HomeMy WebLinkAboutWastewater Capacity StudyMUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM
SANITARY SEWAGE CAPACITY STUDY
Cyril J. Demeyere Limited
Consulting Engineers
261 Broadway, P.O. Box 606
Tillsonburg, Ontario
N4G 4J1
CJDI
Consulting Engineers 30 January 2009
30 January 2009
Municipality of Bayham
Sanitary Sewage Capacity Study
1.0 OVERVIEW
0802
The Municipality of Bayham has retained CJDL to complete a sanitary sewage study to assess reserve
capacity and the critical time frame for future expansion to accommodate ongoing growth. This
assessment includes a review of the sewage treatment plant capacity, trunk sewer capacities and individual
pumping station capacities within the Villages of Port Burwell, Vienna, Straffordville and Eden. Potential
problem areas along with possible improvements and time frames will also be identified.
A Key Plan of the Municipality of Bayham is included as Figure No. 1
2.0 PORT BURWELL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
2.1 Design Capacity
The existing Port Burwell Wastewater Treatment Plan (W WTP) was upgraded in 2001 to a parallel stream
Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) as designed by Acres & Associated Environmental Limited (Acres).
Following the completion of upgrades to the main treatment plant, further upgrades were completed on
the exfiltration gallery and effluent outfall in 2005 to relieve saturation of the surrounding grounds. The
WWTP currently operates under Ministry of Environment Certificate of Approval #7337-66YQL4
(included in Appendix A) and was designed the criteria as listed in Table No. 1.
Table No. 1 - Design Criteria
Description
Value
Design Population
2337*
Per Capita Flow
(includes infiltration and
inflow allowance)
454 L/person/day
Hannon Peaking Factor
3.55
Average Daily Flow
1060 e/day
Peak Flow Rate
43.55 L/s
Plant Hydraulic Capacity
3763 e/day
*The design population is based on the following breakdown for serviced communities: Vienna - 430,
Straffordville - 825, Eden - 200 and Port Burwell - 882 = Total 2,337.
CJ Dl
consuNi� E Inee Page 1 of 13
t
96oh
rof Talbot
's
dSevilla
E
j P--aiirvi�e
CaltbTY U
V
45 rogge
lem o Cor rs
15 IV
1
5 41 i
43 .0 r
akev v{ III
rid 1 ' 42 19
y - 4 50 r
IROQUOIS BEAC 39
�r
PROVINCIAL PARK
PORT
RURWELL
�— Culloden
1X
nsville 20
XI /
I
IV
p1 2 3 4 59.
KEY' PLAN
CYRIL J. DEMEYERE LIMITED
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
TILLSONBURG, ONTARIO
Figure No. 1
N
2.2 Existing Operations
The current WWTP operations and capacity can be summarized by both reviewing the existing population
in the serviced communities and the recorded sewage flows. Initially, the WWTP was designed to serve
only the existing population, however the theoretical assumptions used in that design were conservative
and in practice allowed the capacity necessary for future growth.
The past three (3) years of recorded flow data (Appendix B) are be summarized in Table No. 2.
Table No. 2 - WWTP Recorded Flow Data 2005 to 2007
Description
2005
2006
2007
Average
Average Daily Flow m3/da
612
637
595
615
Maximum Daily Flow (M3 /day)
1179
1231
1438
1283
Average Daily Flow m'/da
1060
1060
1060
1060
Plant Hydraulic Ca aci m3/da
3763
3763
3763
3763
• Capacity - average daily flow
57.7%
60.1%
56.1%
58.0%
% Capacity - maximum daily flow
31.3%
32.7%
38.2%
34.10/.
Flow data from the WWTP indicates that it is operating at approximately 58% capacity based on Average
Daily Flow and at 34% of Maximum Daily Flow. This indicates a Per Capita Flow (including infiltration
and inflow allowance) of 218 L/person/day as the actual sewage flow characteristics within the
Municipality of Bayham: considerably lower than the design flows used for the plant design. The current
average flows correspond more closely with the values used in the design of the original plant in 1983
by Giffels (280 L/person/day). The MOE recommends that sewage treatment plant be designed for 225
to 450 L/person/day. A design value of 250 L/person/day (218 x 1.15) satisfies both the MOE and
existing conditions with a 15% contingency.
Table No. 3 represents the current plant utilization based on a design per capita flow rate of
250L/person/day and 2006 census data for Eden, Straffordville, Vienna and Port Burwell.
Table No. 3 Current WWTP Utilization
Description
Value
Population
2810
Per Capita Flow
(incl. infiltration & inflow allowance)
250 L/person/day
Average Daily flow
703 m3/day
Design Average Daily Flow
1060 m3/day
Capacity Used
66%
Harmon peaking Factor
3.55
Maximum Daily flow
2494 W/day
Plant Hydraulic Capacity
3763 m3/day
Capacity Used
66%
CJ Dl
ConsuRing Engineers Page 2 of 13
2.3 Loading Parameters
The WWTP was designed to accommodate treatment of influent with theoretical design parameters as
shown in Table No. 4
Table No. 4 WWTP Design Parameters
Design Parameter
Influent Concentration (mg/l)
BOD
200
TSS
200
Phosphorous
11
The treatment capacity of the plant is affected by the quality of the influent entering the WWTP through
the municipal sewage collection system. If the sewage exceeds the design values excessively in any one
particular loading parameter, the treatment process may be disrupted thereby requiring increased treatment
time which effectively reduces the capacity of the WWTP. Actual influent parameters based on 2007
sampling and testing are shown in Table No. 5.
Table No. 5 WWTP 2007 Influent Parameters
Parameter
2007 Average Influent
Concentration (mgR)*
BOD
198.2
TSS
236.13
Phosphorous
6.29
The data from sampling influent in 2007 indicates that the initial design criteria was reasonable and that
the plant should be able to meet all effluent criteria as designed. This is also supported by a review of
the latest MOE Inspection Reports (Appendix C) that indicates an overall compliance to the requirements
in the Certificate of Approval.
2.4 Septage Receiving Station - Effect on Capacity in Future
The Municipality of Bayham intends to construct a Septage Receiving Station (SRS) at the WWTP. This
facility will provide septage haulers a local safe disposal site. The SRS will include a septage
processing/screening unit, a receiving/holding tank with mixers and a transfer pump that will feed septage
into the sewage treatment plant at a controlled rate.
The total expected volume of septage to be received at the facility is 1,830 m'/year (5.01 m'/day) (0.058
Us). This represents only 0.47% of the plants capacity in terms of volume, however septage has different
characteristics (significantly more concentrated) than sewage and requires that it be accounted for
differently. Septage has from 20 to 65 times the concentration of sewage. Septage will be pretreated
prior to discharge into the WWTP and will be systematically metered into the influent stream at optimal
times during the treatment process. It is estimated that septage effectively uses 30 times its respective
volume in plant capacity. Therefore, septage receiving at the WWTP will use approximately 14.1% of
the plant's capacity in the future and this usage must be included in future capacity calculations.
CJ Dl
Consuahg Engineers page 3 of 13
2.5 Future Capacity - 2017
A recent Growth Study was completed by IBI Group for the Municipality of Bayham (see Appendix D),
as part of the 5 year Official Plan review. The study indicated a 1.6% annual growth rate can be
anticipated for the next 10 years (to 2017). This would project a future total population in the serviced
communities of 3345.
Assuming a similar growth rate in the rural un -serviced areas as the serviced areas, even though current
Provincial Policy does not favour this, the amount of septage would increase to 2179 m'/year (5.97
m'/day) (0.069 L/s) and would account for 16.9% of the plant's capacity at that time.
Table No. 6 - WWTP Utilization - 2017
Description
Value
Design Population
3345
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow allowance)
250 L/person/day
Average Daily Flow (sewage only)
863 m3/day
Design Average Daily Flow
1060 m3/day
Capacity Used
79%
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.55
Maximum Daily Flow (sewage only)
2969 m'/day
Plant Hydraulic Capacity
3763 M3 /day
Capacity Used (sewage only)
79%
Capacity Used (sewage + septage)
96%
Past performance and growth projections indicate that the WWTP will be able to serve the Municipality
of Bayham up to and beyond 2017.
2.6 Infiltration
The MOE recommends that sewage treatment plants be designed for 225 to 450 L/person/day plus an
allowance for infiltration and inflow. Historic flow data collected from the WWTP indicates that on
average they receive only 218 L/person/day. This could lead to the conclusion that infiltration and inflow
area not a serious concern. The data does, however indicate a correlation between `wet weather' and
increased flow rates at the WWTP. The "Conceptual Design Report" - December 1998 by Acres also
noted that plant flow rates respond to rainfall events and that "waste strength .... reduces during `wet
weather' confirms an impact of inflow on the sewer system as compared to continuous infiltration
impacts." This report was completed during the period when only the sanitary sewers in Port Burwell
were connected to WWTP.
In summary, it can be concluded that inflow from stormwater runoff, groundwater and residential sump
pumps is a concern, however the plant staff have been able to effectively manage the peaks in flow to
ensure the composite effluent testing meets all requirements. Overall performance of the WWTP has
not yet been unduly compromised by infiltration. In the future, it may be beneficial to the Municipality
as the WWTP nears its capacity limits to investigate these sources of inflow and initiate a program to
eliminate them in order to reduce peak flows to the WWTP and thereby effectively increase capacity.
CJ Dl
Consulting Engineers Page 4 of 13
2.7 Future Capacity - Beyond 2017
If we assume a future growth rate equal to the rate predicted by IBI (1.6%), capacity at the WWTP will
be exceeded in the year 2022. The Municipality of Bayham should recognize that plant expansions or
upgrades typically require a minimum of 3 to 5 years to develop and therefore a long term plan for
upgrades should be initiated once the facility reaches 90% capacity anticipated to occur by 2013 at the
forecast growth rate.
2.8 Areas of Concerns - WWTP
The WWTP is regularly reviewed by the MOE for compliance with the Certificate of Approval and a
copy of the latest Inspection Report is included in Appendix `C'. No bypasses or overflows were
recorded in the report, and all "effluent quality requirements were met". The report also indicated no
anticipated human health impacts, no anticipated environmental impacts and no indications for
environmental impairment were noted during the inspection.
Staff at the Municipality of Bayham have indicated no areas of major concern, no required improvements
or areas of potential problems. This study also does not indicate any existing capacity problems or any
potential problem areas that may occur in the near future.
3.0 PUMPING STATIONS
The Municipality of Bayham's four (4) serviced or partially serviced communities rely on eight (8)
pumping stations to transfer sewage from within individual communities, from community to community
and ultimately to the Port Burwell Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP).
3.1 Eden - (P.S. No. 1)
The single pumping station that services the Hamlet of Eden is located on the west side of Plank Road,
approximately 340 metres southwest of Eden Line. It was designed by Acres & Associated (2000) to
handle a peak sewage flow of 4.0 L/s (346 mYday) but was ultimately built with a capacity of 7.0 L/s
(605 WIday). It is equipped with two (2) pumps, one being a duty pump and the other a standby pump.
This pumping station currently operates under Ministry of Environment Certificate of Approval 47337-
66YQL4 (Appendix A).
A drawing illustrating the sewage collection system in Eden is included as Figure No. 2
3.1.1 Design Capacity
Table No. 6 - Pumping Station No. 1 Design Criteria
Description
Value
Design Population (2000)
200
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow
allowance)
454 L/person/day
Average Daily Flow
91 mYday
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.8
Peak Flow
346 m3/day
Pumping Station Capacity
7.0 Us = 605 m'/day
CJ Dl
Consuking Engineers Page 5 of 13
IN
ISTAL.L.t�n
N 20Ca
R"BBR.
Na
apo
METRIC SCALE. HORIZ. 1:5000
I B I U—rw axsmUnMx Iia rvn. ori w I
flEN510N
ME "AR MIRINU. G STALL ms
WEBroxrsam vcVmseima..sa sxu .s un anon mu>was nor MAY as cewxo w
"'E"'r.
pBiirvAT IurnBwaBBiiBME Um1Wl AIR ""E"o m WE
AM
REAMER, Su anu
SUEJECT TO ME AARMVAE AS ME MGM— ME GRUMACTER W� HOT HE ALERTAID TO WERE
WAEFEA� M.M. ARS TIRE
PAMATE .1 AAM OWNER BE ��S, E.,x�Ao WE
MIRAT MU
AIR P. �.1.AA� WTM�;:�a� ,A.. amwU �x
S, FUMBER AR.EµaE�.MMIAMER MEMNAME M 1.mM SEEEA EM
nE WBBBm1. RRE S, BETTBE RAM ioiROM im" sa.m "'
WER. ANS REPLACEMENT OF RATE
..TEME
wn AM SY ME MEARM`MUUST BE
1. RAWWA� BARRED PvEwn MALL SE SMOl� wu TERMMBLumr TO Map TO
SERUM JU PEACE AS 0TIMMER�r mEEAg MmAcAm's Biu°Av e, Earvw"inu
A.BERAFTEAS R, BE
BEE"ETIO 1. NBa SWWEST. RA WRESTS THAT SAUL OR�mm S Al BE Ux ww4iWLv
R SEEMS
AM MATTER Br Ms BARZm r mamCAM rYr/r3IREET 1WmaSa
AREAS n BE danBEAR AS A MFABAR R UT.W
AR Am OF Mwa a"E 8"" 7+iM WEaMc, .Rnw Mac MAa Rx own ewBE.BE
B w.um oBem o: e: mws.xw BMxEs
ai B usm n E tMM.lciga
MM -ESO uERB'REFUMAG, TORO ESENERmE"E"VR= M¢Yq ci6c SRM 1ill [ 0A. .UL
Au awwEBRUMxc ora wx REARM ER Ewsac�M BiM.,LER BY xus rwitorv'.m
ro imm im,4BNrxFMEBnF@a4 iM LmE
EO nLLM WYPmMMx Ef BAWiu E¢OW MBBXMNnMB wAS mM A
IRS 'ASr� TME WEtl RMaTCXEES MA WEEK tWUUAUBBE REWfID N A MURMUR OMM
EF
MUNICIPALITY OF w,
BAYHAM (_,a
/"N Oa udo waaa Water A&MEY rr
*aM�V d$OYCa 011ftltiBA0a 0006Na%
REM, my W..� 'WUWM�'7r�MA1AEUUAMLWlEE
MAIM ;
xm-- vMASURE � AM, 11, WE EM E ASRAE
RF xmw w er a nA ER iortrwM a wn E, w
B MB— BSEUR M rnMM+Ba iM rwmw m M-M,,UMR Bmam eammsl
BREARRO BE IN RAFAREAREEuE Maa MW ry aunt mmm .m ar ms xvzmuma
AT LEAST ARLANE OF F
LLE
AW
KKOTAK. µnaw MMUBBNR,xarXEWmMEERMEBRrAw.na
WE
ARM nom' Oµous: an Ram rw narmmm ES My WER—WAY. ME ANDMnBBvxXr�'� 6LAUES ��a ARE
WERATOR. RFB. suavee9w M
BIT
MW
ME TR W.+"AR uM ...s AAR
AIR
sMAImw".x.M. MARS.a MUMMUSU.Maumm`muonu� ASEAURETTON M—I ER AS
TA SAMMAY .nee uB P°B`M'M r— mM BmM.Mne a M[a URWRT, rEEE. ral
B MUME"0MSUL B."',E IM BSS ERE
11.1"EM To Auuq P5XosbRR .mI. 1.
�Vr/m..y+u/nar.ras
XNR� MAIMANT.A RMERL EMAE BWRS Wsr 9E.. BY WE
ME MA—M. MAU, BE BERTRAM, ME aonm rMARD ,R jME A nBMwnE7E.1 o;u MATURAMS ..� TO ME "BUwnwu OF
EDEN SEWAGE WORKS
Q CMM. J. DEMEYERE LIMITED
CONSUL DNG ENGINEERS GENERAL PLAN OF SERVICES
/0 nusoesuac, ONrARIO AND GENERAL NOTES
i A. AUSE . pE51W BY: Wp 9RAWN BY: Rp CREEKE9 BY: JP%
PROJECT N0.9991E SURVEY BT. 1PM OFlE:16 AUC 20W 9RAWINC Nc. 2
Figure No. 2 0802
3.1.2 Existing Conditions
Table No. 7 - Pumping Station No. 1 Existing Utilization
Description
Value
Population (2006)
200
Recorded Average Flow
Rate (2005-2008)
61.7 raNday
Harmon Peaking Factor
4.15
Peak Flow
256 m'/day
Peak Flow Design Capacity
605 m'/day
% Capacity (Peak Flow)
42%
The recorded flow data from the pumping station in Eden (P.S. No. 1) indicates that this community
contributes a higher per capita flow rate (3 10 L/person/day) than the Municipality does on average (250
L/person/day). In the evaluation of future capacity of this pumping station a per capita flow rate of 357
L/person/day should be used. This equate to 310 L/person/day x 1.15(factor of safety).
3.1.3 Future Conditions
Table No. 8 Pumping Station No. 1 Utilization 2017
Description
Value
Population (2017)
238
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow
allowance)
357 L/person/day
Average Daily Flow
85 m'/day
Harmon Peaking Factor
4.12
Peak Flow
350 m3/day
Peak Flow Design Capacity
605 m'/day
Capacity (Peak Flow)
58%
It was assumed that the growth rate of Eden would remain constant with the overall growth rate of the
entire Municipality of Bayham at 1.6% as projected by the Growth Study of IBI Group (2008). It should
be noted that if municipal water is extended to Eden, the projections for anticipated growth should be re-
evaluated, as well as, the capacity of the sewage pumping station that services the community.
CJ Dl
Cgnsulang Enginmrs Page 6 of 13
3.1.4 Summary
The pumping station in Eden is currently operating at approximately 42% of capacity and has sufficient
capacity to serve the community in the future design year of 2017. If growth continues at the same rate
beyond 2017, the pumping station should have sufficient capacity to 2051.
3.2 Straffordville
The Village of Straffordville is serviced by two local pumping stations, a third pumping station that serves
both a local area within Straffordville as well as the Hamlet of Eden's sewage and a fourth pumping
station that transfers all of Eden and Straffordville sewage to Vienna. These pumping stations were
designed by Acres & Associated (2000) and currently operate under Ministry of Environment Certificate
of Approval #7337-66YQL4 (Appendix A). Only the main pumping station is equipped with a flow meter
to record the volume of sewage pumped.
A drawing illustrating the sewage collection system in Straffordville is included as Figure No. 3.
3.2.1 Main Pumping Station (P.S. No. 5)
This pumping station was originally designed for a peak sewage flow of 24.1 Us (2074 e/day) however
it was ultimately built with a capacity of 34.8 Us (3007 m'/day). It is equipped with two (2) pumps, one
being a duty pump and the other a standby pump.
