niche. **Each additional interment in a regular lot, cremation lot or niche is subject to payment of an additional fee, as may be in place at time of such interment, and must be properly authorized in writing. ** Resale: Interment Rights may be resold to a third party, through the operator, subject to restrictions. The Purchaser agrees that in the event of resale of the said Internment Rights, this certificate shall be returned with the completed and signed Part 1 and Part 2 of the Interment Rights Resale Endorsement — Form "C", to the Cemetery Operator who, upon completion, approval and payment of any required fees, will issue a new certificate to the new Interment Rights holder. **( Examples of Care and Maintenance Fund contributions from purchase of interment rights: 1. The Purchase Price of$600.00 (six hundred dollars) per regular lot includes $300.00 to the Care and Maintenance Fund and allows one interment in the regular lot. 2. The purchase price of$300.00 (three hundred dollars) per cremation lot includes $150.00 to the Care and Maintenance Fund and allows one interment in the cremation lot.) 2016 Schedule "A"to B/L 2016-057 - 3- 3. The Purchase Price of$1200.00 (twelve hundred dollars) per single columbarium niche includes $300.00 to the Care and Maintenance Fund and allows one interment in a single columbarium niche. Interment Rights to Regular/ Cremation Lot or Columbarium Niche purchased: Location & Details Block Section Plot# Row Grave(s): No. of graves(s) Dimensions per lot Area of square feet. OR: Columbarium Niche Unit 1 or 2 Side A or B # The number of Regular Lot(s) / Cremation Lot(s) or columbarium niche purchased: at ($600 / $300 or$1200) each, equals which includes ($ 150, $300 or$300) to the Care and Maintenance Fund. (Circle above as appropriate) Interment Rights Purchases: Amount HST Regular lot(s) Cremation lot(s) Columbarium Niche Services: Identification & marking of lot for burial Identification & marking of lot for marker placement Placement of up to four corner posts provided by interment rights holder Duplicate Interment Rights Certificate —Transfer Duplicate Interment Rights Certificate — Resale Endorsement Interment Permission Form No charge Municipal fee for opening & closing Cremation grave Municipal fee for opening & closing Columbarium Niche Fee for each additional interment in a regular or cremation lot or inurnment in a single columbarium niche (circle selection) Name plate & engraving plus cast shipping Extra copy of Cemetery By-law Booklet Purchase of two (2) or four(4) corner markers (circle choice) Ministry interment/inurnment fee N/C Other Sub-Totals + Total Contract Price $ 2016 Schedule "A"to B/L 2016-057 -4 - TERMS & CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT 1. THE FOLLOWING TRUSTING PROVISIONS ARE IN EFFECT: Per each regular Lot: 40% of the Purchase price or $ 300, whichever is greater Per each cremation lot: 40% of the Purchase price or $150, whichever is greater. Per each columbarium niche: 40% of the Purchase price or $300, whichever is greater. 2. CONTRIBUTION TO CARE AND MAINTENANCE FOR MARKER INSTALLATION: Flat marker 173 square inches or more: $ 50. Upright monument up to 4 feet in height or width $100. Upright monument more than 4 feet in height or width $200. 3. A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF INTERMENT RIGHTS INCLUDES: • In accordance with the cemetery By-law 2015-116, the following restrictions on the exercising of interment rights and documents required are under the Interment Heading. • If an interment rights holder desires to transfer an interment right, the rights holder shall give notice on the appropriate form Schedule "E" to the cemetery owner and return the original interment rights certificate. Upon full payment of all applicable fees, the cemetery owner shall issue a new interment rights certificate to the Transferee. • For Contract Cancellation within thirty days of purchase, refer to the By-law heading "Cancellation". • In accordance with By-law 2015-116, restrictions on the transfer of interment rights can be found under the Transfers, Repurchases & Third Party Sales heading. • The resale of interment rights after 30 days by the purchaser or interment rights holder, as applicable, to a third party is now permitted. Please refer to "Resales" under the Transfers, Repurchases & Third Party ReSale heading. NOTE: ALL THIRD PARTY RESALES OF INTERMENT RIGHTS SHALL BE CARRIED OUT THROUGH THE CEMETERY OPERATOR. 4. CANCELLATION OF CONTRACT • If the above Interment Rights have been paid for in full, have not been used, and the Interment Rights Certificate has not been issued, the Purchaser may, in writing to the owner, within thirty (30) days from the signing of the contract, cancel this contract and receive a full refund. • If the above Interment Rights have been paid for in full, have not been used, and the Interment Rights Certificate has been issued, the Interment Rights Holder(s) may, in writing to the owner, within thirty (30) days from the signing of the contract, cancel this contract and receive a full refund. • The Purchaser or Interment Rights Holder, as applicable, may in writing to the owner, within thirty (30) days from the signing of the contract, cancel pre-paid supplies and services, provided they are paid in full, and receive the refund. 2016 Schedule "A"to B/L 2016-057 - 5- 5. RESALE OF INTERMENT RIGHTS AFTER 30 DAY COOLING-OFF PERIOD & PRICE • Unless the interment rights have been exercised the Purchaser or Interment Rights Holder, as applicable, retains the right to re-sell the interment rights. • A Purchaser or an Interment Rights Holder cannot re-sell their Interment Rights for more than the current value on the cemetery price list. • The current cost for the cemetery operator to complete and provide a new Interment Rights Certificate upon resale is listed on the Cemetery Tariff/Fee Schedule. 6. SUBDIVISION OF INTERMENT RIGHTS • No Purchaser or Interment Rights Holder(s) may sub-divide and sell or transfer a portion of an Interment Rights. 7. MEMORIALIZATION • The purchase of a lot permits placement of a maximum of one (1) upright monument only on a traditional full body interment, plus up to two (2) cremations or on a lot with up to 4 cremations only, subject to approved by-laws. • Care and Maintenance Fund Contribution for Marker and Monument Installation: In accordance with the FBCSA and Ontario Regulation 30/11, the following contributions will be made to the Care and Maintenance Fund for every installation of a marker or monument: (a) In the case of a flat marker measuring less than 1,116.3 sq. cm. (173 sq. in.) $0.00 (b) In the case of a flat marker measuring over 1,116.3 sq. cm. (173 sq. in.) $50.00 (c) In the case of an upright monument measuring 1.22 m. (4 ft.) or less in height or length, including the base $100.00 (d) In case of an upright monument measuring more than 1.22m. (4 ft.) either in height or length, including the base $200.00. • Only the Memorial plaque included with the purchase of the Niche are permitted as found under the Columbarium heading. • Interment Rights Holder(s) request to remove memorialization: A marker, monument, or memorialization purchased and/or installed by anyone other than the Rights Holder(s) may be removed by the cemetery representative on the written request of the Rights Holder(s). 8. PAYMENT TERMS • Payment in full is required at time of purchase. Full payment must be made before any burial or memorialization can take place. An Interment Rights Certificate will not be issued until the Interment Right(s) and Care and Maintenance portions have been paid in full. An Interment Rights Certificate(s) will be issued within 14 days of full payment and signing of the contract by the operator. 9. CAUSES BEYOND THE CEMETERY OPERATOR'S CONTROL • The cemetery operator cannot be responsible if unable/prevented from carrying out this contract due to causes beyond its control. 