Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 07, 2018 - Court of Revision - Tollgate Road Municipal Drain THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM COURT OF REVISION AGENDA MUNICIPAL OFFICE 56169 Heritage Line, Straffordville, ON Council Chambers Thursday, June 7, 2018 8:00 p.m. —Tollgate Road Municipal Drain 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST & THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF 3. CHAIRMAN'S REMARKS ON THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING A. Tollgate Road Municipal Drain Court of Revision Notice Pursuant to Section 46 of the Drainage Act, the purpose of the Court of Revision is to provide an opportunity for any person or body entitled to receive Notice to appeal their assessment as per Engineers Report#213140 dated April 2, 2018 4. STAFF PRESENTATION A. Report DS-35/18 by Bill Knifton, Chief Building Official I Drainage Superintendent re Tollgate Road Municipal Drain Court of Revision 5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 6. DISPOSITION 7. ADJOURNMENT • 5 Pp rtunity Is The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham NOTICE OF COURT OF REVISION CONCERNING THE TOLLGATE ROAD MUNICIPAL DRAIN IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM NOTICE TO AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS Drainage Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter D.17, Section 46 TAKE NOTICE that in accordance with Chap. D.17, Section 46 of the DRAINAGE ACT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham, on Thursday, May 3 2018, adopted Report No. 213140, dated April 2, 2018 as prepared by Spriet Associates in regard to drainage works for the construction of the Tollgate Road Municipal Drain serving Parts of Lots 20 and 21, Concession South Gore and Lot 129, Concession S.T.R., in the Municipality of Bayham. FURTHER to Chap. D. 17, Section 46 of the DRAINAGE ACT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham, on Thursday, May 3, 2018 gave first and second reading to Provisional By-law #2018-056, a copy of which is enclosed, to adopt the drainage works included in the aforementioned Report and to authorize the Municipality to borrow, if required, the monies necessary to carry out the works therein and to levy upon the affected lands and roads their respective apportionment of the cost of the works. TAKE NOTICE that further to Section 46 of the DRAINAGE ACT, a Court of Revision will be held in the Council Chambers of the Bayham Municipal Office, 56169 Heritage Line, Straffordville, on Thursday, June 7, 2018 at 8:00 p.m., to provide an opportunity for any person or body entitled to receive notice, to appeal their assessment. An owner may appeal the owner's assessment to the Court of Revision by a notice given to the Clerk of the Municipality not later than 12:00 p.m. (noon) Monday, May 28, 2018 which is ten (10) days prior to the first sitting of the Court of Revision. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION relating to this Notice or the proposed drainage works may be obtained by contacting the Drainage Superintendent Bill Knifton at the Bayham Municipal Office, 56169 Heritage Line, PO Box 160, Straffordville, Ontario NOJ 1Y0, Telephone: 519-866-5521, Monday— Friday 8:30 am —4:30 p.m. Dated at STRAFFORDVILLE, in the MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM, in the PROVINCE OF ONTARIO, this 4th day of May, 2018. `aul She' ay CAOICIerk YHA REPORT ( DEVELOPMENT SERVICES oVA- PPOrtunity IS 1(0 — TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Bill Knifton, Chief Building Official I Drainage Superintendent DATE: June 7, 2018 REPORT: DS-35/18 FILE NO. C-07/E09 SUBJECT: TOLLGATE ROAD MUNICIPAL DRAIN COURT OF REVISION BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to provide for a Court of Revision hearing in connection with the Tollgate Road Municipal Drain. On Thursday May 3, 2018 in accordance with Sections 44 to 46 of the Drainage Act, R.S.O. 1990, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham adopted Engineer Report #213140 dated April 2, 2018 as prepared by Spriet Associates. Further to Section 46 of the Drainage Act, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham, on Thursday May 3, 2018 gave first and second reading to Provisional By-Law# 2018- 056 to adopt the drainage works included in the aforementioned report and to authorize the Municipality to borrow, if required, the monies necessary to carry out the works therein and to levy upon the affected lands and roads their respective apportionment of the cost of the works. This Section of the Drainage Act also states that a Court of Revision will be held to provide an opportunity for any person or body entitled to receive Notice to appeal their assessment. Section 52 of The Drainage Act specifies that any owner of land assessed for the drainage works may appeal the assessment to any land or road as being too high or too low or that any land or road that should have been assessed has not been assessed, or that due consideration has not been given as to type of use of land. The owner may, in person or by agent, appeal to the Court of Revision by giving Notice in writing to the Clerk of the initiating municipality setting out the grounds of the appeal, and the appeal shall be heard by the Court of Revision. Every Notice of Appeal shall be given at least ten days before the first sitting of the Court, but the Court may, though Notice of Appeal has not been given, by resolution passed at its first sitting, allow an appeal to be heard on such conditions as to giving notice to all persons interested or otherwise as just appear. Section 53 of the Drainage Act specifies when the ground of appeal is that lands or roads are assessed too high and the evidence adduced satisfies the court of revision, that the assessments on such lands or roads should be reduced. All appellants are to be present at the court of revision meeting. If any of the appellants are absent from the meeting, then the meeting shall be adjourned to allow the clerk sufficient time to notify by prepaid mail such persons of concern. The clerk must also alter any assessments that are changed, and the provisional by- law must be amended. A second meeting of the court of revision must be scheduled. Section 54(1) of the Drainage Act states any party to an appeal before the court of revision may appeal to the Tribunal by giving notice addressed to the clerk of the Tribunal, given to the clerk of the initiating municipality, from the decision of the court of revision or from its omission, neglect or refusal to hear or decide an appeal within twenty-one days of the pronouncement of the decision of the court of revision or of any matter evidencing such omission, neglect or refusal. Section 58 of the Drainage Act specifies that after the Court of Revision has taken place and the time for appealing has expired and there are no appeals or after all appeals