3.2.1.1 Design Capacity
Table No. 9 - Pumping Station No. 5 Design Criteria
Description
Value
Design Population (2000)
Eden - 200
Straffordville - 825
Total - 1025
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow
allowance)
454 L/person/day
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.8
Average Daily Flow
465 m'/day
Peak Flow
1767 e/day
Pumping Station Capacity
34.8 Us = 3007 m' /day
CJ Dl
Consuaing Enginmm
Page 7 of 13
Figure No. 3 0802
@O
fEHFRJiL NOTES
TO
``
w. mF 0,,,0W -
rAM=UU.mcnxttwc. uoo.Y wr UnYry oON,—N TN.r Y...i Iwvixo ON
��
•
` P. a @ 28l
x
q
m mF
Y 1OF
��
NONE n rcxvsMowwwEtxs
x
nF
h p°ry
450i 'i, y
T.artmw
YmMi.'rNOT Ho
olo TNEe¢
p0
'Ye •
@"
o" e,,O wY�E
¢r
oNml.
t
lusty OTN
°
,MT.wUTUnµpsunaaNATE�1.1 m.m.ETE, Ow 11—TwTNI
UTUT.r0.
3til-
@
e@y
ma r r FPOO moMwr wo xmmArww ixn
i r
• @
u �x OEaxew �°cs w,00 Br BY. Ywxm DOA, uuuu'w, xaxx ADN' nwruwrxz
rtU
LPNv Oo ro... o.U0 ..N Mm —No N,,
OPMIP
%m
v
xgwwAVY.6—
p
'Z-Y
PfPRwWSP me xw.xAWS Yva wrl +. oWmrrm YY�ly.
gE wiAwa. lw. m a x:m
lu w-N.Txx ismo wr
TON
ewe FROM FRE amlwNwue rmno. O xr FRF-we waU.r EWY wo
µ^moon.
a i °Yw�TaPw 0,
o, ,,N,1 x'o:'oi xF°wAxrzm'e°rsi a"n" ON .1 +..E
e
2°
Y. mime fmW annwRxrwr eExWu wxan.�
To.xoxa. r. rwu wNO—
@?
raa oos of rwmc wxW! i:aio w mE.roBTPxT.
@p
p
wvnxvmlvcw
xs^vuuv¢imaAwxmrvmsmun
0
unc FOR wMr ewom ouxixc FRE iunuunw
wo oYxixa T...
YAWR Weus
O
0O .N[rWM WsmFER UEW ttW OErtux N'� 3WMPARM
ffi
r
m0 q
TEE 'A Er ewu oxE
.s xF¢ssNO
rw0 YmEw
yX
\'••�
@ (M pJ
ON No. lOOT
m nuN wxXxpXliwmi en
mmmuo'
I
°Y O
.00ury NNOOZffxyuuxwai�e
M, ""o
uXioo
pAnxiro FRE sxescr frau wr ncwuror Auxcr m uwamv.
ti
p
J
n
IL `P
i
1 �
'
®
uNe
de
v
41
P
P
r�J$imL�xNi NOTES
O
n pNTy
//
//
2
e/
A xYoxxm wnYwxo FRE
xaomc anon roEs s
wE naw w w<. w PWE Oxxxs ON wEmw wow
•us.aE: w,iE w worx awErzx .s
O .
p'
A u ..ENT OF w�aE
ON ,NN ol xor. m.o w . w.olws
Txa mx .xo Y,N .xfx
GDOO@ • O
E"`zualM frw FTI. wozaxvs Yxsrw
w.osoas >mM®W wm xmwwos.w 11 TY wa�E>roum��u+EAmmAE
TNT TOO .00 oO
o p
J
.. FRA w w.m xx w ssw^uToo
1111
—11
YNoI
O i
g
rL llaOoUr m oD AO.1.1m fuse ra
rvnv°a"ww is®FRE wP°A.cA�ar :'E mei c+`"u'Yu m".x
awn
TO 0.0.WW
«c w wnn Fa,mxwra s T FDNUT,
PAVONENT 'A'°`"`
eE
sa raO NTFOA DOON
ow .x .—TON
A¢mx.ly EwEx Ewau mTM M
y
Q
E1✓�w'mx wo.. a'wiviiE uvcW
No
N—' o", .ma µ:ms °x . aTo"
o°
_ _ u.w
ON OTT�,
eF mswwem
�wµa
i
uL.aGY TO SJ/A.eVAm&—oo�w
EE wdr UNIa Yc61E SVReW is PEaMhO OY^xc.WU No, oo Rg'.
of ME oggECr
UNOOTQN�
'w w OOTo YyA E mO�FMp .wBv FRF W:mACiW
.w
Esw
TO, O— Ooo ON J. ToDioH NOX
ME wGXEw .wU PEOIUTlo Wm°1Mifkswo MW WR^4.s wsStr0 w[.wwovu of
/�B
I /
\•(
F.WOW oDioOmu.W TORErW�iTO NL
gG°Q1v.hD PUAIYMfPW 2MA
W NOWrt"E[EYNwMOXGrc.vfrtuwfwnrtsWwurnunwn\
NO
^°X w
sires
METRIC SCALE 1:7500 MUNICIPALITY OF
✓p
STRAFFORDVILLE SEWAGE WORKS
_^No
wAPcswu T, NSE PAe w g O.N aw. re rorcsW r ewemx°s ammxo
BAYHAM
�,.
CYRIL J. DEMEYERE LIMITED
CONSULTING ENTWNEERS GENERAL PLAN OF SERVICES
r; smLONDON 1FB i00 v X"x'wr-NAODD
RLLSONBURG. ONTARIO AND GENERAL NOTES
Iu"
�Hp Cteff WHfi i{�BREy
�Qq
i . e mus F
BT: DRAWN BT. To. LXECXE➢ BY:
f muco. u.r w xs
pgmlKf llOtMP@Mf Off FR11Y
um �sREN510N sDAM
�f
DESIGN JGW
•ry
V
oRGtCT N°.88015 SURVEY BY. TPM I GAFF: MARCH 2000 DRAWING No. 2
No, BY
Figure No. 3 0802
3.2.1.2 Existing Conditions
Table No. 10 - Pumping Station No. 5 Existing Utilization
Description
Value
Population (2006)
Eden - 200
Straffordville - 1070
Total 1270
Recorded Average Flow
Rate (2005-2008)
251.1 e/day
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.73
Peak Flow
1184 mYday
Peak Flow Design Capacity
3007 e/day
% Capacity (Peak Flow)
31%
Actual Per Capita Flow Rate
197.7 L/person/day
The existing flow data from the main pumping station in Straffordville (P.S. 5) indicates that overall the
combined communities of Eden and Straffordville have lower flows than predicted flow by the average
of the entire municipality. However, when predicting future flows, the higher value (average of entire
municipality) 250 L/person/day should be used.
3.2.1.3 Future Conditions 2017
Table No. 11 - Pumping Station No. 5 Utilization 2017
Description
Value
Population (2017)
Straffordville - 1274
Eden- 238
Total 1512
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow
allowance)
250 L/person/day
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.68
Average Daily Flow
378 m'/day
Peak Flow (Peak Flow)
1391 m'/day
Peak Flow Design Capacity
3007 m' /day
% Capacity
46%
CJ Dl
Consuming Egineers Page 8 of 13
3.2.1.3 Future Conditions 2017 (Contd.)
It was assumed that the growth rate of Straffordville would remain consistent with the overall growth rate
(1.6%) of the Municipality of Bayham, similar to the growth rate of Eden as predicted by the Growth
Study by 113I Group (2008). Again, it should be noted that if municipal water is extended to Eden and/or
Straffordville, the projections for anticipated growth must be re-evaluated and along with the capacity of
the pumping station.
3.2.1.4 - Summary
The main pumping station in Straffordville is currently operating at 31% capacity, will be at 46% in the
year 2017 and if growth continues at the same rate, as predicted to 2017, will be able to serve the
community for at least an additional 50 years.
3.2.2 Other Pumping Stations - Straffordville (P.S. No.2, P.S. No.3, P.S. No.4)
Three additional pumping stations service the Village of Straffordville. These pumping stations currently
operate under the same Ministry of Environment Certificate of Approval #7337-66YQL4 (included in
Appendix A). Flow data is not available for these pumping stations, however there are conclusions that
can be made about these facilities:
1. A Per Capital Flow Rate much higher than the Measured Per Capital Flow Rate was used in
the initial design.
2. Each individual pump was designed to service a specific geographic tributary area and those
tributary areas have not changed.
3. The Municipality's staff is satisfied with the performance of the facilities.
3.3 Vienna (P.S. No.6)
A single pumping station services the Hamlet of Vienna and also conveys the sewage that is pumped from
Eden and Straffordville to the WWTP. It was designed by Acres & Associated (2000) to handle a peak
sewage flow of 35 Us but was ultimately built with a capacity of 45 L/s. it is equipped with two pumps,
one being a duty pump and the other a standby pump. This pumping station currently operates under
Ministry of Environment Certificate of Approval 97337-66YQL4 (Appendix A).
A drawing illustrating the sewage collection system in Vienna is included as Figure No. 4
CJDI
Consulting Engineers Page 9 of 13
L,
METRIC SCALE 1:6000
`:�UARMMMMMBN s M vAB
UNDATED FEW
NITIANDTIM WAN AN
NL. w REY1510N OAIE 9Y
°°.�8..
® °9vM
�iB
e�.
41
WORKS
OW-RANUMADY NOT WOUS GENERAL NOTES
+EEMANY ED
ISgym " ED.�D MANUMATE +MU.� �E. EUSNIMANOWEN PLAAK MAN NORTH OF M 30 AND WE E� BY IS.11
�"°p�: , MTx+r Lw.PAX1E5 MAT MAr XE NDmDNM G MESA „.M.
MAN.=.— OW ND AaTwA AN P oma. wG". OF A. MANAM S NIB MaY:MISS, a
NoBEFE.IS sAND �+w,m sAEEE E
eBumOX
z anEB^
uEx x—AD--IA
711
CONSUL nNO ENGINEERS
GENERAL
PLAN OF SERVICES
FIN ANY To WE ENUMBEYA.-
"anCSTANI.
(3..
❑CLSCN6URC, ONTARIO
AND
T
i`. { Onte¢IO Gmm4 Wm4¢fA9eBBey
+w Rg81Y0001HffiIB]rtI6 D¢B kb VR�/
GOTN.Ai
E"wmw INUMANDS ME
DIAMONDS AMEANUFOS ° .... wrs wcPr G CEIANM REm D.. +B wNnf GNxAG
i e
I BRAWN BY: 00 CHEG(EG BY: JUW
rv,RBMXe EE PaB"L BEM.
_
—
b'
¢
WE
MiIM.Bra UND...1EDm. wu�AST B�E01au°B°Xm m eMONS'.IS-ormm ras.ST.
AYTERA� N NT MAT AM. "MY BE U. SIM�X ME MINE BE B¢AYERv.
of
v
¢
CO"TAET"E WE MXNi°P
ME MBSMS`N P MUMS.NO MATT15 MANDAMUS BOX AND NUMEN BE MEA MIXES BY µ
BOUNDISMUS, NAME
BWM
{
1g
,A
PATIMAMAGAINUM URY AND INFUuuAENT AU
NU..
DMPMM P6EGEW YD Dolt
SED.�
L
p
3
U -N. MATIONS AM
¢NEDUAL
n"E A. PANNESS BY— U.N. uMl+m, Hun"AM. XBAD ANN. ...AIDS rMw . ANAL
NNA
¢
on FN p EE,EETB As BY nM RXSRB XyNv Las AAL
SIT,
Ex ANN MN T. NMEN UMB,
u.mz XB N EwEMD AXE Em1aR,„M EMBGE MN.wDAMM"B
ED
¢
S
¢
t
MY AM_ __
L a OwPwE NIDD N+u Mw
¢
m
G
¢
_
DEW� �....1 .�w¢�EwB
1
ME wTEGI WM = Sol. D COWELINAM LM
I
µMD.
OA MOONDDUMNANAY BYSCTALLwANOE�uNFNE"4miTEDw iX B. MANN NEW ¢ AM wMw . BY ME MXNi0vA1 TY
OF
Ali n
1
s Br x
O
O
O
0
7 .i 1
d ail
$®'IL
L
�V�B
9 O
Ilk
CONSIRUCRON NOTES
o N INSE
° I ME PON ASTER MEEoMS DATNED w S RAND a°FfliBP°11'm°E i°L"w" NUS AUM Eon PP1 S w°mNGE MUST SSE SU MATEEBI"iNmNAULA.
SEta ARBOUTUREDD.1 WE MEMBER 41 ME INS OF CCUMMUEEAM AOJABNI N� MOUNT B ANN
(AL Mfg iMCTM's . BAY 11�KBv uMi B, MA EWIvNI BUT �TToa65 cE ME XO G4NNOT BE DILUTED WN AM YAN U�TMBME�
r E. NALL BE GAESD S MBE NUMB OF ALUMINUM AD. BE BEEMENED To SIMER WI Aft. BE SNWOUND By TWA AA.TUANANNESUB AN.
MOBIL UNIT BE M _LL ARMS 10 BE 06TMBE0 AS A ESTIMATE NwABOY IN MINES Ci
MUNN SANNYMN BUT MUST M BE MI MAE MAv ON MADE BEFORE PIPE IAYNE. TOMBIL
NUESSEED MASON ONS MARI AND ANDES ME BWwSO By SERUM U"
NODDED
STABLE WINES! 91410E m&OYO OF BY ME COXANAETLN MO IMPORTED iOPXBL NAN. BE B49 TO
cm P. NEEND w'.
S ME MANNEIOR SMI NONE EUMAlSM M USE A MPG BOB YNIN AS MANWw 10 PREVENT MANAGE
1. SYSTA. PAEs SN BF AudF0.�90�LT'S° NNE IXGVA20BNE1wWAlMJACENE TO TRNp .1 AN BE
cAlplMN. UUMs vmeMEN ANDEMS DAN. BY TIM WMNACE MEN ME
B lmE� BY A EM°EGA IXSUMNOW RM A PIPE GLAND TO BE iNs1AWM AT A MIND GAGE M UNDIMMED
v A. Nntl. BE TYVPGRB MY ME DIFFOUNCE Aw1Wx�M µELL EMOTIONS "LL 3 MINE NOUM EMENDING
To MASS TOM PENNS IF PAUL ME NEWUW.NE OFT TO DL J ndE'MI Md eE
AMOUNTED TO ME DPM G SEEMS INUECESSBLE BY NG PAC NL B SINE NAY BE... AM ILTM
IAMB.E. ME MINIMUMS MAIL ANDEAN ME MY OF AY DENIM OMAN$ FNSEENTNEO BBEMIN SMAN ON P4N
ED NOT. Ds NALL BE MADE MEMS PW PI MI —1 M LAWI DUMBTG AS EpBNNO DAYS. AND .,
6.ffi7TF.
Eel MUNTY WIND
PENNSM— AI BE IN AM BUSANT UT. MINTS EEWNOL MUNI RASSM. SMAJ- AS IN
AT MEANT ME I.AE OF FLUSEM BANTU MUST BE MADOWMED AT AUL VMS AND BOBN MEE WALL BE FUNLY
1.
s 1M
AN. TURN.
Eel xw-xw"inE xwRs
SHEER MAY BE 4oR0 TO WOMEN AMIC EER MUNT MADMI °BRING WE DTIC. OF ME
BOOM MY DIUMMUS MANDRAMEN.
ANSI WE UNPPADN,NNW R wnr ME CAND A YID NNEOL ANN UNDA" TUBE OOFiA¢ 5" SES FOR
MUNN AND ME RATE" E: WN STEAD
7. 111 MIGNMEN
ME DOMMETS NOW x NEUNME Y TO ADDRESS Rr
NOUNUMBNTo WE BATGArnw OF WdM®Ami Pvue`ArvB u ASSUME .D r ASTANAATE �
sM a ME TMEMMPwr G ANN M. U. uNRr AsBABY ON M"w c"m° .:AE
TO ME MINIMUM M OMM ME
MATTAUSTM MAN. POUND THE PUMPS OF AN. NO..' hoo SAYS NIN
NAL
EY G ANSMS ALL refs, wMD. ANE MINE R¢AME TO ME PROJECT TOM MY THE EAW kARY
MAI
B. MON
SUMEADOM WITS NUNN ME DUMP RUSTS IN ME MOMENT BEST OF ME PLIMMUT NATION AND AT MAN ESSEX
.IN. PAUL S9 MUMPS, .. MUMMAN. INNAL ED BEEMBEEND To �WNU SED OF PUMM W I'll AM
PENTUMNS, MAI FUNDS .1 ONSUND. OF AMAMYE DR. AS ARS. BY ME BANDISEM
WE ..I- A. ED MEMANDUSE AXI BEEM—NMEADIAL OF PUBS, ANEW. AMI ... IS WE EVIONAMP
MAJUL WON MY AD. . MADE AS SOMEOD By .1 INDIA. ANSI UM MEAN BF IRONFANUS A
I INPUTS AAAK SUBS.
ED Pt
MIAMI MA
9.MBE [EEW.1I.S.AUNITS NNN EO NED K. ME ANUMADY FOES M ME SUBANDs BW WE
E MEOS.
9. MAPS C BE WAIDO SUMMUM 6 NOT MRSITED W TRIED SURFACES To MUNN, WOODS BANNED TO
NU
SUN
BE
. BY OPTIANDENA AT
. ENTENSE
IN •A LM wMAUL w BE MAN,, NEW MOBBE MEN. NAN U. m NA— ANY UW. LmhfNW N ME
WBAS
N. SUN uNM°WOUNDS BOUND M.
AN,DMsMUNSNUarmePPPAMML:MAN,
BEnEwnrA YW
MUNICIPALITY OF
BAYHAM
�iB
VIENNA SEWAGE
WORKS
CYRIL J. DEMEYERE LIMITED
CONSUL nNO ENGINEERS
GENERAL
PLAN OF SERVICES
MANDI ANNBN Br:
iQA
❑CLSCN6URC, ONTARIO
AND
GENERAL NOTES
T
i`. { Onte¢IO Gmm4 Wm4¢fA9eBBey
+w Rg81Y0001HffiIB]rtI6 D¢B kb VR�/
DESIGN BY:
I BRAWN BY: 00 CHEG(EG BY: JUW
PROJECT N0.9901V
511RVEY 9Y: TPM OAIE: IJ MAY 00
DRAWING NO.