2016 Schedule "A"to B/L 2016-057 - 6 - Privacy Policy Personal Information: The Purchaser acknowledges and provides consent to permit the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham to collect, use and disclose your personal information in accordance with the requirements under the FBCSA and Ontario Regulation 30/11 for information within the municipal owned cemeteries public register. The Purchaser also understands that the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham does not rent or sell personal information to third party organizations. Consumer Information Guide and cemetery price list: By initialing below, the purchaser acknowledges receiving a copy of the Ontario Government's Consumer information Guide (where made available by the Registrar) and the cemetery price list at the time of entering into this contract. {_) I hereby acknowledge I have been offered and/or received a copy of the Ontario Government's Consumer Information Guide and the Cemetery Price List. I have reviewed the Contract's terms and conditions and hereby confirm that the Interment Rights, as specified in this contract are complete and correct. I direct the operator to proceed with the sale of the Interment Right(s), as identified in the contract in accordance with the cemetery by-laws which are now or at any time hereafter in force. {_) I hereby acknowledge I have received and reviewed a copy of the cemetery's by-laws. The Terms and Conditions set out in this contract expire within 30 days unless executed by the purchaser and the operator. The contract date set out below is the date on which this contract is accepted by the operator. [_) I acknowledge having received a copy of this contract, and assume full responsibility for payment of the total contract amount to the operator in accordance with the contract's terms and conditions. It is agreed between the parties that this contract and the operation of the cemetery, including restrictions on Interment Rights, is subject to the Cemetery By-laws of the Municipality of Bayham and the Purchaser hereby acknowledges receipt of a copy of the current By-laws and that the "Terms & Conditions of Contract" above, have been read and understood. Total Contract Price $ (from page 3) Ordered by: Signature (Purchaser Name) Payment by cheque #: received on Accepted on behalf of the Operator by: Name Cemetery Operator/ Representative: Signature Contact: Email: Telephone #:_ 2016 -$AYHAA MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM -� 9344 Plank Road, Box 160 Straffordville, ON NOJ 1Y0 Telephone 519-866-5521 www.bayham.on.ca bayham(a)bayham.on.ca Schedule "B" to B/L 2016-057 INTERMENT RIGHTS CERTIFICATE Certificate #: Operator License # 3267732 Pursuant to the Cemeteries Act and Regulations and all amendments thereto, BETWEEN: The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham Cemetery Name and Address Here hereinafter called "The Cemetery Operator" AND: Interment Rights Holder, hereinafter called the "Purchaser" In consideration of the sum of Dollars ($ ), receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and which included the sum of Dollars ($ ), for Care and Maintenance which is deposited with the Municipality of Bayham, the Cemetery Operator agrees to assign the Purchaser the Interment Rights as follows: Section: Block: Plot# Row: Grave(s)/Lot(s): Area of square feet. OR: Columbarium Niche Unit (1 or 2) Side (A or B) # Date of Purchase/Transfer or Third Party Resale (circle 1 only): Interment Rights per regular lot may include no more than one full size traditional body interment, plus two (2) cremation interments, provided the first interment is in a vault. All cremated human remains interred in a regular 4'x10' lot on top of a full body casket in a vault shall be placed in a small flat six by six inch (6"x6") box type container with a depth of no more than four (4) inches to ensure at least two feet (2') of earth coverage over the cremation remains, at surrounding ground level." Section 3.58 Alternatively, up to four (4) cremation interments only, may be made in a regular lot. A maximum of two (2) cremation burials are permitted in a 3' x 3' cremation lot or in a single columbarium niche. Cremation urns or containers may be used for burials in regular lots when used for cremation burials only and in designated 3'x3' cremation burial lots. 2016 Interment Rights Certificate-Schedule B to By-Law 2016-057 Page 2 of 2 For each cremation interment on top of an existing body burial with a vault, permission forms must be completed, signed and on file with the Municipality, in advance. No more than two (2) appropriately sized urns shall be placed in any single columbarium niche. The purchase price per regular lot, cremation lot or niche permits one interment only in the respective lot or niche. Each additional interment in a regular lot, cremation lot or niche is subject to payment of an additional fee, as may be in place at time of such interment, and must be properly authorized in writing. Resale: Interment Rights may be resold to a third party, through the operator, subject to restrictions. The Purchaser agrees that in the event of resale of the said Internment Rights, this certificate shall be returned with the completed and signed Part 1 and Part 2 of the Interment Rights Resale Endorsement — Form "C", to the Cemetery Operator who, upon completion, approval and payment of any required fees, will issue a new certificate to the new Interment Rights holder. The Purchaser, by signature below acknowledges acceptance of this indenture and confirms that the By-law(s) governing the operation of the cemetery have been received and read, and agrees to be guided by the said By-law(s) as well as the provisions of the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act and Regulations thereto, as if these were included as part of this indenture. With respect to the erection or installation of markers, the Purchaser agrees to abide by the restrictions in the Cemetery by-law(s) regarding the erection or installation of monuments or markers. Signature of Purchaser: In WITNESS whereof the Cemetery Operator has affixed its signature by the hands of its proper signing officer this day of in the year Cemetery Operator Representative Name: Signature: To be made in DUPLICATE (Issue one certificate for each lot sold) 2016 Schedule "C" to B/L 2016-057 g,AYHA MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM 9344 Plank Road, Box 160, Straffordville, ON NOJ 1Y0 Telephone 519-866-5521 Website: www.bayham.on.ca Email: bayham(a)bayham.on.ca INTERMENT RIGHTS RESALE ENDORSEMENT Regarding the Cemetery at [If there are more than one Interment Rights Holders, all living Rights Holders shall sign the endorsement certificate. All Third Party Purchaser's shall be listed in full on the endorsement certificate in order to register their names and addresses on the cemetery records.] Part 1 — Interments Rights Holder(s) Resale Endorsement I/we, the Interment Rights Holder(s) registered on the cemetery records, hereby wish to re-sell the Interment Rights to Section: Block: Plot# Row: Grave(s)/Lot(s): to a third party purchaser. I/we certify that the Interment Rights are being resold in accordance with the Funeral Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 (FBCSA) and Ontario Regulation 30/11, and the Cemetery By-law(s). I/we further certify that the resale is for an amount no greater than the value on the cemetery price list in effect, at the time this resale is completed. I/we hereby acknowledge and direct the above named Cemetery to resell the identified Interment Rights to the purchaser(s) listed below. Interment Rights Holders contact information: Name(s): Address: PC Telephone #: Email: Signed: & Interment Rights Holder(s) Part 2 — Acknowledgement of Purchaser(s) I/we the third party purchaser(s) acknowledge that we have received a current copy of the Cemetery By-laws from the Interment Rights Holder(s). I/we have reviewed the Cemetery By-laws as they may apply to the Interment Rights and hereby agree to abide by the Cemetery By-laws and certify that I/we meet all necessary qualifications and restrictions under those By-laws. I/we have been informed by the Interment Rights Holder(s) that the Interment Rights being resold contains lot(s), and that no lot(s) have been utilized and said lots remain available for future use. Third Party Purchaser's contact information: Name(s) Address: PC Telephone #: Email: Signed: & *Date received by Cemetery Representative: (Mandatory) 2016 Schedule "C" to B/L 2016-057 Parts 1 and 2 of this form must be completed by the interment rights holder(s) and returned to the Municipal Treasurer in order to proceed with Re-sale of interment rights to a third party, subject to restrictions in the cemetery by-law. The Resale Endorsement fee listed in the current Cemetery Fee Schedule will apply based on the date this form is received by the Cemetery Operator. Part 3 — Cemetery Representative Acknowledgement and Acceptance of the Resale Endorsement The Operator for the above named Cemetery hereby confirms that the cemetery records have been reviewed and that the above Interment Rights Holder(s) are registered on the cemetery records and have the authority to resell the Interment Rights to the Third Party Purchaser(s). It is also confirmed that no monies are owing by the Interment Rights Holder(s) to the above named Cemetery in respect of the Interment Rights. On behalf of the above named Cemetery, I hereby accept and confirm that the resale has been recorded on the cemetery records and have issued a new Interments Rights Certificate in the name(s) of the Third Party Purchaser(s), as applicable for each resold lot. I also confirm payment of the Interment Rights Resale Endorsement Fee of $ plus HST of $ has been received and paid in full by cheque # in the amount of Accepted on behalf of the Cemetery License # 3267732 Municipality of Bayham Treasurer: Date of Resale: APPLICATION OF RESALE ENDORSEMENT FEES Calculation of the applicable fee(s) for Interment Rights Resale Endorsement will be based on the date this form is received by the Cemetery Operator representative and the current approved fee on the received date. Based on the fee at time of 2016 By-law approval, the Resale Endorsement Fee Payable = $75.00 plus HST $9.75 = $ 84.75, for each new Interment Rights Certificate issued. Examples 1. In the case of four cremation burials to be placed in a regular lot, (or other combinations as applicable), up to four names may be included on the certificate. In this instance, one original would be created and retained by the Operator, certified photocopies would be provided to each of the four persons listed and the respective Cemetery Secretary-Treasurer, if/as applicable, upon full completion of the transaction. This would be considered as one new certificate being issued at a cost of$84.75. 