have been decided, the Council may pass a Provisional By-law authorizing the construction of the drainage works. A minimum of forty days must transpire commencing from the date of the mailing of the notice of Court of Revision before 31d reading of the Provisional By-law may take place. Further, drainage work may be commenced ten days after the by-law is passed if no Notice of Intention to make application to quash the by-law has been filed with the Clerk. DISCUSSION: Section 52(2) of the Drainage Act states that a person may submit a notice of appeal regarding their assessment via written notice to the Clerk within 10 days of the first sitting of the Court of Revision. The clerk has not received any written notice of appeals. Therefore, the Court of Revision should consider requesting comment from any landowners, or agents present, to determine if they wish to submit an appeal based on the assessment value included or excluded in the aforementioned Engineer's Report. RECOMMENDATION In the event no appeals are received it is recommended that the Court of Revision consider the following resolution: THAT the Court of Revision for the Tollgate Road Municipal Drain hereby confirms the assessments as per the Engineer's Report# 213140 dated April 2, 2018. Respectfully Submitted by: e/4}-9(101/ —me Bill Knifton maul hip ca Chief Building Official I CAO I Clerk Drainage Superintendent E- 17:►v' n hlf'�`Q2 �� C o► v To:The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham Dated May 25/2018 56169 Heritage Line PO Box 160, Straffordville Ontario NOl 1Y0 Attention:The Clerk of the Municipality Paul Shipway CAO/Clerk This letter is to serve as notice to the Court of Revision respecting cost related issues to the maintenance assessment schedule identified within the Toll Gate Road Municipal Drain report.To be clear, The cost's related to an identified future cleanout proposed under maintenance will be distributed over the maintenance schedule sometime after the construction is completed which entails simply brush removal and a sediment trap construction.The issue is that there is a designed gradient to be established under maintenance that shows existing material within the proposed drain impedes the flow now within the private ditch to be incorporated as the municipal drain. Presently the profile of the design gradient, if I am not mistaken,for the drain is not to be established under the construction proposed to obtain the legal outlet.This imposes additional costs over and above a regular maintenance cleanout. Questions of the Engineer a) As it remains now,who gets to interpret when the drain will be cleaned to the design gradient to be established under maintenance,the municipality or the landowner Dan? b) Please clarify,whether the proposed sediment trap is to be maintained in the future on a regular basis and how the cost of cleaning out the sediment trap should be distributed; simply divided over the maintenance schedule OR prorated upstream from the sediment trap to the roads and landowners within the drainage area. Request by the Appellant of the Court of Revision Member's Based on the questions asked,which relate to additional maintenance costs imposed by this report, and answered by the Engineer,we ask the Court of Revision members to consider the following to be included in a resolution from this court; a) since there is an imposed "cost assessment"to the drain over and above the construction costs identified in the Drainage Report for cleaning down to a design gradient identified to be completed under maintenance, Dan being the only landowner that is directly affected by the condition of the drain, should be entitled to decide when this work will take place.This gives him entitlement to co—ordinate his plan to replace his private culvert and perhaps install a water control structure in the future at the same time as the drain is cleaned out to ensure the culvert and/or water control structure doesn't impede on the set gradient of the drain identified by the Engineer. b) regular maintenance of the sediment trap, if any is proposed,should be prorated over the upper lands and roads within the drainage area since the sediment trap is located at the upper end of the drain. If maintenance is to occur on a regular basis the engineer should identify the "prorated" maintenance assessment schedule in the report as clarification to the clerk to bill out this specific type of maintenance activity. These two requests of the Court of Revision members do not negatively affect the identified assessment percentage schedules for future maintenance on the drain identified in the drainage report completed by the Engineer.The road authorities' interest to obtain the legal outlet remains intact as well. Reasons for; Request(a) has not been address with a specified time period for the cleanout to take place and the road authority has already cleaned their ditches approximately 3 years ago prior to this report being presented therefore we don't expect any opposition to this request to enable Dan to plan the required cleanout to the gradient identified in the report under maintenance . Request(b)the engineer's report has identified a sediment trap to be dug near the road which normally stops sediment from going down the drain during the construction. Since this trap is located at the beginning of the drain for the sole purpose to divert the sediment discharge from the roads and ditches upstream and assuming it will serve to stop sediment from maintenance activity upstream of the municipal drain,the cost of any future cleanouts should be assessed on a "prorated" basis threw a recalculation of the maintenance schedule.This can be provided for in the drainage report by the engineer,since the location of the trap remains the same,for clarification as a separate maintenance schedule for the sediment trap for the purposes of billing out this specific cost.This work only incorporates the trap at the beginning of the municipal drain and does not involve the actual cleanout of the municipal drain downstream of the trap. Drainage Superintendents are required to prorate costs over any maintenance schedule when the work takes place at specific location along the drain. In this case,any maintenance work on the sediment trap remains at a specific location identified in the drainage report at the roads property line. Please note;there are no objections to the present assessment s identified within the Engineers report for the construction and maintenance of the municipal drain respecting Dan's property. If there are any proposed changes to be considered by this court that would affect Dan's present assessment's under construction and/or maintenance,we reserve the right to an appeal of such proposed changes at another meeting of the Court of Revision. Respectfully Submi without Prejudice on behalf of Dan Bruner Pe - :ryan—Pulh.a' . . . Drainage Advisor/Mediator (Re'. : age Superintendent)