2
Figure No. 4
ME
3.3.1 Design Capacity
Table No. 12 - Pumping Station No. 6 Design Criteria
Description
Value
Design Population (2000)
Eden - 200
Recorded Average Flow
Rate (2005-2008)
Straffordville - 825
Harmon Peaking Factor
Vienna - 430
Peak Flow
Total 1455
Per Capita Flow Rate
454 L/person/day
(includes infiltration and inflow
24%
allowance)
164.6 L/person/day
Average Daily Flow
660 m'/day
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.80
Peak Flow
2508 m'/day
Pumping Station Capacity
45 Us = 3888 m'/day
3.3.2 Existing Conditions
Table No. 13 - Pumping Station No. 6 Existing Utilization
Description
Value
Population (2006)
Eden - 200
Straffordville - 825
Vienna - 500
Total - 1525
Recorded Average Flow
Rate (2005-2008)
251 ma/day
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.67
Peak Flow
921 m'/day
Peak Flow Design Capacity
3880 m'/day
% Capacity (Peak Flow)
24%
Actual Per Capita Flow Rate
164.6 L/person/day
The existing flow data from the pumping station in Vienna (P.S. No. 6) indicates that the overall flow
created by the combined communities is less than the amount predicted by the average of the community.
Therefore when predicting future flows, the higher value (average of the entire municipality) 250 L/person
should be used.
CJ Dl
Consuaing Engineers Page 10 of 13
3.3.3 Future Conditions - 2017
Table No. 14 Pumping Station No. 6 Utilization 2017
Description
Value
Population (2017)
Eden- 238
Straffordville - 1274
Vienna - 595
Total - 2107
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow
allowance)
250 L/person/day
Average Daily Flow
527 ma/day
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.57
Peak Flow
1880 m'/day
Peak Flow Design Capacity
3880 m'/day
Capacity (Peak Flow)
49%
It was assumed that the growth rate of the area serviced by the Vienna pumping station would remain
consistent with the overall growth rate (1.6%) of the Municipality of Bayham as predicted by the Growth
Study by IBI Group (2008). Again, it should be noted that if municipal water is extended to Eden and/or
Straffordville, the projections for anticipated growth must be re-evaluated along with the capacity of this
pumping station.
3.3.4 Summary
The main pumping station in Vienna is currently operating at 24% capacity and is projected to be at 49%
in the year 2017 and, if growth continues at the same rate beyond 2017, will be able to service the
community for approximately an additional 50 years.
3.4 Port Burwell
The Village of Port Burwell is serviced by two (2) local pumping stations and a portion of the Village
west of the Big Otter Creek relies on gravity sewers only. The two (2) pumping stations do not have
individual flow meters.
A drawing illustrating the sewage collection system in Port Burwell is included as Figure No. 5
Flow data is available for the WWTP and if the measured flow from the other communities served by
the WWTP is subtracted, the flow from Port Burwell is calculated to be:
Port Burwell Average Flow - 256 m'/day (2003 - 2008).
The Brock Street Pumping Station (P.S. No. 7) was designed by Giffels (1983) and is equipped with two
(2) 3.18 L/s sewage pumps, one duty and one standby.
CJ Dl
Consulting Engineers Page 11 of 13
I___... .Poi
LEGEND: (FOR DWGS. 1-1 TO 1-40)
•- PI 1113 STATION
YN.T
�---0--- SANITARY SEWER. WONpLE Iro.
FORGEIWIN
-- PRRRRtt LINE
—• v— EXISTING WATIOGAIN A FIRE HYDRANT
—• •— EXISTING WATERMIN A VALVE BOX
—•—.— EXISTING GASMIN
EXISTING STORK SEWER A MYOHOASIN
G EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGN
• EXISTING HYDRO POLE ON BELL POE
s"T BaEHOLE ANO BOfEHOLE N0.
�F DENOTES HOUSE OR BUILDING WITHOUT BASEMENT
NOTES:
1. GONTUCTOR SHALL Min LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF ALL
EXISTING SERVICES AND UTILITIES PRION TO CRETNDTION.
UTILITIES HIRE NBEERS ARE:
MTUNL RESOURCE MS I-519-TT3-5321
ANTELGODW 1.519 -TTI -0991
VILLAGE OF PORT BURWEI.L P.V.C. VILLAGE OFFICES
2. T9WHAPHIGD. IWORNATION SHOWN ON THEM DRAWINGS IS
wo CII NAPPING P1IEPAEO By TENTING mm sciENCEs LTD.
FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY FLOWN IN MY 1990.
3. BOREHOLES SHOWN ON DRAWINGS ARE IN REFERENCE TO SOILS
REPORTS PREPARED AS FOLLOWS:
SODER d ASSOCIATES LTO. - 1970 • SCREWS IG[ TO 110 INCL.
-GOLDER PROECT NO. 10059
THIS TRON GROUP LTO. - 1978 - SORONIFS I TO T INCL.
-TROW PROJECT M..19153/1051
RE TROT GAWP LTO. - IBM - SgiF1DES 00.1 TO 80-12 INCL.
-1801 TROJECT W. L-1996
4. LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIOM OF SEWER SWIM CONNECTIONS WILL
BE ESTpELI5NE0 BY THE ENGINEER iNPD1ATELY BEFORE
INSTALLATION OF EACH SKEET SEWER MIN.
BENCHMARK:
G.B.N. NO. G5 -U-234
ELEV.
ROYAL Y& CAANCN _
ADIAN LEGION BUILDING OA BRANCH N0. 529
SOUTH 510E OF ELGIN CORNY ROAD W. 42 _
.. 0.2 M. FAST OFPOST OFFICE
0.25 HH. -WEST Cf SHIM OVER SOUTH OTTER CREEK.
:MINISTRY` OF THE ENVIRONMENT "..vLaoi'
'T PROWRNSRAI 8EW'GE'WDpNe PROGq.1M PRORCT N 1 b}}TIr
W'
r VILLbOE OF PART BORWEIL
SEWAGE' YSTEM ..
'CONTRACT Ni,I - „
ip0 GENERAL ROAN, LEGEND;
.. e.NQTFc%-Fl .BENCHMANR °�`
Figure No. 5 0802
3.4 Port Burwell - contd.
Table No. 15 - Pumping Station No. 7 Design Criteria
Description
Value
Design Capacity (1983)
3.18 L/s
Design Population
185
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow
allowance)
280 L/person/day
Estimated Average Daily Flow
0.60 L/s
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.73
Estimated Peak Flows
2.24 L/s
% Capacity (Peak Flow)
70%
The Union Street Pumping Station (P.S. No. 8) was designed by Giffels (1983) and is equipped with two
(2) 18.8 L/s sewage pumps, one duty and one standby
Table No. 16 - Pumping Station No. 8 Design Criteria
Description
Value
Design Capacity (1983)
18.8 L/s
Design Population
860
Per Capita Flow Rate
(includes infiltration and inflow
allowance)
280 L/person/day
Estimated Average Daily Flow
2.79 L/s
Harmon Peaking Factor
3.73
Estimated Peak Flows
10.40L/s
% Capacity (Peak Flow)
55%
It was assumed that the growth rate of the area serviced by the Port Burwell pumping stations would
remain consistent with the overall growth rate (1.6%) of the Municipality of Bayham as predicted by the
Growth Study by IBI Group (2008). It is possible to estimate that in the year 2017 the Union Street
Pumping Station (P.S. No. 7) will be at 84% of capacity and the Union Street Pumping Station (P.S. No.
8)will be 66% capacity.
Specific developments that are proposed for Port Burwell will have a very localized effect on the capacity
of the individual pumping stations. The growth predictions used are for the community as a whole and
a development in a particular area can place additional loads on a single pumping stations. Therefore,
each large proposed development must re-evaluate capacities.
CJ Dl
Consuaing Engineers Page 12 of 13
4.0 Areas of Concerns - Pumping Stations
Staff at the Municipality of Bayham has indicated no areas of major concern or areas of potential
problems. This study also does not indicate any existing capacity problems or any potential problem areas
that may occur in the near future.
5.0 Conclusions
The Port Burwell Waste Water Treatment Plant and the Pumping Stations located throughout the
Municipality of Bayham are all operating below their respective design capacities and have the necessary
capacity to meet the demands of the design year 2017.
All of which is respectfully submitted,
Peter J. Penner, P.Eng. Andrew Gilvesy, P.Eng.
CJ Dl
Consulting Engineers Page 13 of 13
Appendix A
Certificates of Approval
CJ Dl
Consulting Engineers
Appendix A
Ministry Ministere
of the de
Environment I'Environnement
Ontario
The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham
9344 Plank Road North
Straffordville, Ontario
NO7 lYO
Site Location: Port Burwell Waste Water Treatment Plant
AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
MUNICIPAL AND PRIVATE SEWAGE WORKS
1 Chatham Street, Port Burwell
and
Hamlet of Eden, Hamlet of Straffordville, and Village of Vienna
Bayham Municipality, County of Elgin
NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
You have applied in accordance with Section 53 of the Ontario Water Resources Act for approval of.-
alterations to the effluent discharge exfiltration galleryand outfall system at the Port Burwell Waste Water
Treatment Plant (NAD83: UTM Zone 17: 515570 m E, 4720830 m N), with a Rated Capacity of 1,060 cubic
metres per day, such that the Works, including the existing sanitary sewers and pumping stations in the Hamlet
of Eden, Hamlet of Straffordville and Village of Vienna, all located in the Municipality of Bayham, consist of
the following:
PROPOSED WORSS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
upgrading of the Port Burwell Waste Water Treatment Plant (W WTP), including:
Effluent Outfall and Exfiltration Gallery
• construction of collection drains on the north, east, and south sides of the existing exfiltration gallery,
complete with perforated drains and a drainage outlet from the collection drains to the existing sanitary
manhole on the effluent sewer from the W WTP, including:
five (5) 150 millimetres diameter Big "O" pipes on the north and east sides and two (2) 150 millimetres
diameter Big "O" pipes on the south side, with the invert of the pipes to be at the depth of the clear stone
bed under the half -pipes in the existing exfiltration gallery;
Page 1 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
- one (1) 1.5 metres by 2.4 metres by 2.8 metres Junction Chamber to collect drainage flow from the
Big "O" pipes and to discharge to MH79 through one (1) 300 millimetres diameter drainage outlet pipe;
• modifications to the existing effluent outfall pumping station by removing the existing sewage pump and
replacing it with a new sewage submersible pump together with miscellaneous items necessary to have a
complete and operable pumping system, including:
one (1) 1.65 kilowatts effluent pump rated at 1,900 cubic metres per day at a Total Dynamic Head (TDH)
of 3.0 metres;
all other controls, electrical equipment, instrumentation, piping, pumps, valves and appurtenances essential for
the proper operation of the aforementioned sewage works;
all in accordance with the following submitted supporting documents:
Application for Approval of Municipal and Private Sewage Works, dated November 3, 2004 and
received November 12, 2004, and cover letter submitted by Cyril J. Demeyere of Cyril J.
Demeyere Limited (CJDL), dated 2 November 2004;
2. Drawing No. 1- "Exfiltration Gallery Collection Drains", prepared by CJDL, Project No. 0441,
dated November 2004;
3. Letter dated 21 September 2004 from Cyril J. Demeyere of CJDL to Paul Farrace of the Ontario
Ministry of the Environment (MOE);
4. Facsimiles dated January 3, 2005 and January 14, 2005 from Cyril J. Demeyere of CJDL to
Andre Schnell of the MOE;
5. Letter entitled "Exfiltration Gallery Investigation, Port Burwell Wastewater Treatment Plant
Expansion, Bayham, Ontario", with attachments, by Frank S. Barone of Golder Associates Ltd.
to Geoff Bums of Acres & Associated Environmental Limited, dated March 20, 2003;
6. "Exfiltration Gallery Assessment, Port Burwell Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion, Bayham,
Ontario" prepared by Golder Associates Ltd., dated June 2002; and
Design Summary and contract drawings, dated November 15, 2002 and submitted for approval
on March 26, 2003, by Acres & Associated Environmental Limited.
Page 2 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
EXISTING WORKS
SANITARY SEWERS AND SEWAGE PUMPING STATIONS
Hamlet of Eden
Sanitary Sewers
STREET
FROM
TO
Plank Road
Approx. 270 metres (m) north of Eden Line
Approx. 360m south of Eden Line
Plank Road
Approx. 795m south of Eden Line
Approx. 360m south of Eden Line
Travis Street
Eden Line
Gray Street
Eden Line
Approx. 240m west of Plank Road
Plank Road
Eden Line
Schaffer Road
Plank Road
Gray Street
Approx. 50m east of Travis Street
Plank Road
Main Sewage Pumping Station in Eden
main sewage pumping station located on the west side of Plank Road and approximately 340 metres southwest
of Eden Line, designed to handle a Peak Flow Rate of 7.0 litres per second equipped with two (2) sewage
submersible pumps (duty and standby), an emergency overflow from the pumping station to the municipal drain,
standby power generator, sewage flow meter and associated pipe work, electrical, instrumentation and controls,
and, a 100 millimetres diameter forcemain discharging to a sanitary sewer manhole at Straffordville Town
Limits.
I Hamlet of Straffordville
Sanitary Sewers
STREET FROM
Sandytown Road
Approx. 115m north of Heritage Line
Sandytown Road
Heritage Line
Sandytown Road
650m south of Heritage Line
Old Chapel. Street
Donnelly Drive
Duke Street
Donnelly Drive
Plank Road
Approx. 220m north of Fifth Street
Plank Road
Sandytown Road
Garnham Street
Hesch Street
West Street
Heritage Line
West Street
First Street
Short Street
Third Street
East Street
Heritage Line
TO
Heritage Line
Pumping Station approx.
770m south of Heritage Line
Main Street
Heritage Line
100m south of Heritage Line
Main Street
Heritage Line
45m north of Heritage Line
Third Street
Fourth Street
50m north of Heritage Line
Page 3 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
Alward Street Approx. 125m south of Heritage Line
Garner Road Heritage Line
Wardwalk Line Garner Road
Heritage Line 400m west of Sandytown Road
Arthur Street Plank Road
Main Street
Old Chapel Street
Main Street
70m west of Garnham Street
Hesch Street
Gamham Street
First Street
Plank Road
Second Street
West Street
Third Street
West Street
Fourth Street
Short Street
Fifth Street
Plank Road
Elgin Street
100m south of Third Street
Third Street
Elgin Street
Sewage Pumping Stations in Straffordville
Heritage Line
Pumping Station at Wardwalk Line
200m west of Gamer Road
790m east of Gamer Road
Approx. 160m northwest and west of Plank
Road
90m east of Old Chapel Street
East Street
60m east of Gamham Street
East Street
140m east of West Street
CPR right of way
CPR right of way
110m east of Plank Road
Third Street
Plank Road
Pumping Station No 1 (No 2 on Sanitary Sewer Drawings)
located on the east side of Plank Road and approximately 45 metres north of First Street, designed to handle a
Peak Flow Rate of 22.5 litres per second, equipped with two (2) sewage pumps (duty and standby), emergency
overflow from the pumping station to an existing municipal drain, standby power generator, sewage flow meter,
associated pipe work, electrical, instrumentation and controls, and, 150 millimetres diameter forcemain
discharging to sanitary sewer on Plank Road;
Pumping Station No 2 (No 3 on Sanitary Sewer Drawings)
located on the east side of Gamer Road at the intersection of Gamer Road and Wardwalk Line, designed to
handle a Peak Flow Rate of 1.7 litres per second, equipped with two (2) sewage pumps (duty and standby),
additional wet well storage to compensate for power or station failure, provision to connect a portable type
power generator, sewage flow meter and associated pipe work, electrical, instrumentation and controls, and,
50 millimetres diameter forcemain discharging to sanitary sewer on Heritage Line;
Pumping Station No 3 (No 4 on Sanitary Sewer Drawings)
located on the north side of Heritage Line E., approximately 200 metres west of the intersection of Heritage Line
E. and Tollgate Road, designed to handle a Peak Flow Rate of 1.95 litres per second, equipped with two (2)
sewage pumps (duty and standby), additional wet well capacity to compensate for power or station failure,
provision to connect a portable -type emergency power generator, sewage flow meter and associated pipe work,
electrical, instrumentation and controls, and, 50 millimetres diameter forcemain discharging to the sanitary
sewer at Heritage Line E. and Gamer Road;
Page 4 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
Pumping Station No 4 (No 5 on Sanitary Sewer Drawings)
located on the west side of Plank Road and approximately 90 metres south of the intersection of Sandytown
Road and Plank Road, designed to handle a Peak Flow Rate of 34.8 litres per second, equipped with two (2)
sewage pumps (duty and standby), emergency overflow from the pumping station to an existing municipal storm
sewer on Plank Road, standby power generator, sewage flow meter and associated pipe work, electrical,
instrumentation and controls, and, 200 millimetres diameter forcemain discharging to sanitary sewer at Vienna
Town Limits;
Village of Vienna
Sanitary Sewers
STREET
FROM
TO
Centre Street
380m north of Fulton Street
125m south of Fulton Street
Centre Street
Vienna Line
Pearl Street
Vienna Line
Centre Street
210m west of Centre Street
Pearl Street
Centre Street
Front Street
Fulton Street
Centre Street
Elm Street
Union Street
75m south of Fulton Street
125m north of Fulton Street
Union Street
Chestnut Street
70m south of Chestnut Street
Pine Street
Fulton Street
160m south of Fulton Street
Snow Street
Fulton Street
110m south of Fulton Street
Elm Street
130m north of Fulton Street
Plank Road
Elm Street
Ann Street
Chestnut Street
Chestnut Street
Union Street
Elm Street
Oak Street
70m north of Chestnut Street
110m south of Ann Street
Oak Street
Fulton Street
Plank Road
Queen Street
Oak Street
Edison Drive
Edison Drive
Queen Street
Plank Road
Ann Street
Elm Street
Edison Drive
Ann Street
80m east of Union Street
Oak Street
Plank Road
North Village Limit
Otter Street
Otter Street
Front Street
50m northwest of Front Street
Front Street
Otter Street
Pumping Station on Front Street
Water Street
King Street
Pumping Station on Front Street
King Street
Water Street
30m west of North Street
Plank Road
King Street
Chapel Street
Chapel Street
Plank Road
120m northeast of North Street
Walnut Street
Chapel Street
North Street
North Street
Walnut Street
100m north of Walnut Street
Page 5 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
Main Sewage Pumping Station
located on the north side of Front Street and approximately 90 metres southwest of the intersection of Front
Street and Plank Road, designed to handle a Peak Flow Rate of 45.0 litres per second, equipped with two (2)
sewage pumps (duty and standby), an emergency overflow from the pumping station to the Big Otter Creek,
standby power generator, sewage flow meter and associated pipe work, electrical, Instrumentation and controls,
and, a forcemain discharging to existing sanitary sewer at Bridge Street.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
an existing WWTP in Port Burwell, located adjacent and east of Chatham Street, approximately 700 metres
south of Wellington Street in the Municipality of Bayham, with a design average daily flow of 1,060 cubic
metres per day, consisting of the following:
Influent Works
one (1) raw sewage pumping station with four (4) submersible sewage pumps, including pumps No. 1
and No. 2 each rated at 8.2 litres per second at a Total Dynamic Head (TDH) of 9.0 metres, pump No. 3
rated at 20.5 litres per second at 7.5 metres TDH, and pump No. 4 rated at 24.0 litres per second at
9.3 metres TDH;
one (1) mechanical grinder-screen/conveyor/compactor rated at 3,800 cubic metres per day and one (1)
manual bar screen;
- one (1) vortex grit separator rated at 3,800 cubic metres per day;
- one (1) grit classifier;
Influent Flow Equalization
- one (1) flow equalization tank equipped with two (2) SBR influent transfer pumps each rates at
2,269 cubic metres per day and one (1) mixing pump rated at 3,860 cubic metres per day;
Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBR)
- two (2) SBR treatment units, with process unit No. 1 rated at 610 cubic metres per day and process unit
No. 2 rated at 450 cubic metres per day, including sewage distribution, sludge collection, and decanting
systems;
- two (2) sewage pumps, each rated at 7,990 cubic metres per day;
Page 6 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
- three (3) aeration blowers, each rated at 8.8 cubic metres per minute;
Effluent Disinfection and Flow Measurement
- an ultraviolet (UV) radiation system with two (2) banks of lamps, including 10 low pressure, high
intensity UV lamps per bank;
- a Parshall flume for flow measurement;
Phosphorus Removal System
- one (1) chemical storage tank having a capacity of 1.8 cubic metres;
two (2) chemical metering pumps, each capable of automatically dosing liquid alum at 1,890 litres per
day at 1.4 bar;
Sludge Treatment and Storage
- one (1) primary digester tank with dimensions of 4.5 metres long by 4.6 metres wide by 4.0 metres
sidewater depth, equipped with a diffused aeration system and sludge mixer;
- one (1) secondary digester tank with dimensions of 4.5 metres long by 2.5 metres wide by 4.0 metres
sidewater depth, equipped with a diffused aeration system and sludge mixer and decant system;
one (1) biosolids transfer tank with dimensions of 4.5 metres long by 5.5 metres wide by 4.0 metres
sidewater depth, equipped with two (2) sludge transfer and loading pumps;
- four (4) aerated sludge holding tanks, each with dimensions of 6.5 metres long by 6.7 metres wide by
4.0 metres sidewater depth, equipped with sludge mixers;
Effluent Outfall and Exfiltration Gallery
- an exfiltration discharge gallery consisting of a series of buried perforated pipe sections, located on beach
land surrounding the mouth of Port Burwell Harbour, designed to retain effluent discharge from the
SBR -based treatment system and allowing it to percolate into the native sand and mix with the subsurface
water to Lake Erie;
- an existing 375 millimetres diameter gravity outfall sewer leading to the effluent pumping station;
Page 7 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
- an existing effluent outfall pumping station with one (1) submersible pump capable of discharging
21.6 litres per second at 4.5 metres TDH to Big Otter Creek via a 100 millimetres diameter forcemain;
Emergency Power Supply System
- one (1) diesel engine stand-by power generator rated at 125 kilowatts, and a 2.27 cubic metres capacity
fueltank;
together with building structures, associated appurtenances, piping, ventilation, electrical, instrumentation,
controls, SCADA system, and all other items necessary to have a complete and operable treatment plant;
all in accordance with the "Addendum to ESR's for Eden, Straffordville and Vienna Sewage and Water Works",
dated June 1999, and "Port Burwell Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion - Design Brief', dated July 1999,
prepared by Acres & Associated Environmental Limited, and subsequent information submitted by Cyril J.