2. A Third Party Resale that pertains to more than one lot, will require a separate interment rights certificate to be issued for each lot regardless of the number of proposed interments in each. Example: 4 resold lots = 4 fees /4 certificates at $84.75 each for a total fee cost of$336.00 2016 Schedule "D" to B/L 2016-057 $AYH�4 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM 9344 Plank Road, Box 160, Straffordville, ON NOJ 1YO Telephone 519-866-5521 Website: www.bayham.on.ca Email: bayham(U-)bayham.on.ca INTERMENT PERMISSION FORM Regarding the Cemetery at Section: Block: Plot# Row: Grave(s)/Lot(s): OR: Columbarium Niche Unit (1 or 2) Side (A or B) # Certificate #(s) OR Other Document(s) (Perpetuity Receipt, Deed or other document acceptable to the Cemetery Operator) 1/We of Address: PC Telephone: Email: hereby authorize the burial of in the above noted lot/niche. I acknowledge the following interment requirements (B/L 2015-116, Sections # 3.44, 3.45, 3.46 & 3.47 & 3.58): 3.44 Subject to restrictions, no more than three interments may be made in a regular lot, the first interment must be in a concrete vault, and the remaining two interments must be cremation burials for which proper authorization has been documented and approved by the cemetery representative. 3.45 Installation of a concrete vault for all casket type burials is strongly recommended. 3.46 A full body casket in a vault or cremation interment must be to a depth that will ensure at least two feet of earth coverage over the case at the surrounding ground level; 3..47 No more than four (4) cremation interments, if placement allows, shall be made in a regular lot. A maximum of two (2) cremation burials are permitted in a 3' x 3' cremation lot. 3.58 All cremated human remains interred in a regular 4'xl 0' lot on top of a full body casket in a vault shall be placed in a small flat six by six inch (6"x6") box type container with a depth of no more than four (4) inches to ensure at least two feet (2') of earth coverage over the cremation remains, at surrounding ground level. Signature of Interment Rights Holder Signature of Interment Rights Holder {Both if Joint Rights Holders only} In WITNESS whereof the Cemetery Owner has affixed its signature by the hands of it's proper signing officer this day of in the year For Cemetery Operator: (Print Name) Signature: 2016 Schedule "E"to B/L 2016-057 MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Bp�YIA 9344 Plank Road, Box 160, Straffordville, ON NOJ 1Y0 Telephone 519-866-5521 Website: www.bayham.on.ca Email: bayham(@-bayham.on.ca INTERMENT RIGHTS TRANSFER FORM Regarding the Cemetery at Section: Block: Plot# Row: Grave(s)/Lot(s): OR: Columbarium Niche Unit (1 or 2) Side (A or B) # Certificate #(s) or other documents dated (Perpetuity Receipt, Deed or other document acceptable to the Cemetery Operator) I/We of Address: Telephone: Email: hereby authorize the transfer of the above noted lot(s), made without consideration, as a gift to: Name Address Telephone: Email: Name Address Telephone: Email: I/We hereby relinquish all rights to the above lot(s) and submit the original copy of the Interment Rights Certificate and request that the Cemetery Operator issue a new certificate(s) in the above noted name(s). (One name per regular lot unless multiple cremation or a mix of burials are proposed, in which case, all names must be provided in writing.) In WITNESS whereof the Cemetery Operator has affixed its signature by the hands of it's proper signing officer this day of in the year Signature of Interment Rights Holder Signature of Interment Rights Holder (Both if Joint Rights Holders only) Transfer Fee: $35.00+$4.55 HST per certificate issued For Cemetery Operator.- Name: (Print) Signature: Fee amount received: $ 2016 Schedule "F" to B/L 2016-057 $AYHAAf MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM 9344 Plank Road, Box 160 Straffordville, Ontario NOJ 1YO Telephone 519-866-5521 Website: www.bayham.on.ca Email: bayham(c_bayham.on.ca REPURCHASE OF INTERMENT RIGHTS REQUEST FORM Regarding the Cemetery at Section: Block: Plot# Row: Grave(s)/Lot(s): OR: Columbarium Niche Unit (1 or 2) Side (A or B) # Certificate #(s) OR Other Document(s) (Perpetuity Receipt, Deed or other document acceptable to the Cemetery Operator) I/We of Address: Telephone: Email: hereby request the repurchase of the above noted lot(s) by the Cemetery Board, in the negotiable amount of $ I/We acknowledge that the Care & Maintenance portion is non-refundable and a negotiated repurchase, including relevant HST, apply only to the interment right portion of purchases made after May 1, 2014. I/We hereby submit the original copy of the Interment Rights Certificate(s) and upon receipt of the Repurchase Price, I/we hereby relinquish all rights to the above lot(s) (All rights holders must sign). Signed & Dated: Signature of Interment Rights Holder Signature of Interment Rights Holder Upon successful negotiation, the following is to be completed I/We hereby acknowledge receipt of the agreed repurchase amount of $ paid by cheque # dated Signature of Interment Rights Holder Signature of Interment Rights Holder In WITNESS whereof the Cemetery Owner has affixed its signature by the hands of it's proper signing officer this day of in the year For Cemetery Operator: THIS FORM TO BE USED ONLY WHEN THE CEMETERY OPERATOR CHOOSES TO NEGOTIATE THE REPURCHASE OF INTERMENT RIGHTS. 2016 Unit 1 UNIT 1-SIDE'A' UNIT 1 - SIDE 'B II II 1-1A 1-2A 1 11-3A 1-2 B -3 B I 14 B II II M II II � II II II II � II II 1-5A I 1 4A ` 1 6A 1- B ` 1-5B 1-6B II II II II II II II II 56.0D0 5 130 II II II II 1-7A 1-SA 11-9A 1-7B 1-8B 1-9B II II � � II II I I I I 1 10A 1 1 1 11A l 1-12A i i 1-103 1-118 1-12B II II � II II I II II II II 6000 54.750 54J50 Unit 2 4.Ofl0--i UNIT 2 51DE'A' - >_ UNIT 2-SID'E'B' II II II II 2-1A 2-2A 2-3A 2-113 1 2-213 12 3B II II II II II II 1 2 4A 2-5A 2-6A i ' 2 5B 2-68 2-48 II II II II 5B.dDO i 56-[700 II II � II II 2-7A ' 2-8A ; i 2-9A I I I I I I 12-713 12-813 12-9B II II II II II II � � II II j 2-10A 2-11A 2-12A 2-1QB 1 2-11B 1 2-12B II II II II II II II II 6.Ma f� 54750� -- Schedule H to By-Law 2016-057 Municipality of Bayham 9344 Plank Road, Box 160 Straffordville, ON NOJ 1Y0 Tel: 519-866-5521 Email: bayham@bayham.on.ca Web: www.bayham.on.ca License # 3267732 Cemetery Rates & Fees Fee HST@13% Total Identification & Marking of lot for burial $ 50.00 $ 6.50 $ 56.50 Identification & Marking of lot for marker placement $ 35.00 $ 4.55 $ 39.55 Placement of up to 4 corner posts provided by interment rights holder $ 35.00 $ 4.55 $ 39.55 Interment Rights Certificate - Transfer $ 35.00 $ 4.55 $ 39.55 Interment Rights Certificate - Resale Endorsement $ 75.00 $ 9.75 $ 84.75 Interment Permission Form No charge Municipal Cremation fee for opening & closing grave $300.00 $ 39.00 $ 339.00 Regular Lot Purchase price of regular lot total (Interment Rights @ $300, C&M @ $300) Purchase price permits one interment in a lot. Purchase price permits the erection of a flat or upright marker, subject to approved by-laws. $600.00 $ 78.00 $ 678.00 Fee for each additional interment in any regular lot, subject to completion of authorizing documents. Two (2) cremation burials are permitted on top of a casket burial, provided the first interment is in a vault, and subject to completion of authorizing documents. Up to four (4) cremation burials only are permitted in a regular lot, subject to completion of authorizing documents. $300.00 $ 39.00 $ 339.00 Cremation Lot Fee HST@13% Total Purchase price of one cremation lot total (Interment rights @ $150, C&M @ $150) Purchase price permits one interment in a lot. Purchase price permits the erection of one flat marker Only, at a maximum size of 24" x 14", or less, on a 12" diameter post hole filled with a minimum depth of Three feet of concrete, subject to approved by-laws. A maximum of two (2) cremation burials are permitted in a cremation lot, subject to completion of authorizing documents. A cremation lot is 3' x 3'. $300.00 $ 39.00 $ 339.00 Fee for each additional interment in any lot used for cremation purposes, subject to completion of authorizing documents $300.00 $ 39.00 $ 339.00 Columbarium Niche Fee HST@13% Total Purchase price of a single columbarium niche includes (Interment Rights @ 900 C&M @ 300) Purchase price permits one cremation inurnment in a single columbarium niche A maximum of two (2) cremation inurnments are permitted in a single columbarium niche, subject to completion of authorizing documents $1,200.00156.00 $1,356.00 Niche Nameplate & Engraving Must be purchased as part of initial columbarium purchase price $300.00 $39.00 $339.00 Interment — Open/Close $150.00 $19.50 J$169.50 Fee for a second cremation inurnment in a single columbarium niche $300.00 �$39.00 �$339.00 General Extra copy of Cemetery By-law/Booklet $ 2.00 $ 0.26 $ 2.26 Purchase of 2 small corner markers $ 10.00 $ 1.30 $ 11.30 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. 