Demeyere Limited.
For the purpose of this Certificate of Approval and the terms and conditions specified below, the following
definitions apply:
"Act" means the Ontario Water Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 0.40, as amended;
"Annual Average Concentration" means the arithmetic mean of the Monthly Average Concentrations of
a contaminant in the effluent calculated for any particular calendar year;
"Annual Average Loading" means the value obtained by multiplying the Annual Average Concentration
of a contaminant by the Average Daily Flow over the same calendar year;
"Average Daily Flow" means the cumulative total sewage flow to the sewage works during a calendar
year divided by the number of days during which sewage was flowing to the sewage works that year;
"By-pass " means any discharge from the Works that does not undergo any treatment before it
discharged to the environment;
"CBODY' means five day carbonaceous (nitrification inhibited) biochemical oxygen demand measured
in an unfiltered sample;
"Certificate" means this entire certificate of approval document, issued in accordance with Section 53 of
the Act, and includes any schedules;
"Daily Concentration" means the concentration of a contaminant in the effluent discharged over any
single day, as measured by a composite or grab sample, whichever is required;
Page 8 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
"Director" means any Ministry employee appointed by the Minister pursuant to section 5 of the Act;
"District Manager" means the District Manager of the London District Office of the Ministry;
"E. Coli" refers to the thennally tolerant forms of Escherichia that can survive at 44.5 degrees Celsius;
"Geometric Mean Density" is the nth root of the product of multiplication of the results of n number of
samples over the period specified;
"Ministry" means the Ontario Ministry of the Environment;
"Monthly Average Concentration" means the arithmetic mean of all Daily Concentrations of a
contaminant in the effluent sampled or measured, or both, during a calendar month; .
"Monthly Average Daily Flow" means the cumulative total sewage flow to the sewage works
during a calendar month divided by the number of days during which sewage was flowing to the
sewage works that month;
"Monthly Average Loading" means the value obtained by multiplying the Monthly Average
Concentration of a contaminant by the Monthly Average Daily Flow over the same calendar month:
"Owner" means The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham and includes its successors and
assignees;
"Peak Flow Rate" means the maximum rate of sewage flow for which the plant or process unit was
designed;
"Previous Works" means those portions of the sewage works previously constructed and approved under
a certificate of approval;
"Proposed Works" means the sewage works described in the Owner's application; this Certificate and in
the supporting documentation referred to herein, to the extent approved by this Certif cate;
"Rated Capacity" means the Average Daily Flow for which the Works are approved to handle;
"Regional Director" means the Regional Director of the Southwestern Region of the Ministry;
"Substantial Completion" has the same meaning as "substantial performance" in the Construction Lien
Act; and
"Works" means the sewage works described in the Owner's application, this Certificate and in the
supporting documentation referred to herein, to the extent approved by this Certificate and includes both
Previous Works and Proposed Works.
Page 9 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
You are hereby notified that this approval is issued to you subject to the terms and conditions outlined below:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(1) The Owner shall ensure that any person authorized to carry out work on or operate any aspect of the
Works is notified of this Certificate and the conditions herein and shall take all reasonable measures to
ensure any such person complies with the same.
(2) Except as otherwise provided by these Conditions, the Owner shall design, build, install, operate and
maintain the Works in accordance with the description given in this Certifcate, the application for
approval of the works and the submitted supporting documents and plans and specifications as listed in
this Certificate.
(3) Where there is a conflict between a provision of any submitted document referred to in this
Certificate and the Conditions of this Certificate, the Conditions in this Certificate shall take
precedence, and where there is a conflict between the listed submitted documents, the document bearing
the most recent date shall prevail.
(4) Where there is a conflict between the listed submitted documents, and the application, the application
shall take precedence unless it is clear that the purpose of the document was to amend the application.
(5) The requirements of this Certificate are severable. If any requirement of this Certificate, or the
application of any requirement of this Certificate to any circumstance, is held invalid or unenforceable,
the application of such. requirement to other circumstances and the remainder of this certificate shall not
be affected thereby.
2. EXPIRY OF APPROVAL
The approval issued by this Certificate will cease to apply to those parts of the Works which have not
been constructed within five (5) years of the date of this Certificate.
3. CHANGE OF OWNER
(1) The Owner shall notify the District Manager and the Director, in writing, of any of the following
changes within 30 days of the change occurring:
(a) change of Owner;
(b) change of address of the Owner;
(c) change of partners where the Owner is or at any time becomes a partnership, and a copy of the
most recent declaration filed under the Business Names Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.B17 shall be
included in the notification to the District Manager•,
Page 10 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
(d) change of name of the corporation where the Owner is or at any time becomes a corporation,
and a copy of the most current information filed under the Corporations Informations Act, R.S.O.
1990, c. C39 shall be included in the notification to the District Manager;
(2) In the event of any change in ownership of the Works, other than a change to a successor
municipality, the Owner shall notify in writing the succeeding owner of the existence of this Certificate,
and a copy of such notice shall be forwarded to the District Manager and the Director.
4. UPON THE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF THE WORKS
(1) Upon the Substantial Completion of the Proposed Works, the Owner shall prepare a statement,
certified by a Professional Engineer, that the works are constructed in accordance with this Certificate,
and upon request, shall make the written statement available for inspection by Ministry personnel.
(2) Within one year of the Substantial Completion of the construction of the collection drains and
Junction Chamber at the existing exfiltration gallery and replacement of the submersible pump at the
effluent pumping station, a set of as -built drawings showing the works "as constructed" shall be
prepared. These drawings shall be kept up to date through revisions undertaken from time to time and a
copy shall be retained at the Works for the operational life of the Works.
5. BY-PASSES
(1) Any By-pass of sewage from any portion of the Works is prohibited, except where:
(a) it is necessary to avoid loss of life, personal injury, danger to public health or severe property
damage;
(b) the District Manager agrees. that it is necessary for the purpose of carrying out essential
maintenance and the District Manager has given prior written acknowledgmentof the by-pass; or
(c) the Regional Director has given prior written acknowledgment of the By-pass.
(2) The Owner shall collect at least one (1) grab sample of the By-pass and have it analyzed for the
parameters outlined in Condition 7 using the protocols in Condition 9.
(3) The Owner shall maintain a logbook of all By-pass events which shall include, at a minimum, the
time, location, duration, quantity of By-pass, the authority for By-pass pursuant to subsection (1), and the
reasons for the occurrence.
(4) The Owner shall, in the event of a By-pass event pursuant to subsection (1), disinfect the by-passed
effluent prior to it reaching the receiver such that the receiver is not negatively impacted.
Page 11 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
6. EFFLUENT OBJECTIVES
(1) The Owner shall use best efforts to design, construct and operate the Works with the objective that
the concentrations of the materials named below as effluent parameters are not exceeded in the effluent
from the Works.
Table 1 - Effluent Objectives
Effluent Parameter
Concentration Objective
(milligrams per litre unless otherwise indicated)
CBOD5
10
Total Suspended Solids
10
Total Phosphorus
0.75
Total Ammonia (Ammonia +
Ammonium) Nitrogen
- Non-freezing season
- Freezing season
1.0
3.0
Total Residual Chlorine
nil
Dissolved Oxygen
5.0 or higher at all times
E. Coli
150 organisms per 100 millilitres
(2) The Owner shall use best efforts to:
(a) maintain the pH of the effluent from the Works within the range of 6.0 to 9.5, inclusive, at all
times;
(b) operate the works within the Rated Capacity of the Works;
(c) ensure that the effluent from the Works is essentially free of floating and settleable solids and
does not contain oil or any other substance in amounts sufficient to create a visible film or sheen
or foam or discolouration on the receiving waters.
(3) The Owner shall include in all reports submitted in accordance with Conditions 9 and 10, a summary
of the efforts made and results achieved under this Condition.
Page 12 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
EFFLUENT LIMITS
(1) The Owner shall operate and maintain the Works such that the concentrations and waste loadings of
the materials named below as effluent parameters are not exceeded in the effluent from the Works.
Table 2 - Effluent Limits
Average Concentration
Average Waste Loading
(milligrams per litre unless
(kilograms per day unless otherwise
otherwise indicated)
indicated)
jEffljuentParameter
umn 1Column
2
Column 3
CBODS1515.9
15
15.9 .
Total Sulids
Total Phosphorus
1.0
1.06
Total Ammonia (Ammonia+
Ammonium) Nitrogen
2.16
- Non-freezing season
2.0
5. 30
- Freezing season
0
0. 10
0.1100 6
Un -ionized Ammonia Nitrogen
.
Total Residual Chlorine
ml
pH of the effluent maintained between 6.0 to 9.5, inclusive, at all times
(2) For the purposes of determining compliance with and enforcing subsection (1):
(a) With respect to CBOD5, Total Suspended Solids, Total Phosphorus, Total Ammonia
Nitrogen, and Un -ionized Ammonia Nitrogen, the Monthly Average Concentration of the
respective parameter named in Column 1 of subsection (1) shall not exceed the corresponding
maximum concentration set out in Column 2 of subsection (1).
(b) The Daily Concentration of Total Residual Chlorine shall not exceed the corresponding
maximum concentration set out in Column 2 of subsection (1).
(c) With respect to CBOD5, Total Suspended Solids, and Total Phosphorus, the Annual Average
Loading of the respective parameter named in Column 1 of subsection (1) shall not exceed the
corresponding maximum waste loading as set out in Column 3 of subsection. (1)
(d) With respect to Total Ammonia Nitrogen and Un -ionized Ammonia Nitrogen, the Monthly
Average Loading of the respective parameter named in Column 1 of subsection (1) shall not
exceed the corresponding maximum waste loading as set out in Column 3 of subsection (1).
(e) The pH of the effluent shall be maintained within the limits outlined in subsection (1), at all
times.
(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Owner shall operate and maintain the Works such that the
effluent is continuously disinfected so that the monthly Geometric Mean Density of E. Coli does not
exceed 200 organisms per 100 millilitres of effluent discharged from the works.
Page 13 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
8. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
(1) The Owner shall exercise due diligence in ensuring that, at all times, the Works and the related
equipment and appurtenances used to achieve compliance with this Certificate are properly operated and
maintained. Proper operation and maintenance shall include effective performance, adequate funding,
adequate operator staffing and training, including training in all procedures and other requirements of
this Certificate and the Act and regulations, adequate laboratory facilities, process controls and alarms
and the use of process chemicals and other substances used in the Works.
(2) The Owner shall update and maintain an operations manual that includes, but not necessarily limited
to, the following information:
(a) operating procedures for routine operation of the Works;
(b) inspection programs, including frequency of inspection, for the Works and the methods or
tests employed to detect when maintenance is necessary;
(c) repair and maintenance programs, including the frequency of repair and maintenance for the
Works;
(d) procedures for the inspection and calibration of monitoring equipment;
(e) a spill prevention control and countermeasures plan, consisting of contingency plans and
procedures for dealing with equipment breakdowns, potential spills and any other abnormal
situations, including notification of the District Manager; and
(f) procedures for receiving, responding and recording public complaints, including recording
any followup actions taken.
(3) The Owner shall maintain the operations manual current and retain a copy at the location of the
Works for the operational life of the Works. Upon request, the Owner shall make the manual available to
Ministry staff.
(4) The Owner shall provide for the overall operation of the Works with an operator who holds a licence
that is applicable to that type of facility and that .is of the same class as or higher than the class of the
facility in accordance with Ontario Regulation 129/04.
9. EFFLUENT MONITORING AND RECORDING
The Owner shall, upon commencement of operation of the Works, carry out the following monitoring
program:
Page 14 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
(1) All samples and measurements taken for the purposes of this Certificate are to be taken at a time and
in a location characteristic of the quality and quantity of the effluent stream over the time period being
monitored.
(2) For the purposes of this condition, the following definitions apply:
(a) Daily means once each day;
(b) Weekly means once each week; and
(c) Annually means once every twelve months.
(3) Samples shall be collected at the following sampling points, at the frequency specified, by means of
the specified sample type and analyzed for each parameter listed and all results recorded:
Table 3 - Raw Sewage Monitoring - (at treatment plant inlet)
Frequency
Weekly.
Sample Type
Parameters
Composite
CBOD5, Total Suspended Solids, Total Phosphorus, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Table 4 - Effluent Monitoring - (treatment plant effluent)
Parameters
Sample Type
Frequency
CBOD5
Composite
Weekly
Total Suspended Solids
Composite
Weekly
Total Phosphorus
Composite
Weekly
Total Ammonia (Ammonia
Composite
Weekly
+ Ammonium) Nitrogen
Weekly
Nitrite
Composite
Nitrate
Composite
Weekly
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Composite
Weekly
Total Residual Chlorine
Grab
Weekly
E. Coli
Grab
Weekly
Alkalinity
Grab
Weekly
pH
Grab
Weekly
Temperature
Grab
Weekly
Table 5 - Effluent Monitoring - (drainage flow at outfall sewer at MH79)
Frequency
Annually*
Sample Type
Parameters
Composite
CBOD5, Total Suspended Solids, Total Phosphorus, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Total
Ammonia (Ammonia + Ammonium) Nitrogen, Nitrite, Nitrate
* sampling should be performed in Apnt or eany May ui uauu l alGLluai Y'.
Page 15 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
(4) The methods and protocols for sampling, analysis and recording shall conform, in order of
precedence, to the methods and protocols specified in the following:
(a) the Ministry's Procedure F-10-1, "Procedures for Sampling and Analysis Requirements for
Municipal and Private Sewage Treatment Works (Liquid Waste Streams Only), as amended from
time to time by more recently published editions;
(b) the Ministry's publication "Protocol for the Sampling and Analysis of Industrial/Municipal
Wastewater" (January 1999), ISBN 0-7778-1880-9, as amended from time to time by more
recently published editions; and
(c) the publication "Standard Methods for the Examination. of Water and Wastewater" (20th
edition), as amended from time to time by more recently published editions.
(5) The temperature and pH of the effluent from the Works shall be determined in the field at the time of
sampling for Total Ammonia Nitrogen. The concentration of un -ionized ammonia shall be calculated
using the total ammonia concentration, pH and temperature using the methodology stipulated in
"Ontario's Provincial Water Quality Objectives" dated July 1994, as amended, for ammonia
(un -ionized).
(6) The Owner shall install and maintain a continuous flow measuring device, to measure the flowrate of
the effluent from the Works with an accuracy to within plus or minus 15 per cent (+/- 15%) of the actual
flowrate for the entire design range of the flow measuring device, and record the flowrate at a daily
frequency.
(7) The Owner shall retain for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of their creation, all records
and information related to or resulting from the monitoring activities required by this Certificate.
10. REPORTING
(1) One week prior to the start up of the operation of the Proposed Works, the Owner shall notify the
District Manager (in writing) of the pending start up date.
(2) Ten (10) days prior to the date of a planned By-pass being conducted pursuant to Condition 5 and as
soon as possible for an unplanned By-pass, the Owner shall notify the District Manager (in writing) of
the pending start date, in addition to an assessment of the potential adverse effects on the environment
and the duration of the By-pass.