2016-058 BEING A BY-LAW TO REPEAL THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW 2014-082 WHEREAS the Section 8 of the Municipal Act, 2001, c.25 as amended provides that a municipality has the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person for the purpose of exercising its authority under this or any Act; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it necessary to repeal By-law 2014-082, being a By-law to adopt a policy for the operation and management of the Straffordville and Vienna Community Centre Facilities; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the By-Law 2014-082 enacted by the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham and attachments thereto is hereby repealed; 2. AND THAT this by-law shall come into full force and effect upon final passing. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 215t DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW 2016-060 A BY-LAW TO ASSUME AND ESTABLISH LANDS IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM AS PART OF THE OPEN PUBLIC HIGHWAY SYSTEM (PETERS COURT) WHEREAS the Municipality of Bayham owns the portion of Peters Court identified as Block 6 of Registered Plan of Subdivision 11 M-187; AND WHEREAS Peters Court identified as Part 1 on Reference Plan 11 R9312 being in Part Lot 7 Concession 8, being a travelled road in Bayham; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Municipality of Bayham desires to establish the said parcel of land, Block 6, as part of the open public highway system of the Municipality pursuant to Section 31(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended. THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the parcel of land listed below and situated in the Municipality of Bayham in the County of Elgin be and the same is hereby assumed and established as part of the open public highway system of the Municipality of Bayham: Description Public Highway Name Block 6, Registered Plan of Subdivision 11 M-187 Peters Court 2. THAT this by-law shall take effect upon the date of its registration in the Land Titles Division for the County of Elgin (No. 11). 3. THAT the Clerk or designate is hereby authorized to amend the parcel designation noted in this By-law, if necessary, upon registration of this By-law. READ A FIRST, SECOND TIME AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21s'DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. 2016-064 A BY-LAW TO AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WM. DAN &CAROLYN MURRAY AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, R.S.O. 2001, c. 25 as amended provides that a lower tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting structures, including fences and signs; AND WHEREAS Section 45 (9.1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c P.3 as amended provides in part that a Committee of Adjustment that imposes terms and conditions under subsection (9), may also require the owner of the land to enter into one or more agreements with the municipality dealing with some or all of the terms and conditions; AND WHEREAS Wm. Dan&Carolyn Murray are the owners of lands in Lot 23 Concession 5, known municipally as 56829 Jackson Line, in the Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin; AND WHEREAS the Municipality of Bayham Committee of Adjustment has granted the minor variance Application A-08/16, including the condition that the owners execute a development agreement for the supplementary farm dwelling as per policies of Section 2.1.10 the Official Plan; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk be and are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Agreement with Wm. Dan & Carolyn Murray affixed hereto and forming part of this By-law and marked as Schedule"A". READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21st DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK 1 SCHEDULE `A' TO BY-LAW 2016-064 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WM. DAN & CAROLYN MURRAY AND THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM FOR LANDS LOCATED AT 56829 Jackson Line, Lot 23, Concession 5 Municipality of Bayham 2 THIS AGREEMENT made in duplicate this 21st day of July 2016. BETWEEN: WM. DAN & CAROLYN MURRAY Hereinafter called the "OWNER" OF THE FIRST PART -AND - THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Hereinafter called the "MUNICIPALITY" OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Owner is the owner in fee simple of the lands situate in the Municipality of Bayham, in the County of Elgin being Lot 23, Concession 5, more particularly described in Attachment"A"attached hereto(and hereafter referred to as the "Lands"); AND WHEREAS the Owner intends to locate one (1) mobile home in accordance with the Conceptual Site Plan attached hereto, as Attachment "B" (and hereafter referred to as the "Plan"); AND WHEREAS the Municipality, as a condition of the location of a mobile home on the Lands requires the Owner to enter into a Development Agreement; NOW THEREFORE in consideration of other good and valuable consideration and the sum of Two Dollars($2.00) of lawful money of Canada by each to the other paid (the receipt whereof is acknowledged by each), the Owner hereby covenants and agrees with the Municipality as follows: 1. The Owner agrees that the one(1) mobile home shall be located on the Lands in general accordance with the area identified on the Plan. 2. The Municipality, through its servants, officers and agents, including its Chief Building Official and Fire Chief, may, from time to time, and at any time, enter on the premises of the Owner to inspect the mobile home for the purposes of ensuring public health and safety, in specific regards to condition of the mobile home; fire protection; the provision of potable water; and the proper treatment and disposal of sewage. 3. The Owner shall remove the mobile home from the Lands if the building ceases to be used for the purpose of housing supplementary farm labour for a period longer than two (2) calendar years; 4. The Owner shall not permit the mobile home on the Lands to be occupied by any persons between the period of December 1 st and March 31 st of any calendar year. 5. The Owner further agrees that: 3 a) all necessary provisions for service connections on site will be made to the satisfaction of the Municipality; b) upon failure by the Owner to do any act identified herein, that the public safety or convenience requires, in accordance with this Agreement, upon seven(7)days written notice,the Municipality, in addition to any other remedy, may go in and do same at the Owner's expense, and collect the cost in like manner either as municipal taxes or from the Letter of Credit deposited as performance security; c) nothing in this Agreement constitutes waiver of the owner's duty to comply with any by-law of the Municipality or any other law. 6. The Owner shall be responsible for consulting with and obtaining any necessary approval from the Elgin St. Thomas Public Health and the Ministry of Transportation, if applicable. 7. The Owner shall satisfy all the requirements in relation to the fire protection for the building(s) to the satisfaction of the Municipality's Fire Chief. 8. In the event of any servant, officer or agent of the Municipality, upon inspection, be of the opinion that the state of maintenance is not satisfactory, such servant, officer or agent shall forthwith,forward notice of such opinion, by registered mail, to the Owner, at the last known address, and the Owner shall forthwith correct the deficiency or appeal to the Council of the Municipality of Bayham, as hereinafter provided. 9. In the event that the Owner should disagree with the opinion of the servant, officer or agent of the Municipality, as to the state of maintenance, such Owner shall appear before the Council of the Municipality of Bayham, which after hearing the Owner, shall express its opinion as to whether the maintenance is satisfactory, by resolution, which shall constitute a final determination of the matter. 10. In the event that an Owner shall fail to correct a deviation or deficiency after notice or after notice of an opinion, which the Council of the Municipality of Bayham determines is correct, the Council of the Municipality of Bayham, may by by-law, direct, on default of the matter or thing being done by the Owner, after two (2)week's notice,to it by registered mail, at the last known address of the Owner, pursuant to the last revised assessment roll of passage of such By-Law, that such matter or thing be done by the Municipality, at the expense of the Owner, which expense may be recoverable by action as municipal taxes. 11. This Agreement and the provisions thereof, do not give to the Owner or any person acquiring any interest in the said lands any rights against the Municipality with respect to the failure of the Owner to perform or fully perform any of its obligations under this Agreement or any negligence of the Owner in its performance of the said obligations. 12. The Owner agrees that it will not call into question, directly or indirectly in any proceeding whatsoever in law or in equity or before any administrative tribunal the right of the Municipality to enter into this Agreement and to enforce each and every term, covenant and condition herein contained and this Agreement may be pleaded as an estoppels against the Owner in any case. 4 13. The Owner agrees on behalf of themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, to save harmless and indemnify the Municipality, from all losses, damages, costs, charges and expenses which may be claimed or recovered against the Municipality by any person or persons arising either directly or indirectly as a result of any action taken by the Owner, pursuant to this Agreement. 14. All facilities and matters required by this Agreement shall be provided and maintained by the Owner at its sole risk and expense to the satisfaction of the Municipality and in accordance with the standards determined by the Municipality and in default thereof, and without limiting other remedies available to the Municipality, the provisions of Section 326 of The Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, shall apply. 15. This Agreement shall be registered at the expense of the Owner, against the land to which it applies, and the Municipality shall be entitled, subject to the provisions of The Registry Act, to enforce its provisions against the Owner, named herein, and any and all subsequent Owners of the land. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Parties hereto have hereupon, affixed their Corporate Seal, duly attested to by their authorized signing officers in that behalf. Wm. Dan Murray Witness (signature) Carolyn Murray Witness (signature) THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM MAYOR CLERK 1 ATTACHMENT `A' Roll # 3401-000-003-07200 Legal Description: Concession 5, Lot 23, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin Municipal Address: 56829 Jackson Line PIN # 2 ATTACHMENT `B' Conceptual Site Plan ----- ---APPLIGANT---N-ANt - PROPERTY ADDRESS -S7 52,12 A) Z f,11 2 s:� /-all)U�L_�.�.�� •1— . �i 6! r�(� Roll#3401 -t7od D®3 d•1�()(2 d9 p p Lot Concession Registration Plan No.: Part Lots: Quarter of Municipality Lot N.E. ❑ N.W. ❑ S.W. ❑ S.E. ❑ See Sketch Instructions on the following page. BARN RETURN THIS SKETCH WITH APPLICATION FORM- NOTE: WITHOUT A SKETCH AN APPLICATION CANNOT BE PROCESSED ALL DIMENSIONS MUST BE IN METRIC THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. 2016 - 065 BEING A BY-LAW TO AUTHORIZE THE SIGNING OF A SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT BETWEEN MICHELE SZORENYI AND THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM, TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PLAN OF SUBDIVISION, SANDYTOWN ROAD, HAMLET OF STRAFFORDVILLE, MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the agreement affixed hereto as Schedule "A", being a subdivision agreement with Michele Szorenyi, is hereby approved and the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the same. 2. THAT the agreement is to be registered at the Land Registry Office. READ A First and Second time this 21st day of July, 2016. READ A Third time and finally passed this 21st day of July, 2016. MAYOR CLERK SCHEDULE "A" TO BY-LAW 2016 - 065 THIS SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT made in duplicate this 21IT day of July 2016. BETWEEN : MICHELE SZORENYI of the Municipality of Bayham, in the County of Elgin, Hereinafter called the "Subdivider" OF THE FIRST PART - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Hereinafter called the "Municipality" OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Subdivider proposes to subdivide property described as Lots 3, 4 and 5, Part of Lots 2, 8, 11, 12 and 13, Block c. Reference Plan 205, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin; the said Lands as more particularly set out on a plot plan marked as Attachment "A" attached hereto showing the lots to be created; AND WHEREAS Consents to Sever were granted by the County of Elgin Land Division Committee on December 18, 2015 for applications E105/15, E106/15, E107/15 and E108/15, conditional upon (inter alia) the entering into of an agreement dealing with services for the lots to be created; AND WHEREAS, the Subdivider, has agreed with the Corporation to comply with their requirements with respect to the providing of services for the lands proposed to be subdivided and other matters hereinafter set forth; NOW THEREFORE, the Parties herein, in consideration of other good and valuable consideration and the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00), of lawful money of Canada, by each to the other paid (the receipt whereof is hereby by each acknowledged), covenant and agree with the other as follows: Municipal Engineer 1. Wherever the phrase "Municipal Engineer" is used throughout this Agreement, it shall mean the Municipality's Chief Building Official, the Municipality's Water/Wastewater Operations Manager, or the Municipality's Public Works Operations Supervisor or such other person as the Council of the Municipality may from time to time appoint to deal with the administration of this Agreement. List of Attachments 2.The following Attachments are hereby declared to form part of the Agreement between the parties: Attachment Description "A" Legal description of the said Lands. "B" Registered Plan 11 R1 0033 Parts 1-4, showing the proposed lot pattern "C" Grading Plan and Servicing Plan showing the facilities, works and services to be provided on the said Lands. "D" Time Limits "E" Cost Estimate and Security Schedule Zoning 3. The Subdivider shall apply for a Zoning By-law amendment (removal of holding symbol) as required by the Notice of Decision for Consent and is subject to a Subdivision Agreement. The arrangements contemplated in this Agreement are conditional upon removal of the holding provision. The Municipality agrees to consider the proposed application in the context of these arrangements. Access 4. Access to the lots to be created shall be at the location applied for and approved by the Municipal Engineer. The maximum width of a driveway measured along Sandytown Road to serve a residential use shall be nine (9.0) metres (30 feet). As-Constructed Drawings 5. The Subdivider shall provide for the Municipality records "as-constructed" drawings to the satisfaction of the Municipality for municipal services installed by the Subdivider. These drawings shall be submitted in a satisfactory form prior to the release of any performance bond or security required by this Agreement. Plans and Specifications 6. Plans and specifications for all works and services herein required to be done by the Subdivider shall be first submitted to the Municipal Engineer in a form satisfactory to him and such work shall not be commenced until the Municipal Engineer has received such plans and specifications and has expressly authorized, in writing, such work to commence. All works and services shall be constructed and installed strictly in accordance with the said plans and specifications, all to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer. The Subdivider agrees to construct all services and provide other requirements that will be known only after the details of the engineering design are submitted to the Municipality. The Municipal Engineer may require, in writing, such variance from such plans and specifications as may be required by conditions which may be disclosed as the work progresses, and by sound engineering practice. The works and services required to be done by the Subdivider, including but not limited to engineering and restoration works, shall be wholly at the expense of the Subdivider except as may be otherwise herein expressly provided. Sanitary Sewers 7. a. Sanitary sewers shall be constructed of such size, type, position and extent as are shown on the plans and specifications provided in Attachment "C" that have been certified approved by the Ministry of the Environment & Climate Change (MOECC), if applicable, and the Municipal Engineer. Any material changes to be made to these plans and specifications shall require approval by the MOECC, if applicable, and the Municipal Engineer in writing, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. Storm sewers, if required by the Municipality shall be constructed of such size, type, position and extent as are shown on the plans and specifications approved by the Municipal Engineer or otherwise required by him in writing. The Municipal Engineer may require this work to be done by a contractor whose competence is approved jointly by the Municipal Engineer and the Subdivider, at the expense of the Subdivider. It shall be the responsibility of the Subdivider to provide a satisfactory outlet for said storm sewers, if required, and sanitary sewers (which for the purpose of this Agreement, shall mean the nearest approved