(3) The Owner shall report to the District Manager or designate, any exceedence of any parameter
specified in Condition 7 orally, as soon as reasonably possible, and in writing within seven (7) days of
the exceedence.
Page 16 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
(4) In addition to the obligations under Part X of the Environmental Protection Act, the Owner shall,
within 10 working days of the occurrence of any reportable spill as defined in Ontario Regulation
675/98, bypass or loss of any product, by-product, intermediate product, oil, solvent, waste material or
any other polluting substance into the environment, submit a full written report of the occurrence to the
District Manager describing the cause and discovery of the spill or loss, clean-up and recovery measures
taken, preventative measures to be taken and schedule of implementation.
(5) The Owner shall, upon request, make all manuals, plans, records, data, procedures and supporting
documentation available to Ministry staff.
(6) The Owner shall prepare, and submit upon request, a performance report, on an annual basis, within
thirty (30) days following the end of the period being reported upon. The first such report shall cover the
first annual period following the commencement of operation of the Works and subsequent reports shall
be submitted to cover successive annual periods following thereafter. The reports shall contain, but shall
not be limited to, the following information:
(a) a summary and interpretation of all monitoring data and a comparison to the effluent limits
outlined in Condition 7, including an overview of the success and adequacy of the Works;
(b) a description of any operating problems encountered and corrective actions taken;
(c) a summary of all maintenance carried out on any major structure, equipment, apparatus,
mechanism or thing forming part of the Works;
(d) a summary of any effluent quality assurance or control measures undertaken in the reporting
period;
(e) a summary of the calibration and maintenance carried out on all effluent monitoring
equipment;
(f) a description of efforts made and results achieved in meeting the Effluent Objectives of
Condition 6;
(g) a tabulation of the volume of sludge generated in the reporting period, an outline of
anticipated volumes to be generated in the next reporting period and a summary of the locations
to where the sludge was disposed;
(h) a summary of any complaints received during the reporting period and any steps taken to
address the complaints;
(i) a summary of all By-pass, spill or abnormal discharge events; and
0) any other information the District Manager requires from time to time
Page 17 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
The reasons for the imposition of these terms and conditions are as follows:
Condition 1 is imposed to ensure that the Works are built and operated in the manner in which they were
described for review and upon which approval was granted. This condition is also included to emphasize
the precedence of Conditions in the Certificate and the practice that the Approval is based on the most
current document, if several conflicting documents are submitted for review. The condition also advises
the Owners their responsibility to notify any person they authorized to cavy out work pursuant to this
Certificate the existence of this Certificate.
2. Condition 2 is included to ensure that, when the Works are constructed, the Works will meet the
standards that apply at the time of construction to ensure the ongoing protection of the environment.
3. Condition 3 is included to ensure that the Ministry records are kept accurate and current with respect to
the approved works and to ensure that subsequent owners of the Works are made aware of the Certificate
and continue to operate the Works in compliance with it.
4. Condition 4 is included to ensure that the Works are constructed in accordance with the approval and that
record drawings of the Works "as constructed" are maintained for future references.
5. Condition 5 is included to indicate that by-passes of untreated sewage to the receiving watercourse is
prohibited, save in certain limited circumstances where the failure to By-pass could result in greater
injury to the public interest than the By-pass itself where a By-pass will not violate the approved
effluent requirements, or where the By-pass can be limited or otherwise mitigated by handling it in
accordance with an approved contingency plan. The notification and documentation requirements allow
the Ministry to -take-action in -an -informed -manner and will ensure the Owner is aware of the extent and
frequency of By-pass events.
6. Condition 6 is imposed to establish non -enforceable effluent quality objectives which the Owner is
obligated to use best efforts to strive towards on an ongoing basis. These objectives are to be used as a
mechanism to trigger corrective action proactively and voluntarily before environmental impairment
occurs and before the compliance limits of Condition 6 are exceeded.
7. Condition 7 is imposed to ensure that the effluent discharged from the Works to the Big Otter Creek and
Lake Erie meets the Ministry's effluent quality requirements thus minimizing environmental impact on
the receiver and to protect water quality, fish and other aquatic life in the receiving water body.
Page 18 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
8; Condition 8 is included to require that the Works be properly operated, maintained, funded, staffed and
equipped such that the environment is protected and deterioration, loss, injury or damage to any person
or property is prevented. As well, the inclusion of a comprehensive operations manual governing all
significant areas of operation, maintenance and repair is prepared, implemented and kept up-to-date by
the owner and made available to the Ministry. Such a manual is an integral part of the operation of the
Works. Its compilation and use should assist the Owner in staff training, in proper plant operation and in
identifying and planning for contingencies during possible abnormal conditions. The manual will also
act as a benchmark for Ministry staff when reviewing the Owner's operation of the work.
9. Condition 9 is included to enable the Owner to evaluate and demonstrate the performance of the Works,
on a continual basis, so that the Works are properly operated and maintained at a level which is
consistent with the design objectives and effluent limits specified in the Certificate and that the Works
does not cause any impairment to the receiving watercourse.
10. Condition 10 is included to provide a performance record for future references, to ensure that the
Ministry is made aware of problems as they arise, and to provide a compliance record for all the terms
and conditions outlined in this Certificate, so that the Ministry can work with the Owner in resolving any
problems in a timely manner.
This Certificate of Approval revokes and replaces Certificate(s) of Approval No. 1126-5TWQBU issued
on February 25, 2004.
In accordance with Section 100 of the Ontario Water Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 0.40, as
amended, you may by written notice served upon me and the Environmental Review Tribunal within 15 days
after receipt of this Notice, require a hearing by the Tribunal. Section 101 of the Ontario Water Resources Act,
R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 0. 40, provides that the Notice requiring the hearing shall state:
1. The portions of the approval or each term or condition in the approval in respect of which the hearing is required, and;
2. The grounds on which you intend to rely at the hearing in relation to each portion appealed.
The Notice should also include:
3. The name of the appellant;
4. The address of the appellant;
5. The Certificate of Approval number;
6. The date of the Certificate of Approval;
7. The name of the Director;
8. The municipality within which the works are located;
And the Notice should be signed and dated by the appellant.
Page 19 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL.4
This Notice must be served upon:
The Secretary*
Environmental Review Tribunal
2300 Yonge St., 12th Floor
P.O. Box 2382
Toronto, Ontario
M4P I E4
The Director -
Section 53, Ontario Water Resources Act
Ministry of the Environment
AND 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A
Toronto, Ontario -
M4V 1L5
* Further information on the Environmental Review Tribunal's requirements for an appeal can be obtained directly from the
Tribunal at: Tel: (416) 314-4600, Fax: (416) 314-4506 or www.ert.gov.on.ca
The above noted sewage works are approved under Section 53 of the Ontario Water Resources Act.
DATED AT TORONTO this 19th day of January,. 2005
AS/
c: District Manager, MOE London - District
Mohamed Dhalla, P.Eng.
Director
Section 53, Ontario Water Resources Act
Cyril J. Demeyere, P.Eng., Cyril J. Demeyere Limited
Drinking Water, Wastewater and Watershed Section, Standards Development Branch, MOE
Page 20 - NUMBER 7337-66YQL4
Ministry t`,
4\�/J of the
Environment
Ontario
Whereas
T
Carl.
teNo. .1-783-82-.837 ......
UA ......
(Continued)
Certificate of Approval
(Sewage)
-3-
has applied In accordance with Section 24 of the Ontario Water Resources Act for approval of: -
STORM SEWERS
STREET FROM TO
Robinson Street Lake Erie Approx. 25 m North
of Pitt Street
Erieus Street Strachan Street Approx. 90 m S.W.
of Victoria Street
FORCEMAINS
Brock Street
Approx. 50 m West
Erieus Street
of Strachan Street
(Proposed Sewage
Pumping Station No.])
Erieus Street
Brock Street
Wellington Street
Easement parallel
Approx. 95 in North-
County Road 42
to Union Street
east of County Road 42
(Proposed Sewage
Pumping Station No.2)
County Road 42
Union Street
Bridge Street
Bridge Street
County Road 42
Approx. 70 m S.E.
of Chatham Street
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION N0.1 - to be located on the south side of Brock Street on
the west side of Hagerman Street and consisting of
a submersible type sewage pumping station to be equipped with two (2) 3.18 L/s
@ 5.8 m T.O.H. submersible raw sewage pumps; an emergency forcemain by-pass; an
emergency overflow sewer; and all necessary appurtenances and controls;
...4
Now therefore this is to certifythat after due enquiry the said proposed works have been approved
under Section 24 of the Ontario Water Resources Act.
DATED AT TORONTO this 9th day of September ig 83
Ministry.
of the
Environment
Ontario
Whereas
of
Cerrte No. .17.783-82-837...........
(Continued)
Certificate of Approval
(Sewage)
-4-
has applied in accordance with Saction 25 of thA Ontario Water Resources ,Act for approval of:
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION NO.2 - to be located on the north side of Union Street
approximately 30 m southwest of Erieus Street and
consisting of a submersible type sewage pumping station to be equipped with two
(2) 18.8 L/s @ 17.24 m T.D.H. submersible raw sewage pumps; an emergency forcemain
by-pass; an emergency overflow flow sewer; a connection for a portable emergency
standby diesel generator and all necessary appurtenances and controls;
all in accordance with the final plans and specifications prepared by Giffels
Associates Limited, Consulting Engineers, at a total estimated cost, including
engineering and contingencies, of ONE MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($1,7489000.00).
rte,
V,
NOW thereforethis is to certify that after due enquiry the said proposed works have been approved
under Section 24 of the Ontario Water Resources Act.
This Certificate supercedes Certificate of Approval No.1-783-82-006 dated at Toronto
on February 9, 1982.
DATED AT TORONTO this 9th dayof September i9 83
Attn:-Mr. A.B. Patterson, Project Supervisor
cc: -Mr. D.A. McTavish, MOE SW Reg. Dir.
As. M.E. Smyth, Clerk, Village of Port Burwell
-Giffels Associates Ltd. (attn; B. Kishbaugh)
-Mr. J. Toth, UEngrg.
WValu
-Mr. W. Brink, Value Engrg.
Appendix B
Recorded Average Daily Flows
Recorded Total Monthly Flows
CJ Dl
Consulting Englneers
Appendix B
Municipality of Bayham 0802
Recorded Average Daily Flows (M) 26 -Nov -08
Date
WWTP Vienna Straffordville Eden
Port Burwell*
Jan 05
713.6
357.2
253.0
68.1
356.4
Feb 05
624.6
345.8
248.0
60.4
278.8
Mar 05
600.4
335.7
242.9
59.3
264.7
Apr 05
698.3
375.2
264.5
67.7
323.1
May 05
571.0
340.8
248.7
55.5
230.2
June 05
533.1
325.8
235.6
50.6
207.3
July 05
549.1
320.81
231.6
53.0
228.3
Aug 05
564.0
325.9
235.7
54.9
238.1
Sept 05
542.2
326.8
237.9
54.1
215.4
Oct 05
530.6
350.1
237.5
55.3
180.5
Nov 05
584.3
340.7
248.7
58.7
243.6
Dec 05
603.2
344.9
254.9
65.9
258.3
Average 2005
592.9
340.8
244.9
58.6
252.1
Jan 06
647.3
365.7
268.2
79.0
281.6
Feb 06
649.2
368.0
266.2
72.7
281.2
Mar 06
642.9
361.3
265.3
67.7
281.6
Apr 06
567.9
342.9
252.8
59.7
225.0
May 06
556.6
339.5
250.9
59.6
217.1
June 06
545.7
335.8
251.8
59.9
209.9
July 06
557.81
317.1=2482..48
55.1
240.7
Aug 06
540.5
315.3
53.8
225.2
Sept 06
577.1
336.6
59.1
240.5
Oct 06
747.6
405.3
79.6
342.3
Nov 06
688.0
388.7
69.4
299.3
Dec 06
736.1
406.4
85.3
329.7
Average 2006
621.4
356.9
255.7
66.71
264.5
Jan 07
782.7
424.1
289.3
81.0
358.6
Feb 07
584.8
353.2
260.1
56.7
231.6
Mar07
637.4
400.1
277.0
66.3
237.3
Apr 07
635.2
369.6
265.8
66.0
265.6
May 07
584.8
375.1
271.7
64.2
209.7
June 07
511.7
339.1
242.9
54.8
172.6
July 07
513.0
320.1
230.0
51.8
192.9
Aug 07
521.9
323.8
232.2
52.21
198.1
Sept 07
509.7
343.1
236.7
55.6
166.6
Oct 07
499.9
319.4
230.5
52.3
180.5
Nov 07
502.4
318.7
232.7
52.2
183.7
Dec 07
618.9
368.2
242.6
58.1
250.7
Average 2007
575.2
354.5
251.0
59.3
220.7
Jan 08
641.1
393.5
255.6
67.8
247.6
Feb 08
712.3
410.0
271.8
70.3
302.3
Mar 08
808.2
438.6
279.0
72.0
369.6
Apr 08
768.1
416.3
269.5
72.5
351.8
May 08
678.0
378.6
259.5
63.3
299.4
June 08
621.6
336.9
241.7
54.6
284.7
July 08
1 594.11
328.31
239.41
55.61
265.8
Aug 08
1 583.8
332.0
242.8
57.5
251.8
Sept 08
616.8
333.2
239.9
55.1
283.6
Oct 08
4.11
234.91
54.2
288.4
Average 2008
607 11
369.21
253.41
62.31
294.5
Average
1 611.11
354.71
251.11
61.71
256.3
* Port Burwell values are calculated from the difference between Vienna values and the
Wastewater Treatment Plant values
Municipality of Bayham 0802
Recorded Total Monthly Flows (m) 26 -Nov -08
Date
WWTP Vienna
Straffordville Eden
Port Burwell*
Jan 05
22121
11074
7843
2111
11047.0
Feb 05
17490
9683
6943
1691
7807.0
Mar 05
18613
10407
7531
1837
8206.0
Apr 05
20948
11256
7935
2032
9692.0
May 05
17702
10565
7711
1722
7137.0
June 05
15461
9447
6831
1467
6014.0
July 05
159251
9289
6726
1537
6636.0
Aug 05
17485
10104
7308
1703
7381.0
Sept 05
16265
9805
7136
1623
6460.0
Oct 05
16448
10854
7361
1715
5594.0
Nov 05
17528
10222
7462
1761
7306.0
Dec 05
18698
10692
7902
2044
8006.0
Average 2005
17890.31
10283.2
7390.8
1770.31
7607.2
Jan 06
200631
11338
8313
2450
8725.0
Feb 06
17528
9935
7188
1962
7593.0
Mar 06
19929
11200
8224
2098
8729.0
Apr 06
17036
10287
7584
1792
6749.0
May 06
16698
10185
7526
1789
6513.0
June 06
16370
10074
7554
1798
6296.0
July 06
15060
8563
6275
1488
6497.0
Aug 06
16755
9773
6993
1667
6982.0
Sept 06
17314
10098
7242
1772
7216.0
Oct 06
23176
12563
8376
2468
10613.0
Nov 06
20640
11661
7795
2083
8979.0
Dec 06
22820
12598
8766
2645
10222.0
Average 2006
18615.8
10689.6
7653.0
2001.0
7926.2
Jan 07
24263
13147
8969
2512
11116.0
Feb 07
16373
9889
7283
1588
6484.0
Mar 07
19758
12402
8586
2054
7356.0
Apr 07
19056
8871
6379
1584
10185.0
May 07
18130
11252
8152
1926
6878.0
June 07
15351
9495
6801
1533
5856.0
July 07
159041
9924
7129
16061
5980.0
Aug 07
16179
10038
7199
1617
6141.0
Sept 07
15290
10294
7102
1669
4996.0
Oct 07
15497
9902
7146
1621
5595.0
Nov 07
15072
9562
6981
1565
5510.0
Dec 07
19186
11413
7522
1802
7773.0
Average 2007
17504.91
10515.8
7437.4
1756.41
6989.2
Jan 08
19873
12198
7925
2101
7675.0
Feb 08
20657
11889
7882
2038
8768.0
Mar 08 -
25053
13598
8649
2231
11455.0
Apr 08
23040
12072
7815
2103
10968.0
May 08
21018
11737
8046
1962
9281.0
June 08
18647
10106
7252
1637
8541.0
July 08
18416
10176
7422
1724
8240.0
Aug 0818099
10292
7528
1781
7807.0
Sept 08
18505
9997
7196
1654
8508.0
Oct 08
1 189891
10047
72821
16791
8942.0
Average 2008
1 18253.01
11211.21
7699.71
1891.01
9018.5
Average
1 18487.61
7538.51
1853.11
7836.0
* Port Burwell values are calculated from the difference between Vienna values and the Wastewater
Treatment Plant values
Appendix C
MOE Inspection Report
CJDI
Consulting Engtnc rs Appendix C
Ministry of the Environment
Southwestern Region
London District Office
733 Exeter Rd
London ON N$E 11-3
Fax: (519)873-5020
Tel: (519) 8735024
June 17, 2008
Minist6re de i'Environnement
Direction regionale du Sud -Quest
Bureau du district de London
733 Exeter Rd
London ON N6E 1L3
TOIBcopieur: (519)873-5020
T61:(519) 873-5024
The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham
9344 Plank Rd N
Straffordville, Ontario, NOJ 1YO
ATTN: Kyle Kruger, Administrator
" Ontario
RE: MOE Inspection Report - Port Burwell Sewage Treatment Plant -
Final
Dear Mr. Kruger,
Enclosed please find an inspection report detailing the MOE's findings from the May 28, 2008
inspection of the Port Burwell Sewage Treatment Plant. Please note the requirement, detailed in
Section 5.0 of the report, to obtain MOE approval for Bioxide addition in your collection system.
It would be most appreciated if you could address in writing by June 30, 2008 a schedule for
obtaining compliance with this item. If you have any other questions or concerns please feel free
to contact me at 519-873-5024.
Yours truly,
0
Dan Cromep
Senior Environmental Officer
.:London District Office
File Storage Number: ELBACH
A`Oniano
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
Ministry of the Environment
Ministere de PEnvironnement
tient:
Effluent Limits
Effluent Monitoring
Effluent Reporting
t 1.