Municipal sewer outlet). b. Sanitary sewers, with sanitary private drain connections shall be constructed to the lot line of the subject lands. c. Storm sewers including catch basins and connections, if required by the Municipality, shall be provided and connected as shown on the approved plans and specifications. d. If the works lead to the installation of storm or sanitary sewers, to be assumed by the Municipality, located on easements over private property (including land owned by the Municipality that is not a road allowance), all sanitary sewer manholes shall be located in a location acceptable to the Municipal Engineer in order to facilitate maintenance of the sanitary sewer system by the Subdivider, and all storm sewer manholes shall be placed in easily accessible areas if not placed in paved parking lots or driveways. e. The Subdivider agrees to notify their consulting engineer in the event that any existing sewer or drain is encountered during the progress of construction. The Subdivider further agree to have its consulting engineer investigate the matter and comply with the recommendations of its consulting engineer as approved by the Municipal Engineer's Department with respect to the sewer or drain encountered, such as connecting the existing sewer to a new sewer being constructed or into another existing sewer, at no cost to the Municipality. Adequate sewer easements are to be provided to the Municipality if necessary. The Subdivider shall also ensure that there is no interruption to any subsurface drainage flow because of construction on the site that would have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties. Should such an interruption occur, the Subdivider shall carry out any necessary remedial work to correct the problem as recommended by its consulting engineer and to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer, at no cost to the Municipality. f. Frontage and Connection charges are payable before any dwelling unit is connected to the public (sanitary) sewer system. Such charges are payable at the time of issuance of a building permit, in accordance with the fees and charges in force and effect at the time of application for such building permit. Sewer Subdividership 8. The Subdivider acknowledges and agrees that the Municipality will not accept Subdividership nor allow connections of any type until the works are completed to its full satisfaction, as-constructed drawings are provided, and such determination is at the sole discretion of the Municipality. Grading Drainage and Storm Water Management Plans 9. The Subdivider shall prepare and deposit with the Municipality grading and storm water drainage plans approved by the Municipal Engineer showing the final grades of all lots and roadways. Any lands designated for drainage works and all drainage facilities shall be indicated on such plans to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer. The Subdivider shall agree to carry out or cause to be carried out the recommendations of the grading and drainage plans, which shall form part of this Agreement as Attachment "C". The drainage plan requires the Owner enter into a Mutual Drain Agreement with the abutting landowner for drainage. Roads 10. a. The Subdivider, or their consulting engineer, shall ensure that any proposed excavation, construction, entrance or exit installation, demolition, etc. will not interfere with or be in conflict with location and/or depth of any existing underground facilities, including sewers, pipelines, mains on street allowances or private rights-of-way, services, meter and regulator installations, valve boxes, cathodic protection test points, etc. In instances of apparent conflict, the Subdivider, or their consultant, shall obtain field locates from the appropriate commission, utility or agency. b. All streets and walkways, if any, shall be graded, including fill or excavation as required by the Municipal Engineer to their full width of the allowance before any building permit will be issued and the approved road allowance grades from street line to street line shall be maintained at all times to the grades and levels and to the specifications and requirements and to the satisfaction of the Municipal Engineer until the date of passing of the by-law assuming the said streets and walkways. Sidewalks 11. Not required Streetlights 12. Not required Notification 13. The lots are being created without electrical and telephone services and the costs of providing electrical and telephone services will be at the expense of the Subdivider or its Successors in title. Time Limit for Work and Guarantee for Workmanship and Material 14. Save as herein otherwise provided the Subdivider agrees to complete the work required under this Agreement within the Time Limits specified in the Attachment hereto as Attachment "D", and to guarantee the workmanship and materials for a period of Two (2) years from the date that the said works are approved, in writing, by the Corporation. Any work other than that specifically provided for in Attachment "D" shall be completed within the time limit provided for herein, for sidewalks, curbs and gutters and roads, as applicable. The Subdivider shall, in the period prior to final acceptance of the services or utilities to be constructed under this Agreement as soon as it is practicable after receiving written notice from the Corporation repair any damage caused to existing services or utilities by the implementation or performance of this Agreement or caused during the construction of dwelling units or other buildings on any part of the development. Should the Subdivider fail or neglect to carry out repairs or any other work required of this Agreement the Corporation may, in addition to any other rights or remedies it may perform the work and assess a charge or lien to the property. Inspection and Completion of Works 15. Upon the completion of required off-site works, the Subdivider shall cause a Certificate of Completion to be delivered to the Municipality in the following form: Certificate of Completion of Works To: The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham For good and valuable consideration now paid by the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham (hereinafter called the "Municipality'), the receipt and sufficiency of which l/we hereby acknowledge, 1/we hereby certify that the municipal services constructed pursuant to the Agreement between the Municipality and Subdivider, Registered as Instrument No. and pertaining to the property known municipally as have been: inspected during construction in accordance with standard engineering practice; and constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Municipal Engineer. Dated and sealed at Ontario, this day of 20 Registered Professional Engineer(Ontario) Buildinq Permits 16. No applications shall be made for building permits and no building permit will be issued until the following materials have been received by the Municipality's Engineer: a. A survey prepared by a qualified Ontario Land Surveyor showing all necessary setbacks in compliance with Zoning By-laws; b. a grading and drainage plan approved by the Municipal Engineer showing the final grades of all lands and roadways. c. all permits and authorizations have been obtained by the Subdivider at its expense d. Certificate of Approval from the Ministry of Environment & Climate Change, if applicable, for the installation of sanitary sewer service and an Engineer's Certificate of Completion with as-constructed drawings for the completed installation of the sanitary sewer service to service lots identified as Parts 1, 2, 3 & 4 on Registered Plan 11 R10033; e. the Security has been lodged with the Municipality; Security 17. Before applying for any building permit, or commencing any works on Municipal lands including road allowances, the Subdivider shall provide the Municipality with performance security as described in Attachment "E" to be held by the Municipality until all of the obligations of the Subdivider have been discharged. The security may be in the form of cash or an irrevocable letter of credit from a chartered bank. In the case of cash, the Municipality shall hold funds in a non-interest bearing account. In the case of a letter of credit, the form and content of it shall be satisfactory to the Municipality. Default 18. In the event of Subdivider's default (as determined by the Municipal Engineer), it is specifically anticipated by the parties that the Municipality will, at its sole discretion, contract for completion of all required works, services and other obligations, such that all expenses including administration shall be conducted without cost to the Municipality. In the event that the funds available by means of the security are insufficient to permit the completion of all remaining works and services, these shall be completed according to priorities identified by the Municipality. In the event that the Municipality determines that all works and services cannot be completed with available funds, the Municipality may, in the alternative, defer completion at its discretion, pending more favourable proposals, tenders or completion arrangements. The Municipality has no obligation to complete works for which funds are not available and the Subdivider on their behalf and on behalf of their heirs, successors and assigns, releases the Municipality from any liability in connection with arrangements for completion. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board Coverage 19. The Subdivider agree that they shall at their own expense procure and carry or cause to be procured and carried and paid for, full Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) coverage for all workers, employees, servants and others engaged in or upon any work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement for which such coverage is required by law. Insurance 20. (a) The Subdivider agrees to maintain insurance or require their contractors to maintain insurance in sufficient amount and description as will protect the Subdivider and the Municipality from claims for damages, personal injury including death, and for claims from property damage which may arise from the Subdivider's operations pursuant to this Agreement, including any act or omission of the Subdivider's agents or employees while engaged in any activity pursuant to this Agreement and such coverage shall include all costs, charges and expenses reasonably incurred for any injury or damage. (b) In addition to the foregoing, the Subdivider covenant and agree that: (i) The limits of liability for Personal Injury, Bodily Injury and Property Damage combined shall be for not less than Two Million ($2,000,000.00) Dollars for each occurrence. (ii) All policies shall provide that they cannot be cancelled, allowed to lapse or be materially changed (to the detriment of the Municipality) without at least thirty (30) day's notice to the Municipality by registered mail. (iii) The Municipality shall be named as an added insured and the policy shall include a provision for cross liability. Construction Liens 21. (a) The Subdivider shall comply with all of the provisions of the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, as amended from time to time and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, shall hold in its possession all the statutory holdbacks and any additional funds required to be held by the said Act. These holdbacks and funds shall not be disbursed except in accordance with the Act. (b) The Subdivider shall, at their own expense, within ten (10) days of receiving written notice from the Municipality to do so, pay, discharge, vacate, and obtain and register a release of all charges, claims, liens and all preserved or perfected liens, made, brought or registered pursuant to the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, which affect any lands of the Municipality, including public highways and road allowances, and which arise out of the performance of this Agreement by the Subdivider and their servants, employees, agents, contractors and subcontractors. (c) The Subdivider shall indemnify and hold harmless the Municipality from all losses, damages, expenses, actions, causes of actions, suits, claims, demands and costs whatsoever which may arise either directly or indirectly by reason of any failure, neglect or refusal by the Subdivider to comply with the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, and arising out of the performance of this Agreement by the Subdivider and their servants, employees, agents, contractors and subcontractors. (d) The Public Works Operations Supervisor for the Municipality may at any time, authorize the use of all or part of the securities required pursuant to this Agreement, including cash deposit or letters of credit: i. to pay, discharge, vacate, and obtain and register a release of all charges, claims, liens, and all preserved or perfected liens, made, brought or registered pursuant to the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, which affect any lands, including public highways and road allowances of the Municipality in the event the Subdivider default on the performance of this section; and ii. to pay to the Municipality any amounts owing to it pursuant to this section. Unsold Lots 22. The Subdivider is to plant unsold lots with suitable ground cover and to keep grass and weeds cut. Failure to do so will result in the Corporation performing the work and assessing a charge or lien to the property. Indemnification 23. The Subdivider shall indemnify and save harmless the Municipality against all losses, damages, claims, actions, demands, suits, costs and interest incurred which arise directly or indirectly from anything done in connection with this Agreement, whether in performance of, outside of or contrary to this Agreement. Other 24. Entry into this Agreement with the Subdivider shall in no way fetter legislative or administrative discretion of the Municipality or of any of its officers or staff with regard to the approval or administration of any matters in connection with any development on the said Lands. 25. The Subdivider understands and agrees that there shall be no work performed except in conformity with all applicable by-laws and Provincial and Federal legislation and regulations, and this Agreement does not exempt the Subdivider from any applicable statute, regulation, or code of any legislative, administrative, or governmental authority, and the Subdivider shall obtain and pay for all permits. Notice to Subsequent Subdivider 26. The Subdivider agrees that any payments made or works installed pursuant to this agreement shall not be deemed to be development charges of any sort whether under the provisions of the Development Charges Act or a by-law thereunder, or pursuant to any front-ending provisions of that Act. It is further agreed that the Subdivider shall not make any claims whatsoever against the Municipality or any other land Subdivider of any lands for a contribution or reimbursement in any way for any monies expended by the Subdivider to effect the works. Registration 27. The Subdivider, at his expense, shall register this Agreement on title to the Lands. The Subdivider shall cause a duplicate registered copy and a Solicitor's Certificate to be delivered to the Municipality in the following form: Certificate of Solicitor TO: The Corporation of the Municipality FROM:"Company Name" RE: street address type of agreement(site plan, condominium, subdivision) Agreement between "Subdivider name"and The Corporation of the Municipality For the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00) and other good and valuable consideration, I hereby certify that "Subdivider name"is the registered Subdivider of the lands described in the type of agreement between Subdivider and The Corporation of the Municipality which was registered on date as Instrument Number at the Land Registry/Land Titles Office Number at I further certify that the lands described in the said agreement are the lands intended to be subject to the agreement and that the agreement binds the Subdivider and its successors in title. I further certify that at the time of registration, the Subdivider's title was subject to a mortgage in favour of(list any mortgages, liens and assignments- if none, leave paragraph out). Dated in the Village of County of this day of , 20 "Company" By its solicitor Name: Firm: Binding 28. The covenants, agreements, conditions and undertakings herein contained on the part of the Subdivider shall run with the Land and shall be binding upon the Subdivider and upon the Subdivider's heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, as Subdivider and occupiers of the Land from time to time and shall be appurtenant to the adjoining highways in the Subdividership of the Municipality and this Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the appropriate authority and its successors and assigns. Assignment 29. Neither party is permitted to assign rights and obligations under the Agreement without the permission from the other, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Expiry 30. In the event that no construction of the primary services has commenced within two (2) years from the date of registration of this Agreement the Municipality may, at its option, on one month's notice to the Subdivider, declare this Agreement to be subject to re-negotiation, whereupon the Subdivider agrees that it will not undertake any construction on the said lands until this Agreement has been re- negotiated. Separate Covenants 31. All of the provisions of this Agreement are intended to be construed as covenants and agreements as though the words importing such covenants and agreements were used in each separate clause hereof. Should any provision of this Agreement be adjudged unlawful or not enforceable, it shall be considered separate and severable from the Agreement and its remaining provisions as though the unlawful or unenforceable provision had not been included. Municipality's Expense 32. The Subdivider shall reimburse the Municipality for expenses incurred in the preparation of the Subdivision Agreement upon execution of the agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have hereunto affixed their signatures and corporate seal attested to by the hands of their proper officers, duly authorized in that behalf. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED ) In the presence of ) Michele Szorenyi Per Michael G. Szorenyi, POA Witness ) Date THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM Per: Mayor Date: ) Per: Clerk We have authority to bind the Corporation. Attachment "A" DESCRIPTION OF LANDS Lands in the Village of Straffordville, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin more particularly described as: Registered Plan 11 R-10033 Parts 1-4, being described as Lots 3, 4 and 5, Part of Lots 2, 8, 11, 12 and 13, Block C, Reference Plan 205, Village of Straffordville, Municipality of Bayham, County of Elgin Attachment "B" Proposed Lot Pattern COORiNetATE SCHEDULE -'^ ;;,..,a PFAN 1�R4 tong} r lc POINT tMTIWG EA5TING t \PART SCHEDULE [ * rrl ta+ wrn z I _ PART OF4�2.. - ...._; 1 L ,6.SL 12AND 13 EILOC RECaKSTL'RED PLAN 20S (wa",C 4rFIn,AmA�+7NiZGt COUNTY OF DAYtSAM CWN1Y OF ELGR! i PART WMW wkvE um r, PART 1 ai :a PART 3 ( � _. :1 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFlCATE p PARr. } sr NOTES .,....,. �} M � , T 4 � 2�� Ii it .wrs a�.n,.a roan tw r.�i..zv.+a•x•.a LEGEND � X Y •-, KIM NUSTED SURYEMO LTD. dMiFRN)uti0 NiA4i'K'%+ MM�iC�itYtia-M �r�a.aA WIPE is n-YM'/.B QSEIENCE:. Wl GENERAL NOTES zo I..—R,..,,a TODIm Nam.�xaYAR� ,raYr ax 11 rME GxAn x,..mvwrvT or aAm�9Etl G,bra P1T l �4Y']NL INI,m. `a ILLJ aZ ° Z egg 'a i a na LocArax a u1u,4s Is Am�rArz 0Ar AND araxn n amneman ar mxsrxe � .»- ..a a /Li\ a ]x"'a EOGnax'Ls u1X0iu'diis�.:o sx u'rc o ram. ccY,wcTm ar PAoa OI�w� +.� ,6- '�\ `` ® V111T6 uDWxG 29iN1nW�iA��DEP6�hW�iHt'�RPES�� 1r i`�bI }.� • �'r'�� 91L11M 96d6 Sf tlYa,N1rCMYl.NL dI➢IACES NE.LLCMG �, rG_ X \j � Rpw AYDWA 15 MAE55 OIfUN14 xaeR v4 - i'r -N j/�/.�b7///�� _alAai Y»xrA»ra etaR ar ArL Des1Na oaAea wmrx,Dan.wcnYR —��r T m"�; I � r` �Ir`� '¢^ m �:/ � !� Yx rAu-am eA•rt �� a Aum n nYs eaxmAcr. - \ a1.'.•• w °' � Dm�n EAsn a Arn eraT ,rcS axms r�Y'Lwr�NaFf OSmvA,f�x�enwS NORMAL%/ Mra Rwu ewo T�xEA RE'miaaAxvutl ff suwpRrtD wf�xa`YEu-po";L ra>smrre eEnw'r0°xc ixionxcuTo w an n w.an Tw p o. a ME &Ldxc fE01Ex,nE.L W�flYD rM T�� ]. �PPM�Yum ff 9FPCRim x ACCOROANn»M NRO SPEa,GnaS!a D•a VxE 4% m a swAc BAOO.a I.EaBE1MPaeA�O—. xAClpmAx¢MN�DWE N— Y DEEP _ _ _ _ > PRIVATE DRAIN CONNECTION A* r eaa.n awE'e�(rnj T PPoVATE DRAIN CONNECTION NOTES 1ba.axs�M uo Dawrrs rYixp qqa ss mo>rvwrw 'u aL 4 T� o ban nx.� �' » v e w,a oeu.:aoY w x ou«a maa s:ERs su'.a waiD:p w AI—dPOx ro rsr�mcn. �� �Z_Y.Il,� ..Y,A�m• +4„ a �ae� , � 'a a RSron cRrr.oe ronsnaAN roRAe»NYGo»o»T a.xATaA o.Ym�wM rmawewE,aro>KM R En m.n eeaE.an Eu ec.w a,»n "`°.'°s1Oi ,''..YM"nre,'Y� acnw.MW l. = Z ,. » A , ARr a e.soraE r a RPwDrroEmwA�Ne mM0aY-sMrzE�Mowsxca sAE aTa a eMaeEO — wwa, m�°sw`AaraomuR rsm A.10 a 1N.MA&D ArA �n.�m aa.�ie a:auTEp Emw�xi 1 suroT a MINIMUM TRENCH MID1Ns � N GRADING NOTES \L� LLr SS LJ�I ! D xGx +¢xD m N RDAID ro a nR —AU. DT De»uxlID ME uuaDRwtt m er cmmL.maWnE rmia. r BE BE a>< awE—T -svArL saRL:sx]u a a,uAaMM LV-sorroM AamrANn. Ii _AD YA�aaxALL��AT,R WxMYY ro,WNER Axa,aa� 230 - _-_ -. 230 -wws ars ams.es uo R-M.noa Yusr E vecan ro aon.rc s�rrs.oc _ _ _ .eve Y».oms ro eE xps..�er m.n.mc nmror uu a umm °pm'£ . •- -•: _ BFDOING NOTES rpMuu s 229 229 a sva mp»u Yw.eE»oaA.sn w.ca u mama Ae -.a]aP.n.wexcWAr aArERr,non,Dxo eos ssm roe a RLa»m Fa Au,ms mniwYn M ew.aE A—emo»c oAw+,s srAu BE sT ro sm maRovn sMNE eavxs OmWAYs srAu wTe 2R a»a emaea.e.m..Y.mws sxNL a<m.ACRn ro cs mWnVm ewcvE Y.aAM FNL roYras Raw. ,ra.aa.Y srNA:m.Ac,m aaac u"a r.E»o»aen»n YAA,m ro ---- sma.c ewa ro r,.erp allo eADm,_s.ArAr.nE aw ewoAL.AYL ee � 228 228 A. ,An[�AEmru¢m�eamrA»emw»Mn nmew npanpxgR NOTE: TOP OF FOUNDATIONS AND LOT GRADING SHOWRUCTE ARE 227 -- -'.-- - - -_ -- - - - 227 DESIGN ELEVATONS ONLY NOT AS CONSTRUCTED CLASS 'B' BEDDING 226 ... __._ __.- ......_.. -__ _mR »e - _.__._ _. __-- 226 225 --- _ -- 224 ' )--sAr RAm a e1Re 224 zo 226 ,v.e 223 __ _.- -_._. ___.. _. .. -- 223 227 r . __ 226 varRa - >a..w aEvr A 1°'Sw:`men I i 222 -- - -- r--r--)—� 222 225 Ex. d assoa��,any-»RO E pxERT -- pldi 224 TYPICAL CROSS SECTION mAnw - c - mArlor LOOKING NORTH-SCALE: 1:100 d LEGEND MRAOPK ROLL NUMBER POSSIBLE NT1R ROAD MADE METRIC SCALE HORIZ. 1:5DO,VERT. 1:50 MUNICIPALITY OF B A Y H A M - S T R A F F O R D V I L L E aos-]n [m2) E - PROPOSED SANITARY SEVAa ern Y11 NDMBFA r,YDw TOP 6 FWxDATOx a,„ __ DOSING STORM SEYER ^°. ADJUST,REMOVE,NNRE �..__. PROPOSED SUiffAOE aiAINAOE. ,.,...,yr 0 0 PROPOSED—HOLE.FASTING � EASING CONTOURS-J.D.BAfO1E5 UMITED EASTNc �b CJ D l SZORENYI SEVERANCES GIGIBASN --' WALE(EASTNO.PROPOSED) �! !I. PROPOSED DRIVEWAY A.pLVESY s P.J.PENNER STATION 0+690 TO STATION 0+842 -^•-•-•- GASMAIN a'a EASING OXVANONS-CJOL=05 co[suftm BU• ED HnROD ELEPHONE �,TiA EASING OEODUOUS TREE,CONIFERONS THEE ASPHALT TO BE REMOVED AND BURIED 1J� T '1e. 'o y��•o —c BURIED TOL CABLE OMIT OF BRUSI/'AOOOED AREA RE[ MD A. DESIGN BY: AO OR—BY: 5, CH1.BY: AD SANDYTOWN ROAD MUNIDPAL N. PROPOSED nMSHEO ELEVATIONS RENSON w< r DATE a BY PROJECT NO.1210 1 SURVEY BY: TPM GATE:13 MAY 2018 DRAWNG ND. Attachment "D" Time Limits All primary services to be completed within two (2) years of agreement registration, including: a. Storm Sewers b. Sanitary Sewers c. Roadworks & Driveway Access Attachment "E" Cost Estimate and Security Schedule COST ESTIMATE L, W, I MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM-STRAFFORDVILLE JL Consulting Engineers Sandytown Road Severances 1210 STS 8-1ul-16 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNITPRICE TOTAL Work within Sandytown Road ROW Part 1-Storm Sewers 1.1 375mmo CSP Culverts m 36.0 $200.00 $7,200.00 Subtotal-Part 1 $7,200.00 Part 2-Sanitary Sewers 2.1 125mmo PDC Saddle or Cut-in Tee EA 4.0 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 2.2 125mmo Sanitary PDC m 60.4 $125.00 $7,550.00 Subtotal-Part 2 $13,550.00 Part 3-Roadworks&Driveway Access To Sandytown Road 3.1 Removals,Excavation and Grading L/S 1.0 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 12 HL3(60mm/75mm) tonne 44.4 $135.00 $5,994.00 3.3 Granular'A'(250mm) rn3 52.1 $40.00 $2,084.00 3.4 Restoration-100mm Topsoil and Seed rn 2 454.6 $5.00 $2,273.00 Subtotal-Part 3 $12,851.00 Total Work within ROW $33,601.00 The Above Excludes: • Land Aquisition • Legal&Survey Cost's • Development Charges • Future Work Municipality of Bayham Site Plan Security Requirements 100%Work within ROW $33,601.00 1.76%Effective HST $591,38 Total Security Required $34,192.38 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW 2016-066 A BY-LAW TO APPOINT BLUMETRIC ENVIRONMENTAL INC. RISK MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL AND RISK MANAGEMENT INSPECTOR WHEREAS subsection 47(1)(b) of the Clean Water Act, 2006 (the "Act'), provides that a municipality that has authority to pass by-laws respecting water production, treatment and storage under the Municipal Act, 2001 is responsible for the enforcement of Park IV of the Act in the municipality; AND WHEREAS subsection 47(6) of the Act provides that a municipality that is responsible for the enforcement of Part IV of the Act shall appoint a risk management official and such risk management inspectors as are necessary for that purpose NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT BluMetric Environmental Inc. be appointed Risk Management Official and Risk Management Inspector pursuant to subsection 47(6) of the Clean Water Act, 2006 for a three year period ending June 30, 2019; 2. THAT this by-law shall come into full force and effect upon final passing. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 215t t DAY OF JULY 2016. MAYOR CLERK THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM BY-LAW NO. 2016-067 A BY-LAW TO CONFIRM ALL ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM FOR THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JULY 21, 2016 WHEREAS under Section 5 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001 S.O. 2001, Chapter 25, the powers of a municipal corporation are to be exercised by the Council of the municipality; AND WHEREAS under Section 5 (3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, the powers of Council are to be exercised by by-law; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham deems it advisable that the proceedings of the meeting be confirmed and adopted by by-law. THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the actions of the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham in respect of each recommendation and each motion and resolution passed and other action by the Council at the regular meeting held July 21, 2016 is hereby adopted and confirmed as if all proceedings were expressly embodied in this by-law. 2. THAT the Mayor and Clerk of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham are hereby authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the action of the Council including executing all documents and affixing the Corporate Seal. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME and finally passed this 215t day of July, 2016. MAYOR CLERK