,�ai1a��„t4Q`JYU
Requirements
5
(yes/no)
(yes/no)
:rction Site Address:
Yes
Yes
Yes
xx� n Ra
Yes
Yes
r, ri 1 r
ontact Name:
--
itle:
dministrator
ontact Telephone:
r aw
6 .. x" '�i ontact Fax:
519)866-3884
ast Inspection Date:
006/O1N2
�spection Start Date
-.- -,- __
f`'' ' .:: ;'.* ,-. <
a a •.
nspectlon Finish Date:
00 /i15/28 .
outhwestern
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 . AUTHORIZING AND CONTROL DOCUMENT INFORMATION
Authorizing/Control Number Issue Date
Effluent Limits
Effluent Monitoring
Effluent Reporting
Document
(yes/no)
Requirements
Requirements
(yes/no)
(yes/no)
Certificate of Approval 1131-61Y L4 2005/01/19
Yes
Yes
Yes
Certificate of Approval 1126-5TWQBU 2004/02/25
Yes
Yes
Yes
The January 2005 approval is the current approval. This approval includes all the municipal streets as well
as all eight pumping stations. '
Page 1
2.0 INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
Sewage Treatment Plant
Sewage. Works Number:
Certificate of Approval Number(s)
C of A Number(s):
Plant Ownership: _
' Operating Authority: -
Service Population:
Wastewater Collection System:
Certificate of Approval Number(s):
C of A Number(s):
Collection System Ownership:
Operating Authority:
2.1 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Type Of Plant
Primary:
Secondary:
Advanced:
Biological Treatment:
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
Does the Plant Practice Phosphorous Removal?
Effluent Disposal Method
2.2 EFFLUENT QUALITY ASSESSMENT
Parameter Year.,
._ ..... 2006,._, 2007_ _., Limits
Page 2
Other:=
s s xs �"` a '�� ;,•
iunir� jai." �'��3.
Describe:
Solids are reduced by a screw type shredder while over -sized
-
solids are removed using a screw conveyer. Thek raw sewage then
_
flows to a wetwell (where somegdtremoval occurs) and is
-a
-
.pumped through a grit removaf channel into vortex grit separator
.
into an equalization tank. From the equalizalion tank the influent
flows into one of two sequential batch reactors (SBRs). Alum is
added during the aeration cycle for phosphorous -removal. After
settling the effluent ffows through-ultra-violetdisinfection into an
-
exiltration discharge gallery consisting of a series of buried
perforated:pipes.. The effluent percolates in batch mode into the
native send and' mixes thesubsurface water to Lake Ede.
-
Wasteactivated sludge treatment consist of primary and
secondary digesters equipped vAh fine bubble diffusers, and four
sludge holding tanks.
..
Q 0omm6na1 Septic
Q Constructed Welland
Q S iowfluent
Q Other
Effluent Discharge Frequency
Does the Plant Practice Phosphorous Removal?
Effluent Disposal Method
2.2 EFFLUENT QUALITY ASSESSMENT
Parameter Year.,
._ ..... 2006,._, 2007_ _., Limits
Page 2
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
The limits above are concentration limits.. The certificate of approval also has loading limits. The
concentration limits are monthly average limits but the loading limits are an annual average. The approval
also limits Total Ammonia Nitrogen, Un -ionized Ammonia, pH, and E. Coli. No exceedances of any of these
parameters was noted for this review period.
2.3 CAPACITY ASSESSMENT
This plant appears to be operating well within it's operating capacity. It should also be noted that both SBRs
are operating.
2.4 EFFLUENT SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS
Effluent Monitorina
Parameters
Year 1
Year2
BOD5
Composite
2006
2006
2007
vera a daily flow
9 Y
X56 O
_
a aA r y5'0
°
Total Ammonia (Ammonia + Ammonium) Nitrogen
:3�
�«sra�
a ,� , �. ra •t
(m'/day)
I'
aximum daily
ail flow,
Y
/day)
rti ,g 3,�
s�3
_ (m
t �,... �,�
c.�'s# .�. '
11
apacity Design
/o of capacity, based on3
=a�'
veragedailyflow
,rr�P
This plant appears to be operating well within it's operating capacity. It should also be noted that both SBRs
are operating.
2.4 EFFLUENT SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS
Effluent Monitorina
Parameters
Sample Type
Frequency
BOD5
Composite
Weekly
Total Suspended Solids
Composite
Weekly
Total Phosphorus
Composite
Weekly
Total Ammonia (Ammonia + Ammonium) Nitrogen
Composite
Weekly
Nitrite
Composite
Weekly
Page 3
2.6
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
Nitrate
Composite
Weekly
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Composite
Weekly
Total Residual Chlorine
Grab
Weekly
E:Coli
Grab
Weekly
Alkalinity
Grab
Weekly
pH
Grab
Weekly
Temperature
Grab
Weekly
Total residual chlorine has not been analyzed in the effluent as required by the certificate of approval. Also,
alkalinity samples are Collected using a composite sampler rather than by grafi as described in the
certificate of approval. To be fair though, the need to measure chlorine residual from this facility is not
necessary since chlorine is not used for disinfectant. And, the quality of the alkalinity sample is not
improved when collected by grab rather than using a composite sampler. These are technical violations
only.
2.6 �MINISTRY SAMPLINGLJ�pA�T TIMEOF INSPECTION
Sample
q
-Sample Locations and Analyses:
2.7 DISINFECTION
a) Method of disinfection:
b) Disinfection Period
C) Comment on the seasonal disinfection period for each
d)
e)
f)
year
Disinfection Required By:
Ultraviolet
4 A+ f
Certil`icateofApproval - -
Residual monitoring technique:
Was there a measurable chlorine residual
In the final effluent after contact: - -
2.8 PLANT CLASSIFICATION & OPERATOR CERTIFICATION
a) Plant classification: -
i) Facility Level: c.
IN s+s'rtx"�',?s',v
l4?ksax-
11) Certificate Number: tri
iii) Data of Issue: 2000/03/09
b) Plant operators have the appropriate level of 9 Yes 0 No
certification for this plant
Ed Roloson is the Operator in Charge. In total there are three operators at this facility:
Page 4
Butler
2.9 FLOW MEASUREMENT
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
13850
a) Flows are being metered at: Final effluent
b), Date of last calibration of effluent flow meter: 2008/01/24
Flows are measured at the final effluent using a parshall flume and an ultrasonic sensor.
2.10 1BYPASSES, AND/OR OVERFLOWS
Are bypasses and overflows routinely reported?
Are bypasses and overflows routinely monitored?
Are bypasses and overflows routinely sampled?
PLANT INFORMATION:
Plant Collection System
f �
JW �.
COLLECTION SYSTEM INFORMATION: (Satellite(s), Lift Station(s) and Regulator(s))
1 iff nfannn OvurflnwI Other Location Overflow
Item
Plant Bypass
Plant Overflow
Item
Year 1
2005
Year 2
2006
Year 3
2007
Year 1
2005
Year 2
2006
Year 3
2007
Total number of events?
11
ik' -,� T
`�et.:h
r,
f the total number of events, how many are
dry -weather events?
Total duration of event(s)? (Hour(s))
Total quantity with notreatment?(1000m)
0.07
_
Of the total number of events, how many are
dry -weather events?
otal quantity with only disinfection? (1000 m')
Pa
0.07
-
-
quantity with bthef treatment? (1000 m)
Total quantity with no treatment? (1000 m)
-
re any Overflow(s) at combined sewer -
- -
Total quantity with only disinfection? (1000 raj
Total quantity with primary treatment? (1000 m'
Total quantity w8h primary treatment and
disinfection7(1000m� -
Total quantity with other treatment? (1000 m)
Total quantity with other treatment and
disinfection?(1000
What is the most common reason for event(s)?
-.
What is the name of the receiving water?
subsurface to Lake Ede -
ubsurface to
Lake Erie -
subsurface to
Lake. Erie
subsurface to
Lake Erie
Name the most important type of sensitive
receptor?
there
other
other
other
What is the approximate distance to the
sensitive receptor? (km)
0
0
0
COLLECTION SYSTEM INFORMATION: (Satellite(s), Lift Station(s) and Regulator(s))
1 iff nfannn OvurflnwI Other Location Overflow
Item
Year 1-Year2
2005 2006
Year
2007
Year
2005-
Year Yeat
2006 200
otal number of events?
"'��F
,777777r
Total duration of event(s)? (Hour(s))
11
f the total number of events, how many are
dry -weather events?
Total quantity with notreatment?(1000m)
0.07
_
otal quantity with only disinfection? (1000 m')
Pa
0.07
quantity with bthef treatment? (1000 m)
0.00
re any Overflow(s) at combined sewer -
No
Page 5
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
locations? (Yes/No)
- Sludge Stabilization:
f r zr
What is the most common reason for event(s)?
equipment or
Sludge Storage:
fid
-=
Total available storage: _
,
.5..
-
structural
: 4._�
a ;- r<i• d ria: t x
Retention Time
failure
Certified waste hauler
Certificate numbers of haulers are:
What is the name of the receiving water?
Otter River/
Lake Erie
Lake Erie
Lake Erie
Lake Erie
Lake Erie
Lake Erie
�.F
`•w��
Name the most important type of sensitive
receiving water
receiving water
receiving water
receivingwater
receiving water
receiving w
receptor?
That is the approximate distance to the
ensitive receptor? (km)
Comments:
There was one pump station bypass event during this review period. The MOE incident report
number for this event is 8174-6HKLBB. The value in the field 'Total Quantity with Only Disinfection'
in the table above is a rough estimate. According to the incident report, when the bypass was
discovered chlorine pucks were placed in the catchbasin.
PS #1 Eden --r overflow enters a drain and eventually outlets at the Big Otter Creek.
PS 42 Straffordville — overfloweriters a drain and eventually outlets at the Big Otter Creek.
PS #3&4 Straffordville -- no overflow
PS #5 Straffordville -- overflow enters a drain and eventually outlets at the Big Otter Creek.
PS #6 Vienna — overflow directly to the Big Otter Creek
PS #7..Pt. Burwell -- overflow to a municipal drain and directly to Lake Erie
PS #8 Pt.Burwell -- overflow directly to the Big Otter Creek
2.11 SLUDGE (BIOSOLIDS) MANAGEMENT
- Sludge Stabilization:
f r zr
Sludge Storage:
fid
-=
Total available storage: _
,
.5..
-
'-
Volume
: 4._�
a ;- r<i• d ria: t x
Retention Time
Certified waste hauler
Certificate numbers of haulers are:
Method of Disposal/Utilization:
dcultural
Certified waste disposal facltty
. Certificatenuhiber(S) of facilities are:
�.F
`•w��
i
2.12 WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS
7. Does this plant receive sewage from a Combined Sewer
Collection System (sanitary sewage, roof leaders,
foundation drains, catch basins and/or storm water
conveyed within a single pipe)?
2. How are bypasses, overflows and/or combined sewers
being minimized or eliminated? _
a) Pollution Prevention and Control Planale
"�twulaw
(As describedin Procedure F -5.5)L Other Plan"'4'g
Page 6
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
b) Characterization Study?
c) implementation Plan?
Comments:
3.0 REVIEW OF PREVIOUS NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUES
The previous inspection report cited the failure to meet the effluent quality requirements in the certificate of
approval. The effluent quality requirements were met during this review period.
i
4.0 SUMMARY OF INSPECTION FINDINGS (HEALTH/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT)
Was there any indication of a known or anticipated human health impact during the inspection andfor review
of relevant material related to this Ministry s mandate ?
Specifics: -
Was there any indication of a known or anticipated environmental impact during the inspection and/or review
of relevant material ?
Specifics:
Was there any indication of a known or suspected violation of a legal requirement during the inspection
and/or review of relevant material Which could cause a human health impactor environmental impairment ?
❑ yes Effluent quality did not meet the limits set out in the Certificate of Approval, Director's Order or
Provincial Officer's Order
Ryes Effluent sampling and monitoring did not meet the requirements set out in a Certificate of
Approval, Director's Order or Provincial Officer's Order
❑ yes Facility operators are not certified in accordance with the Licensing of Sewage Works Operators
Regulation
❑ yes Waste carrier (sludge hauler) are not certified
❑ yes Waste disposal facility (sludge disposal) are not approved
specifics: Total residual chlorine has not been analyzed in the effluent as required by the certificate of
approval. Also, alkalinity samples are collected using a composite sampler rather than by grab as
described in the certificate of approval. To be fair though, the need to measure chlorine residual from this
facility is not necessary since chlorine is not used for disinfectant. And, the quality of,the alkalinity sample is
not improved when collected by grab rather than using a composite sampler. These are technical
violations only.
Was there any indication of a potential for environmental impairment during the inspection and/or the review
of relevant material ?
Flo
Specifics:
Was there any indication of non-conformance or minor administrative non-compliance?
Page 7
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
Yep
LeS�te:ften0ht�/ilSii(eY. #?Crnf2.
specifics: Municipality is adding a chemical called Bioxide in the collection system in order to eliminate
odour problems. There is no certificate of approval for the addition of this chemical.
5.0 ACTION(S) REQUIRED
The municipality is obliged to obtain a certificate of approval from the Environmental Assessment and
Approvals Branch for the Bi.ioxide chemical addition program in the collection system.
6.0 OTHER INSPECTION FINDINGS
It should be noted that there are several issues with the certificate of approval that the District office has
requested a fix from Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch:
1. In the description of the'Influent Works', reference is made to a compactor. There is no compactor
however, there is an auger. The district has requested that this be changed.
2. In 'Table 2 - Effluent Limits', reference is made to'non-freezing season' and 'freezing season' however,
the seasons aren't defined. The district has requested that the seasons be defined.
3. 'Table 4 -Effluent Monitoring' requires Total Residual Chlorine to be monitored weekly by grab. Given
that chlorine is not used at this facility there is no need for monitoring residual. The District has
requested this be removed from the approval.
4. 'Table 4 - Effluent Monitoring' requires Alkalinity to be collected for analysis by means of a grab sample.
There is no technical reason for alkalinity to be collected by grab; a composite sample would have
equal value. The District has requested that the sample method be changed to composite.
7.0 INCIDENT REPORT
,.3.7FFRG2 D
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
Required attachments:
PREPARED BY:
Environmental Officer:
Name:
Dan Cromp
District Office:
London District Office
Date:
2008/06/76
Signature l -
4
REVIEWED BY:
District Supervisor:
Name: Ewoud Van Goch
z;t
Page 8
Communal Sewage Inspection Report
District Office: London District Office
Date: 2008106/16
Signature: E t j CJ, -----
File
/lr
File Storage Number: ELBACH
Note:
"This inspection report does not in any way suggest that there is or has been compliance with applicable legislation and
regulations as they may apply to this facility. It is, and remains, the responsibility of the owner and/or the operating
authority to ensure compliance with all applicable legislative and regulatory requirements" ,
Page 9
Appendix D
Growth Study
CJ Dl
Consuking Englnmrs
Appendix D
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
DISCUSSION PAPER #2
FEBRUARY 2008
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
1. INTRODUCTION
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY IS YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
1
2. PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT 2005.............................................................................2
2.1 Intensification and Redevelopment.....................................................................................................2
2.2 Planned and Existing Infrastructure....................................................................................................3
2.3 Specialty Crop Soils 1 Prime Agricultural Areas................................................................................. 4
2.4 Agricultural Operations........................................................................................................................5
3. SERVICING
4. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
5.
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................7
5.1
Corinth....................................................................................................................................................7
5.2
North Hall...............................................................................................................................................8
5.3
Eden.......................................................................................................................................................8
5.4
Richmond...............................................................................................................................................9
5.5
Straffordville..........................................................................................................................................9
5.6
Calton...................................................................................................................................................10
5.7
Vienna...................................................................................................................................................10
5.8
Port Burwell.........................................................................................................................................11
6.
INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNER REQUESTS..............................................................................13
6.1
Expansion of Elliott Road Special Policy Area (Pt Lot 14,15, Cone 10) ........................................13
6.2
New Estate Residential Area (Pt Lot 13, Cone 9)..............................................................................13
6.3
New England (New Hamlet) & Expansion of Highway Meadows Mobile Home Park
(Pt Lot 23 - 25, Cone 9).......................................................................................................................14
6.4
Richmond Boundary Expansion (Pt Lot 110, Cone NTR)................................................................15
6.5
North Hall boundary expansion (Pt Lot 5, Cone 9 and Pt Lot 6, Cone 8) .......................................15
6.6
New Estate Residential Area (Pt Lot 10, Cone 9)..............................................................................16
IBI
February 2008
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER 42
6.7 Calton boundary expansion
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
16
6.8 Chateau Wyndemere Lands (Pt Lot 6.8, Conc 1)..............................................................................16
7. RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................................17
8. CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................20
9. NEXT STEPS..........................................................................................................................20
9.1 Other Policy Issues............................................................................................................................. 20
Febmary 2008 Page 2
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
1. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this discussion paper is to study the potential for additional growth and/or urban
boundary re -organization stemming from how growth has occurred over the last five years under
the current Official Plan. New statistical information will also be reviewed to determine if further
growth is warranted. The Provincial Policy Statement 2005 states that settlement areas may only
be expanded at the time of a comprehensive review of an Official Plan.
The Municipality has experienced growth to some extent in all of its various urban areas which
include the hamlets of Corinth, North Hall, Eden, Richmond, and Calton, as well as the Villages of
Straffordville, Vienna, and Port Burwell. Most growth has occurred through the consent process in
the form of single detached residential building lots being created in groups of 1-5 lots at a time.
There has been only mild interest in multi -lot residential development, none of which has resulted in
any physical development during the last five years.
As per the policies of the Official Plan, the preferred form of development in the Municipality is to
allow small amounts of residential growth to occur in the various hamlets within their specified
boundaries, and direct the majority of residential growth to the villages of Straffordville, Vienna, and
Port Burwell. Due to changes in the Provincial Policy Statement specifically relating to servicing,
the development patterns preferred by the Municipality can not be realized without significant
investments in public water services in certain areas. This will be discussed in greater detail later in
the report.
Some observations regarding growth in the Municipality over the last few years are as follows:
The new hamlet of North Hall has quickly maximized the majority of its infilling
opportunities, but new Provincial servicing policies has quashed interest in
developing large interior portions by plan of subdivision;
• Interest in lot development has been strongest adjacent to and north of the
Highway No. 3 corridor in order to be near larger employment centres in
Tillsonburg, Woodstock, Ingersoll, St. Thomas, and even London;
• Pace of growth remains slower along the Highway 19 corridor, south of
Straffordville in the areas of Vienna and Port Burwell, although as recently as
2006 Vienna has seen an increase in individual lot growth in older parts of the
Village where lots on open municipal rights-of-way have been created, which
had previously been held by single owners as larger estate lots
The existing servicing situation, Provincial policy direction, and market interests have combined to
create a situation in the Municipality that cannot maximize its potential for residential growth based
on current settlement area boundaries.
IBI
February 2008
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
This Growth Study discussion paper is divided into several parts that should form the basis for
determining any new settlement area boundaries included as part of the Five -Year Review Official
Plan amendments. These sections include:
• Provincial Policy Statement 2005;
• Servicing;
• Quantitative Analysis (statistical growth / future projections);
• Qualitative Analysis (market interests)
2. PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT 2005
Section 1.1.3.9 of the Provincial Policy Statement states that a planning authority may identify a
new settlement area or expansion of an existing settlement area only at the time of comprehensive
review and subject to the following criteria:
• Sufficient opportunities for growth through intensification, redevelopment, and
existing growth areas are not available;
• The planned or existing infrastructure are suitable to accommodate public health
and safety;
• The lands do not comprise a specialty crop area, avoid prime agricultural areas
where possible, or avoid highest classification of prime agricultural land
surrounding a settlement area;
• That any impacts on agricultural operations are mitigated to the greatest extent
possible.
2.1 Intensification and Redevelopment
Policy 1.6.4.2 specifically states that intensification and redevelopment should be promoted on
existing municipal water and sewage systems where available. Given the existing servicing
situations, intensification and redevelopment could only therefore occur in the Villages of Port
Burwell and Vienna.
Within the Village of Port Burwell there is some room for intensification through new "greenfields"
development including:
a Zawierucha subdivision
a Elizabeth Street subdivision
a Consents — N/S Lakeshore Line, east of Elizabeth Street;
February 2008 Page 2
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
• Consents — E/S Victoria Street, north of Robinson Street;
McCord Lane;
As well, there are significant opportunities for "brownfields" redevelopment on the lands around the
Big Otter Creek harbour mouth designated as "Harbour Residential/Commercial'. Brownfields
refers to properties that are potentially contaminated due to historical commercial/industrial land
uses and are underutilized or vacant and situated in key areas of communities in downtowns or
along waterfronts. Current policies for these lands support densities ranging between 60 and 75
uph which could conceivably house over 500 dwelling units.
Within the Village of Vienna there is significant opportunities for intensification (see Vienna map —
Appendix 1) given the traditional large lot sizes and scattered development on existing road
networks. In addition, there is over 110 hectares of "greenfields" development land within the
northern half of the Village (north of Old Mill Line) that could accommodate over 2200 dwelling units
at preferred densities in the "Residential" policies of the Official Plan of 20 units per hectare.
It should be noted that while there are existing opportunities for intensification and redevelopment
within Port Burwell and Vienna, any such growth would require significant investment in municipal
water and sewage systems to accommodate this growth.
There are no other settlement areas with full municipal services. As such, intensification and
redevelopment in other areas such as Straffordville and Eden (partial services) and the remainder
of the hamlets (private services) could only occur at a rate at which private services could effectively
accommodate growth while ensuring a maximum level of public health and safety. This would
predominately take the form of infilling with new single detached dwellings on farm frontages within
the growth boundaries, or on oversized residential lots.
2.2 Planned and Existing Infrastructure
The existing piped infrastructure for the Municipality of Bayham is as follows:
Settlement Area
Sanitary Sewage Treatment and Disposal
Potable Water Supply
Corinth
Private Septic
Private Well
North Hall
Private Septic
Private Well
Eden
Piped Municipal
Private Well
Richmond
Private Septic
Private Well / Communal Well
Straffordville
Piped Municipal
Private Well
Calton
Private Septic
Private Well
Vienna
Piped Municipal
Piped Municipal
February 2008 Page 3
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
Port Burwell Piped Municipal Piped Municipal
2.3 Specialty Crop Soils 1 Prime Agricultural Areas
Specialty crop soils and prime agricultural lands form significant portions of Bayham and contribute
greatly to agriculture being the prime economic force in the Municipality. The Province has placed a
greater emphasis on protecting specialty crop soils from encroachment by urban development. As
part of the Background Study to the Official Plan, specialty crop soils and soil classifications were
mapped indicating that approximately 73% of the land base in Bayham is considered prime
agricultural land, including those specialty crop soils areas. Together these soils are shown in
Appendix 2 withrg een areas indicating prime agricultural lands and/or specialty crop areas and red
areas showing non -prime agricultural lands.
Two important definitions to understand and differentiate from are prime agricultural lands (specialty
crop soils and Canada Land Inventory Class 1-3 soils) and prime agricultural areas (those areas
where prime agricultural lands predominate). Due to the predomination of "prime agricultural land"
in Bayham, the Province considers the entire municipality as a "prime agricultural area", and as
such specialty crop, prime, and non -prime soils are all included in the Official Plan's "Agriculture"
designation.
When considering urban boundary expansions into prime agricultural areas, municipalities must a)
avoid specialty crop soils; b) look at options that first avoid prime agricultural areas, or c) if avoiding
prime agricultural areas is not possible, then look at opportunities on lower priority agricultural lands
within the prime agricultural area. Since the entire Municipality is considered a prime agricultural
area, the Provincial Policy Statement requires that the Municipality look at expansion onto lower
priority agricultural lands within the prime agricultural area. Our analysis of basing urban expansion
solely on these criteria would indicate the following:
• Corinth, Richmond, Calton - no alternatives to avoid prime agricultural lands;
• North Hall — southward expansion in Lot 6, Concession 8 would avoid prime agricultural
lands;
• Eden — northerly and easterly expansions would avoid prime agricultural lands;
• Straffordville — southerly expansion along Garner Road would avoid prime agricultural lands;
• Vienna — north-westerly expansion along Bogus Road would avoid prime agricultural lands;
• Port Burwell — opportunities to expand north-easterly and north-westerly.
February 2008 Page 4
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER 92
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
2.4 Agricultural Operations
Generally, the types of agricultural operations that would most impact, and/or be impacted by urban
expansion are livestock operations. The exact location of current livestock operations has not been
undertaken. Previous research on this matter undertaken in the 1980's indicated there were
buildings capable of housing livestock all across the municipality. Since this criterion does not limit
urban expansion, but rather requires consideration to mitigation measures between two land uses,
a more detailed review of such uses would be considered upon final determination of any proposed
urban expansions.
3. SERVICING
As noted, the Villages of Vienna and Port Burwell are the only settlement areas with full municipal
services. Areas with full services are the preferred areas for growth as they can accommodate a
higher range of residential dwelling types at higher density ranges; allow for maximum protection of
public health and safety through protection of drinking water; and have the least amount of impact
on the environment through the treatment of sewage effluent.
The next most desirable areas to accommodate growth would be those areas with partial services
where public sanitary sewage disposal is provided, and potable water is acquired through private
wells. This would include the Village of Straffordville and the Hamlet of Eden. The Province
indicates that growth may occur in such areas provided that it is within the reserve sewage capacity
of the system, and that site conditions are suitable for the long-term provision of such services. In
the past, Straffordville was subject to a "development freeze" by the Ministry of Environment due to
drinking water concerns. Scattered infill development has occurred in the past five years based on
individual site approval for private wells. Eden has not experienced any concerns over potable
water and has experienced limited infill growth over the past five years as well.
The final consideration for servicing development is both private sewage disposal and private water
supply. This servicing is applicable to the hamlets of Corinth, North Hall, Richmond, and Calton.
The Hamlet of Richmond also includes a portion of the community that draws water from a
communal well. Development in such communities may occur, according to the existing Official
Plan policies, through infilling within the existing growth boundaries, at a scale and density that
does not warrant the establishment of communal water or sewage works.
A form of servicing that should be discouraged is partial servicing where public water is supplied,
but sewage treatment and disposal is by private septic systems. Problems associated with this type
of servicing relate to private septic systems not being able to accommodate large volumes of
wastewater which may occur where residents are not as concerned with limiting water use. Such
Febmary 2008 Page 5
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
volumes may be handled by private septic systems where lot density is low and scattered, but
problematic at higher densities.
4. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
The overall population increase from the 2001 — 2006 period was 352 persons, or 5.2% according
to Statistics Canada. This indicates an annual growth rate of 1.04%. StatsCan also indicates that
the total number of households increased from 2232 in 1997 to 2305 in 2006, or 73 dwellings. This
indicates an average annual increase of 0.004% (approximately 8 dwellings per year) over the 1997
to 2006 period. The difference in population growth and total number of households indicates
larger household populations of 2.92 persons per household in 2006.
In contrast to the Statistics Canada information, the Municipality of Bayham issued 144 residential
building permits and had 119 residential severances approved by the County between 2002 and
August 2007 for an increase of 29 new dwellings per year. This information is deemed to be more
accurate than StstsCan information and should be used as a guide for future growth projections.
The Municipality of Bayham (including the former Villages of Vienna and Port Burwell) has
experienced a gross population increase of 27.5% since 1989 (or 1.6% annually). Table 1
illustrates the projected growth rates for the next 10 year period of 2007 to 2017. The projections
are based on assumed annual population growth rates of 1.5%,1.75%, and 2.0%.
Table 1 = Future Population of the Municipality of Bayham at Selected
Annual Growth Rates: 2007 2017 (2006 Assessed Population:
6727
Year Projected Increases —Average Annual Growth Rate
1.50%0 1.75% 2.00%
2007 6828 6845 6862
2008
6930
6965
6999
1009
7034
7086
7139
2010
7140
7210
7282
2011
7247
7337
7427
2012
7356
7465
7576
2013
7466
7596
7727
February 2008 Page 6
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER R2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY IS YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
2014
7578
7729
7882
2015
7692
7864
8039
2016
7807
8001
8200
2017
7924
8141
8364
At 1.6%, annual growth was slightly less than anticipated in the background study to the Official
Plan undertaken in 2001 (a rate of 2.0% was used for growth forecasts for the 2001 — 2010 period).
Assuming a similar growth rate over the next 10 years, the Municipality could anticipate a 2017
population ranging between 7924 and 8141. This scenario presently appears as the most probable
population growth rate for the next planning period to the year 2017.
Such projections would translate to approximately 109 to 129 new people every year. With an
average household size of 2.92 persons in 2006, this would result in the need for 38 to 45 dwellings
per year.
It can be concluded that, notwithstanding undue influences such as severe economic recession,
nearby plant closures or openings, extreme fluctuations in agricultural markets or unusual
development pressure, the population growth of Bayham should continue to increase at a modest
rate. This growth is measurable in terms of both total population and total number of households.
5. QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
In the past five years growth has occurred in each of the individual settlement areas, albeit at
different rates. This section will look at each settlement area from the perspective of recent growth,
perceived desirability for further growth based on recent trends, and forces which may affect future
growth.
5.1 Corinth
The un -serviced Hamlet of Corinth with a land area of approximately 33 hectares and a density of
less than 1.0 unit per hectare has not experienced any significant growth over the last five years.
The existing development pattern consists of development fronting onto Culloden Road and Best
Line with some limited interior road network. The lands are conveniently located in proximity to
Highway No. 3 and larger urban centres including Tillsonburg and Ingersoll.
Approximately 21 short-term lots were accommodated for in Corinth along existing road frontages,
with a further 25 lots possible on future roads in the southeast corner of the hamlet. Current
February 2008 Page 7
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY t5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
Provincial policy would not permit development through plan of subdivision due to the lack of public
water and sewer services in Corinth, thereby limiting potential to infill growth on the existing road
network. The hamlet is also located in the midst of prime agricultural areas, thereby limiting its
desirability to expand. The likelihood of municipal sewer and/or water services in the hamlet is low
given its size and geographic location.
5.2 North Hall
The unserviced Hamlet of Hall was included as a new hamlet when the Official Plan was adopted
in 2001. With a land area of approximately 68 hectares and a density of less than 1.0 unit per
hectare, North Hall has experienced a significant amount of growth through infilling over the last five
years. There was also interest in further subdividing the large vacant interior parcel of land in the
hamlet, but this was not pursued due to lack of support by the Province for multi -unit development
on private sewer and water supply systems. Development is focused along Eden Line and
Culloden Road with vehicular access restricted for any new development along Highway No. 3.
The lands are conveniently located in proximity to Highway No. 3 and larger urban centres including
Aylmer, Tillsonburg and Ingersoll.
Approximately 38 short-term lots were accommodated for in North Hall along existing road
frontages, with a further 39 lots possible on future roads through plan of subdivision.
Lands to the south of the boundary on Culloden Road are non -prime agricultural lands, contain
existing non-farm development, and bisected by a wooded area that has limited agricultural
activities in this area. As such, there may be some potential for additional infilling opportunities to
satisfy market demand. The likelihood of municipal sewer and/or water services in the hamlet is low
given its size and geographic location.
5.3 Eden
The partially serviced Hamlet of Eden with a land area of approximately 93 hectares and a density
of less than 1.0 unit per hectare has not experienced any significant growth over the last five years.
The existing development pattern consists of development fronting onto Plank Road and Eden Line
with some limited interior road network. The lands are conveniently located in proximity to
Tillsonburg.
Approximately 50 short-term lots were accommodated for in Eden along existing road frontages,
with a 133 possible future lots on future roads in various areas of the hamlet. Current Provincial
policy would not permit development through plan of subdivision due to the lack of public water,
thereby limiting potential to only infiil growth on the existing road network. Extension of public water
would enable significant growth in the Hamlet. Any future growth beyond the existing boundary
Febmary 2008 Page 8
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
should occur northerly and/or easterly on non -prime agricultural lands. Westerly expansion is not
advised due to the shallow depth of sewers along Eden Line at the westerly edge of Lot 22. Any
further westerly extension of sewers would require a pumping station. The likelihood of municipal
water services being extended to the hamlet is moderate given its geographic location and existing
municipal sewer system.
5.4 Richmond
The un -serviced Hamlet of Richmond with a land area of approximately 43 hectares and a density
of approximately 2 units per hectare has not experienced any significant growth over the last five
years. The existing development pattern consists of development fronting onto Heritage Line and
Richmond Road as well as some established older interior roads. The lands are conveniently
located a short distance to Highway No. 3, approximately halfway between Tillsonburg and Aylmer.
Only 7 short-term lots were accommodated for in Richmond along existing road frontages, with a
further 30 lots possible on future roads southwest of the intersection of Heritage Line and Richmond
Road. However, current Provincial policy would not permit development through plan of subdivision
due to the lack of public water and sewer services in Richmond, thereby limiting potential to infill
growth on the existing road network. The existing communal water supply in Richmond can not
accommodate any more connections for future development. The hamlet is also located in the
midst of prime agricultural areas and has many topographical restrictions to growth. The likelihood
of municipal sewer and/or water services in the hamlet is low given its size and geographic location.
5.5 Straffordville
The partially serviced Village of Straffordville with a land area of approximately 193 hectares and a
density of approximately 1.0 unit per hectare has not experienced any significant growth over the
last five years due mainly in part to a "development freeze" by the Ministry of Environment that only
recently has allowed development to occur with proof of potable water being supplied by the
developer. Development is more variable including commercial, service, and industrial uses and
includes more advanced internal road networks expanding in all directions from the main
intersection of Heritage Line and Plank Road. Its geographical location at the centre of the
Municipality and at the intersection of the two main roads makes the Village an ideal hub for many
service, and commercial purposes. However its distance from larger urban centres and the Lake
Erie shoreline are the likely drawbacks to further growth.
Approximately 66 short-term lots were accommodated for in Straffordville along existing road
frontages, with over 350 possible future lots on future roads possible on large parcels of vacant land
in various areas of the Village. Current Provincial policy would not permit development through
February 2006 Page 9
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #Q
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
plan of subdivision due to the lack of public water, thereby limiting potential to only infill growth on
the existing road network. Extension of public water would enable significant growth in the Village.
Any future growth should be southerly towards non -prime agricultural lands, but is not likely
warranted given the surplus of vacant lands within the Village. The likelihood of municipal water
services being extended to the hamlet is highest amongst urban areas given its proximity to Vienna
and the presence of existing municipal sewers.
5.6 Calton
The un -serviced Hamlet of Calton with a land area of approximately 19 hectares and a density of
approximately 1 unit per hectare has not experienced any significant growth over the last five years.
The existing development pattern is linear along Richmond Road and Calton Line, with additional
development in the Township of Malahide. The community is isolated amongst a primarily
agricultural area and not near any major urban centres.
22 short-term lots were accommodated for in Calton along existing road frontages, with a further 18
lots possible on two small interior parcels of land. However, current Provincial policy would not
permit development through plan of subdivision due to the lack of public water and sewer services,
thereby limiting potential to infill growth on the existing road network. The hamlet is also located in
the midst of prime agricultural areas making further growth outside the current boundary
unadvisable. The likelihood of municipal sewer and/or water services in the hamlet is low given its
size and geographic location.
5.7 Vienna
The fully serviced Village of Vienna, at over 380 hectares is the largest urban area within the
Municipality but among the least dense with less than 1.0 unit per hectare. The Village includes
large areas of vacant land intended for future growth and existing built-up areas which are under
developed. With existing public water and sewer systems and an existing underutilized street
network, Vienna offers enormous potential for infill development without the need for large
investments in public infrastructure. Drawbacks include lack of employment areas; geographic
distance from larger employment centres; the Big Otter Creek floodway limiting re -investment in the
main street and older residential areas of Village; and lack of immediate recreational uses to attract
tourists and seasonal recreation / residential use.
The background study to the Official Plan identified over 100 ,short-term lots that could be
accommodated along existing road frontages, with over 400 possible lots on future roads possible
on large parcels of vacant land, primarily north of the Big Otter Creek floodway. Very little of this
growth has materialized in the last five years. Any large-scale development would be dependant on
February 2006 Page 10
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
the availability of public water and sewage capacity. While there are non -prime agricultural lands to
the north of the existing growth boundary, any expansion of Vienna would not be warranted given
the vast amounts of vacant land for both short and long-term growth already available.
5.8 Port Burwell
The fully serviced Village of Port Burwell has a land area of over 313 hectares, of which
approximately ^% is occupied by Port Burwell Provincial Park. Excluding the Park, the Village is the
densest of the urban areas, with a fully established interior network of streets and suitable
commercial areas to provide goods and services to the inhabitants of the Village. The Village
provides some limited opportunities for infilling on the existing street network, and currently has two
draft plan of subdivision applications which would add approximately 70 lots to the Village land
base. The aforementioned plans for the harbour, if realized would significantly change the
population and character of Port Burwell; however its market potential has not received any interest
in the last five years. Obvious benefits to Port Burwell are its proximity to Lake Erie and its full
servicing capabilities. Drawbacks include its geographic distance from major urban centres that
could potentially attract tourism and seasonal residents.
The background study to the Official Plan identified 47 short-term lots that could be accommodated
along existing road frontages, and the 70 lots through plan of subdivision. Any large-scale
development would be dependant on the availability of public water and sewage capacity. Any
expansion of Port Burwell which avoids prime agricultural land would be directed north of
Lakeshore Line and east of Elizabeth Street.
February 2008 Page 11
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
Estimated Available Lots short term & long teem growth = 2001
Area
Short term (1-10 years)
Long Term (10 years+)
Area — he (long term)
Corinth
21
25
4.5
North Hall
38
39
10.4
Eden
49*
133
30.2
Richmond
7
30
11.6
Straffordville
66*
356
74.9
Calton
22
18
3.9
Vienna
100+**
434**
81.8
Port Burwell
47*
69***
8.0
TOTAL
349
1164
225.3
Estimated Available Lots short term & long termgrowth) =2007
Area
Short term (1-10 years)
Long Term (10 years +)
Area — he (long term)
Corinth
18
25
4.5
North Hall
20
39
10.4
Eden
39
133
30.2
Richmond
0
30
11.6
Straffordville `"
60
356
74.9
Calton
15
18
3.9
Vienna
70+
434**
81.8
Port Burwell
37
69***
8.0
TOTAL
259
1164
225.3
February 2008 Page 12
181 GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
6. INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNER REQUESTS
During the period leading up to commencing the 5 Year Official Plan Review, a number of requests
to expand growth areas came forward from individuals or groups of landowners. The following
details these proposals and analyzes their potential to be included as amendments to the Official
Plan to accommodate future growth in the Municipality.
6.1 Expansion of Elliott Road Special Policy Area (Pt Lot 14,15, Conc
10)
The Elliott Road Special Policy Area includes an area of land on the west side of Elliott Road,
between Green Line and Talbot Line that may accommodate a total of 20 residential lots. The area
was created due to the existing fragmentation of farmland in the area (10 lots at the time), noting
that the additional development would not further inhibit agricultural activities in the surrounding
area. The current request is to extend the area southwards across Talbot Line.
The area to the south is characterized by a cluster of 6 lots zoned Al and RR at the intersection.
To include these lots would recognize the existing non-farm development and offer the potential for
perhaps one additional lot. There would be no justification to extend the designation even further
south of this cluster as this would constitute strip development of lands that are prime agricultural
lands; not bounded by further residential development to the south; and are also occupied by a
wooded tributary that connects to a significant Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (Big Otter
ANSI).
6.2 New Estate Residential Area (Pt Lot 13, Conc 9)
The "Rural — Estate Residential' was included in the Official Plan to recognize "existing" designated
lands and not intended to accommodate new 'Rural — Estate Residential'. These lands are a 7.4
hectare triangular piece of agricultural land that is separated from remainder of its original parcel
fabric by Talbot Line. These lands are prime agricultural lands and could be conveyed or rented to
any number of farm operations north of Talbot Line without traffic limitations. Other potential uses
for this area may include highway commercial or industrial uses to take advantage of the proximity
to Highway No. 3.
February 2008 - Page 13
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
6.3 New England (New Hamlet) & Expansion of Highway Meadows
Mobile Home Park (Pt Lot 23 - 25, Conc 9)
Both of the above requests are located along Plank Road, north of the Hamlet of Eden and are
characterized by a number of estate residential dwellings and fragmented farm parcels between the
Highway Meadows Mobile Home Park in the south and the New England Gas & Variety in the north
(see Appendix 1 — New England). The area is also bounded by hazard lands to the rear of the
developed areas on the west side of Plank Road. The mobile home park is serviced by private
septic systems and a communal water system.
Benefits which would support designation/expansion of this area include the large amount of non-
prime agricultural lands in the area; the small agricultural parcels on the east side of the road; the
existing residential land base; the fragmentation caused by the surrounding hazard lands; and the
capability of being serviced by a communal water supply and a municipal sewer system (if the
municipal sewers could feasibly be extended northwards from nearby Eden). Drawbacks include
prime agricultural lands on the east side of Plank Road, where most future development would likely
occur, and the lack of a public water supply.
Based on our review of this area redesignation of these lands could include one of two scenarios:
1. Infilling of residential development to village -size residential development (800 — 900
m 2 ) and expansion of mobile home park provided the sanitary sewer system could be
extended to service the entire area; and provided there could be an expansion of the
communal water supply to accommodate all development;
2. Infilling of residential development to hamlet -size residential development (2000m2)
provided the sanitary sewer system could be extended to service the area; and
expansion of mobile home park provided there could be access to public sewers and
an expansion of the communal water supply to accommodate all mobile home park
development.
As noted, both scenarios involve at a minimum full hook-up to the municipal sewage system.
Appendix 1 indicates the approximate boundary of a "New England Hamlet/Special Policy Area"
based on existing lot structure. No expansion beyond the outer edge of any existing development
should be allowed to discourage strip development.
February 2008 Page 14
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayhem
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
6.4 Richmond Boundary Expansion (Pt Lot 110, Conc NTR)
This request involves a minor boundary expansion to the Hamlet of Richmond which would include
221 metres (725') of additional frontage on the west side of the Hamlet along the north side of
Heritage Line. This would include one existing residential lot and enough frontage to accommodate
five (5) new building lots (see Appendix 1 — Richmond).
As noted in Section 5.4, Richmond is not a serviced hamlet, and is surrounded by prime agricultural
lands. As such, it should not be expanded unduly. However, the hamlet does include large areas
of land that are undevelopable due to topographic constraints and/or lack of public services
(hatched areas). As such, there is potential to "return" undevelopable interior lands to the
"Agriculture" designation in exchange for a small increase to the "Hamlets" designation (dashed
area).
6.5 North Hall boundary expansion (Pt Lot 5, Conc 9 and Pt Lot 6,
Conc 8)
These requests involve two minor boundary expansion to the Hamlet of North Hall which would
include the entire frontage of land in Pt Lot 5, Conc 9, on the north side of Eden Line, west of
Culloden Road, and on the west side of the Hamlet along Culloden Road, just south of Eden Line.
The first request could result in approximately 10 lots extending in a linear fashion away from the
existing Hamlet boundary effectively creating strip development. There is farming to the south,
north, and west, but the subject lands are mostly non -prime agricultural lands.
The second request includes a large parcel of land, measuring 17.6 hectares (43.63 acres) in area,
southeast of the existing hamlet boundary as shown on the figure below. The lands are
characterized by an agricultural field and large wooded portion to the rear. These lands could
accommodate approximately 20 lots fronting onto Culloden Road. As noted in Section 5.2, interior
development would not be possible on these lands by way of plan of subdivision, as North Hall
does not have any public sewer or water services. In addition, residential development would not
be permitted along Talbot Line, as per Ministry of Transportation road access policies. As such, the
inclusion of these lands would be characterized as strip development along Culloden Road that is
not contiguous with existing development in North Hall.
Similar to Richmond, the hamlet of North Hall does include large areas of land that are
undevelopable due to lack of public services. As such, there is potential to "return" undevelopable
interior lands to the "Agriculture" designation in exchange for a small increase to the "Hamlets"
designation.
February 2008 Page 15
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY IS YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
6.6 New Estate Residential Area (Pt Lot 10, Conc 9)
This request is a matter of allowing a severance on an existing non-farm residential lot to
accommodate the creation of one (1) new residential lot. The subject lands are located in Pt Lot 10,
Concession 9, on the west side of Somers Road, north of Talbot Line. The subject lands are
designated "Agriculture" in the Official Plan and zoned Rural Residential (RR).
The reason for the request is that due to the "Agriculture" designation, a consent to sever would not
be permitted. The only types of residential severances permitted in the "Agriculture" designation
are for surplus farm dwellings. The primary reason for prohibiting any other types of residential
severances is to limit the impacts of new residential uses on agricultural uses. The subject lands
are currently part of what would be classified by the Province as a "rural residential cluster' (four or
more small lots sharing a contiguous boundary) when applying Minimum Distance Separation
Formula setbacks, and would not serve to increase the area of impact in any direction currently
imposed by the cluster.
In order to accommodate any severance in compliance with the Official Plan policies, the subject
lands would have to be re -designated to a "Rural — Estate Residential" land use designation.
6.7 Calton boundary expansion
These requests involve minor boundary expansion to the Hamlet of Calton which would include the
remaining frontage along Calton Line in Lot 1, Concession 4 currently outside the growth boundary,
as well as a portion of land in Part Lot 1, Concession 3, that is south and east of the existing
boundary with frontage on Richmond Road. Both requests include lands beyond the distance of
typical lot depths, but neither such parcel could be developed by plan of subdivision due to lack of
public water and sewer systems in Calton. As such, both requests would result in short-term lot
creation.
Calton is not a serviced hamlet, and is surrounded by prime agricultural lands. As such, it should
not be expanded unduly. However, the hamlet does include large areas of land that are
undevelopable due to lack of public services (hatched areas). As such, there is potential to "return"
undevelopable interior lands to the "Agriculture" designation in exchange for a small increase to the
"Hamlets" designation (dashed area).
6.8 Chateau Wyndemere Lands (Pt Lot 6-8, Conc 1)
While being considered through a separate Official Plan Amendment application, this proposal for a
22 lot estate residential community contiguous to the Village of Port Burwell should be mentioned
as a potential growth area as part of this review. The proposed development is located on a former
February 2008 Page 16
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER 92
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
religious retreat centre site which is designated "Agriculture" and zoned Institutional (1) in Zoning By-
law #Z456-2003.
Proponents of the development are currently undertaking background work to determine the
suitability of the lands to accommodate residential development. The lands are located contiguous
to the urban growth boundary of Port Burwell, but are far removed from the developed portion of the
community with the Port Burwell Provincial Park effectively lying between the two areas.
Advantages of the subject lands for development include it's proximity to a fully serviced
community; proximity to a variety of recreational uses (beach, park); the existing zoning could allow
for equally -intensive land uses from a servicing perspective; and the majority of the lands are
classified as non -prime agricultural lands. Drawbacks include distance to municipal sewage access
and the lack of public street frontage (long easement over private agricultural lands).
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are included in a manner which addresses each urban area:
1. Corinth — That the remaining frontage of Lot 6, Concession 9 be redesignated
"Hamlets" and the interior lands in Lot 6, Concession 9 be redesignated
"Agriculture" (see Appendix 1). This change reflects the lack of development
potential for the interior lands, while simultaneously allowing the owner of these lands
to develop the frontage of the property. The net change as a result of this
recommendation is an increase of 3.9 hectares to the "Agriculture" designation and an
increase of approximately 1 infill lot.
2. North Hall — That the frontage of Lot 6, Concession 8, and Lot 5, Concession 9,
be redesignated "Hamlets" and the interior lands in Lot 6, Concession 9 be
redesignated "Agriculture" (see Appendix 1). This change reflects the lack of
development potential for these interior lands, while allowing some minor infilling to
occur on non -prime agricultural lands between existing non-farm residential
development. One portion of the southerly area requested to be changed should
remain unchanged as it constitutes extensive strip development and interior lands that
could not be developed. The net change as a result of this recommendation is an
increase of 1.0 hectare to the "Agriculture" designation and an increase of
approximately 30 infill lots.
3. Eden — No changes (see Appendix 1). There were no requests to change to the
Eden growth boundary. Existing boundaries approximate existing boundaries of
development and maintaining interior portions for future residential growth by plan of
February 2008 Page 17
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
subdivision reflects the potential for extending the municipal water supply to Eden to
make it a fully serviced urban area. There is currently room for approximately 39 infill
lots.
4. Richmond — That the frontage of Lot 110, Concession NSTR, be redesignated
"Hamlets" and the interior lands in Lot 110 - 112, Concession SSTR be
redesignated `Agriculture" (see Appendix 1). This change reflects the lack of
development potential for these interior lands based on topographical constraints
and/or lack of public water and sewer services, while allowing minor infilling to occur
between existing non-farm residential development. The net change as a result of this
recommendation is an increase of 10.2 hectares to the "Agriculture" designation and
an increase of approximately 4 infill lots.
5. Straffordville — No changes (see Appendix 1). There were no requests to change to
the Straffordville growth boundary. Existing boundaries generally approximate existing
development limits along existing roads. By maintaining interior portions for future
residential growth by plan of subdivision, it reflects the potential for extending the
municipal water supply to Straffordville to make it a fully serviced urban area. There is
currently room for approximately 60 infill lots.
6. Calton — That the frontage of Lot 1, Concession 2, and Lot 1, Concession 3, be
redesignated "Hamlets" and the interior lands in Lot 1, Concession 3 be
redesignated `Agriculture" (see Appendix 1). This change reflects the lack of
development potential for these interior lands based on lack of public water and sewer
services, while allowing minor extension to the existing growth boundary on existing
road frontages. The net change as a result of this recommendation is an increase of
2.8 hectares to the "Agriculture' designation and an increase of approximately 10 infill
lots.
7. Vienna — No changes (see Appendix 1). There were no requests to change to the
Vienna urban boundary. Existing boundaries maintain large portions of land for future
residential growth by consent on existing streets and by plan of subdivision, all capable
of being serviced by full municipal services. There is currently room for over 70 infill
lots.
8. Port Burwell — No changes (see Appendix 1). There were no requests to change to
the Port Burwell urban boundary. Existing boundaries allow for some moderate
amount of infill growth on existing streets and maintain several interior portions of land
February 2008 Page 18
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER 42
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
for future residential growth by plan of subdivision on full municipal services. There is
currently room for approximately 37 infill lots.
9. New England — That the frontage of Lot 24 & 25, Concession 9, be redesignated
"New England Special Policy Area" (see Appendix 1). This change reflects the
potential for a moderate amount of infill residential development within an existing
fragmented area on non -prime agricultural lands. Site-specific policies should be
added to the Official Plan which sets out the requirement for public services to be
extended to the area, prior to any commencement of development. These policies
may also set out the maximum number of lots / mobile home units that may be
developed; any specific studies which must be submitted prior to development; and
site plan control requirements. The net change as a result of this recommendation is a
decrease of 16 hectares from the "Agriculture" designation.
As a result of these recommendations the approximate total number of short-term and long-term
lots in the "Hamlets" and "Villages" designation (excludes New England Special Policy Area') would
be as follows:
Estimated Available Lots (short term & long term growth) —
Post 5 Year Review
a
Short term (1-10 years)
Long Term (10 years +)
Area — ha (long term)
inth
r
19
0
0.0
rth Hall
37
0
0.0
n
39
133
30.2
Richmond :
3
0
0
Straffordville
60
356
74.9
Calton
24
0
0.0
Vienna
70+
434**
81.8
Port Burwell
37
69***
8.0
TOTAL
289
992
194.9
February 2008 Page 19
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
8. CONCLUSION
Based on the aforementioned recommendations, the net land use change is 1.9 hectares added to
the "Agriculture" land use designation. These changes make more effective use of the existing road
work, while recognizing the limitations placed by absence of public water and sewage services,
while simultaneously reinforcing the goals of the Official Plan for the long-term protection of
agricultural lands, and promoting growth in fully serviced urban areas.
All of the above recommendations for expansion of urban areas are conditional upon the concurrent
redesignation of lands for agricultural purposes. The quantitative analysis undertaken would not
provide sufficient justification for a net increase to urban land use designations. The re -organization
of urban boundaries provides for the most efficient use of lands consistent with the goals and
objectives of the Official Plan.
In summary, the Municipality of Bayham does not require additional land to accommodate
forecasted growth, but has an excellent opportunity to re -organize urban boundaries in a manner
that is consistent with Provincial policy; maximizes investment in the municipal infrastructure; and
reflects recent trends in growth experienced over the past five years.
9. NEXT STEPS
9.1 Other Policy Issues
Following the Growth Study Discussion Paper we will undertake a review of all remaining matters
that Council may wish to consider as amendments to the Official Plan that are not tied specifically to
residential growth and/or regulatory changes.
J:134041409 OP RevimXPTRdisc2_g m h2o07-12-07.doc1200M-0 2910D
February 2008 Page 20
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
APPENDIX 1 - MAPS
February 2008
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
CORINTH
LUT 5
roracEsslor.i to
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
H'N E FP:"AI
a FL ULTUP.E' TO
HAHLETS'
OE ,idM1IATUfi
LI)T ,
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
NORTH HALL
LO, _
[�J F LL, �:.. a [O, � I
�j/ LOPiCE551Jq P
/
AE l
o rt.
cv
:
_....
_`TLIELOCO _ —..,
IL VEVELT�TMEIII
Ax
"\
Ili
.:� l'x l C
[
11
I [cr s
-.. LOT e
r
� L5. _ ger s '. cap s I
,i caoicfssni+ e
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
EDEN
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER k2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
RICHMOND
PEDEW,11 TE "HAWLETS' \\\1
BOUNCE[ El' E`ISTllh \
FE9C',ENTIAL I I
GE ELDI MENT
LOT 111 I
LVT 11n �. � L2T 112 �
COW E>=101N NSTR
w.
RFEyi
F I1E11 L
EnE F F
/GE EL FA+E Il .
eE HUI naeL :'y
EGt E3. /�ckC JC \
�/ �
�\ R
RC!RT1JTIJf<E /
lIC
keEul
POTE11TIM, FOF
IEU
CE ELWFMENI
1 I l�/CJE l LC
m
'
14.:L �
/ Ek E / •
ttP,6CR FR UL/ /
, t / II 1P Illi-
LOT 111
EI>T, 1tu I � LOT 112
1
,I i-Ol1I:ES`JOPJ IISTE
1 ��
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER 02
STRAFFORDVILLE
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY IS YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER 92
CALTON
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY IS YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
II'
1Lf Llll"T rRv,rl
E
1L
DL TO
LAC' OF -14trIPIL1
j.
L:,T
LOT 1
� ;CNCE">sd?PI Iv
Heel
1 oEFx ., n
i b .
1
I �
I
I 1 r
I
1 LC El ;1.11
L' 1
FIFEC.IAI 110
n
[
DE
•r-'� LOT I LOT
1 Y i
j; �")rllE ._IOIJ III
i
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
VIENNA
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2 Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
PORT BURWELL
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER 42
NEW ENGLAND
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
FIEW E 111GL410
CA` :PID VAPIETY
LOT
L 25 J
J,
EXACT EXTENT OF
MOBILE HOME
HICHAA.,
PE RK ExTENSICIN
INI-N&IN IlEACCWS
10CEILE
J
HINAE PA
R.
-0"
IBI GROUP DISCUSSION PAPER #2
Municipality of Bayham
GROWTH STUDY (5 YEAR OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW)
APPENDIX 2 - SPECIALTY CROP AREAS 1 PRIME
AGRICULTURAL AREAS
PALITY OF BAYHAM
TY CROP SOILS AND
,GRICULTURAL LANDS
LEGEND
IM-
BPECIPLtt DROP / PRIME
AGRIGULNRAL (11310 ha ]Gx)
y s
NON-PRIMERORIWLNRAL
(6572M - 0%)
BUILDINGSCAPABLE OF
HOUSINGLIVESTOCK
6
0 ISWm 3000m <SOOm