01 25 2006 COW Agenda
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
DATE: WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 25,2006
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
1. NOTICE OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF: - "IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT"
4. DEPUTATIONS:
None.
5. CORRESPONDENCE:
a) City of Kawartha Lakes, correspondence dated December 20, 2005 re: Municipal Water
and Wastewater Rates.
b) The Town of Niagara-On-The-Lake, correspondence dated December 15, 2005 re:
Report of the Water Strategy Expert Panel.
c) Paul Miller, Sales Representative Royal LePage, correspondence dated January 14,
2006 re: Part Lot 21, Conc. 5 on Highway 11.
d) Mike Drumm, Airport Manager, Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission,
correspondence January 5, 2006 re: Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Semi-Annual
Report.
6. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
a) Report No. ADM 2006-05, Harold Daynard, Manager of Information Technology re:
Administration Building Phone System [deferred from January 18, 2006 meeting - to be
distributed at meeting].
b) Report No. TR 2006-02, Paul Gravelle, Treasurer, re: Capital Contribution - Coldwater
Community Centre.
c) Report No. ADM 2006-08, Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk, re: Ad Hoc Committee - Animal
Control By-Law.
d) Report No. ADM 2006-09, Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO re: Ad Hoc Committee - Medical
Services.
7. PUBLIC WORKS:
a) Report No. PW 2006-02, Jerry Ball, Public Works Superintendent, re: Request for
Speed Reduction - Line 4 North between County Road #19 and Mount St. Louis Road.
b) Report No. PW 2006-03, Jerry Ball, Public Works Superintendent, re: Request for "No
Parking Zone" - Village of Hawkestone.
8. ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES:
None.
9. BUILDING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
a) Committee of Adjustment, minutes of January 12, 2006 meeting.
10. IN-CAMERA:
a) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, re: Legal Matter.
11. ADJOURNMENT:
2
ADDENDUM
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
5. CORRESPONDENCE:
e) Ontario Good Roads Associalion, correspondence dated January 12, 2006 re: 2006
OGRAlROMA Combined Conference Announcements.
f) M. Beal-Fife, correspondence received January 20, 2006 re: 2005-ZBA-22, 2005-
SUB-1, TRY Recycling Inc.
g) John Thornton, correspondence dated January 23, 2006 re: Physician Recruitment
for Oro-Medonte.
6. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
a) Memorandum dated January 24, 2006 and Report No. ADM 2006-05, Harold
Daynard, Manager of Inforrnation Technology re: Administration Building Phone
System [deferred from January 18, 2006 rneeting].
9. BUILDING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
b) Report No. BP 2006-04, Bruce Hoppe, Director of Building and Planning Services,
re: Places to Grow Proposed Growth Plan, Ministry of Public Infrastructure and
Renewal.
10. IN-CAMERA:
b) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, re: Personnel Matter.
c) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, re: Property Maller
Catch the Kawartha sPirit
The Corporation of the
City of Kawartha Lakes
P.O. Box 9000, 26 Francis SI.,
Lindsay, Ontario K9V 5R8
Tel: (705) 324-9411 ext 320, 1 888-822-2225
Fax: (705) 324-8110
bkellv@citV.kawarthalakes.on.ca
City of
~WART
Barbara A. Kelly, Mayor
December 20, 2005
Premier Dalton McGuinty
Premier of Ontario
99 Wellesley Street
Whitney Block, 6th Floor
Toronto ON M7A 1W3
Dear Premier McGulnty:
Re: Municipal Water and Wastewater Rates
At the recent Council meeting of December 13, 2005 the following resolution was passed:
Moved by Councillor R. McGee, seconded by Councillor Villemaire,
WHEREAS, the events of 2000 In Walkerton, Ontario resulted in a reaction from the
Government of Ontario;
AND WHEREAS the Government of Ontario has introduced very comprehensive legislation
over the past 5 years with very costly ramifications for Ontario municipalities and the
customers they serve;
AND WHEREAS this legislation dictates requirements that Ontario municipalities and the
water and wastewater customers they serve are no longer able to afford nor sustain as a direct
result of Provincial Legislative requirements;
AND WHEREAS duly elected municipal representatives in the City of Kawartha Lakes will no
longer pass these Provincially mandated costs onto the customers they are elected to
represent;
BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council for the City of Kawartha Lakes direct staff to maintain
the municipal water and wastewater rates at the levels approved In 2004 for 2005; 2006 and
2007;
THAT correspondence be forwarded to Premier Dalton McGuinty respectfully requesting the
creation of a new Water and Wastewater Partnership Funding Program to assist Ontario
municipalities and the users they serve;
THAT this Water and Wastewater Partnership Funding Program include special circumstances
funding for small rural municipal water systems;
.
THAT this correspondenCe be copied to the Honourable Dwight Duncan, Minister of Finance,
the Honourable John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Honourable
Laurel Broten, Minister of the Environment and all MPP's within the Province of Ontario; and
THAT this correspondence be forwarded to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario for
circulation to and support from every municipality within the Province of Ontario to petition the
Province of Ontario to take immediate action.
Premier, we have 26 relatively small water/wastewater systems, most of which needed upgrades to
meet your new legislation. This has resulted in expenditures over the past 4 years of over $20million
to the 11,204 users of these systems. Based upon a recent study done by C.N. Watson, the next 5
years have identified gross capital needs of $84.5 million. This does not factor in a further $13milllon
annually to deal with IIfecycle replacement and reserve costs nor the additional operational
requirements to adhere to your audit compliance and reporting requirements.
The math indicates that municipalities like ours are already finding user rates are becoming
unaffordable for their users. While the OST AR funding program currently in place has helped to some
degree, it by no means goes far enough for communities who cannot achieve the economies of scale
of a municipality with a larger user base in a smaller geographic setting.
By direction of another resolution, we intend to meet with the relevant Ministers to discuss this serious
situation. We anticipate your Government will be prepared to respond with solutions and we offer this
funding program as a viable solution for your consideration. By copy, we encourage all municipalities
similarly affected to advise you accordingly to assist in your consideration of this serious matter.
Yours truly,
g~ 47 ~~
Barbara Kelly, Mayor
City of Kawartha Lakes
c.c. Hon. Dwight Duncan, Minister of Finance
Hon. John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Hon. Laurel Broten, Minister of the Environment
All Ontario MPP's
AMO - all municipalities
I
I
,
t
I
Memorandum
To: Members of Councit
cc: Jennifer Zieleniewski
From: Keith Mathieson
Date: 1/1312006
Re: Report of the Water Strategy Expert Panel
I have reviewed the Report of the Expert Panel on Water and Wastewater called "Watertight" and
have some of the same concerns that the municipality of Niagara-On- The-Lake has with respect to
up-loading of systems or some responsibilities with fewer than 10,000 population to the upper tier
recommend the Township of Oro-Medonte support the resolution of Niagara-On- The
1
l;~f
~
Office of the Town Clerk
TELFJ'HONE 905-468-3266
FACSIMILE 905-468-2959
Niagara..On1he..:k..ke
1593 CREEK ROAD
P.O. Box 100
VlR<ilL,OI'i'TARlO
WSITO
December 15, 2005
All Ontario Municipalities With Populations Under 35,000
and Including All Lower Tier Municipalities Within the
Regions of Niagara, Waterloo and York
Re: Report PW-05-0062
Report of the Water Strategy Expert Panel
Please be advised that the Council of the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake at their
regular meeting held Monday, November 28, 2005 approved the following
recommendations:
1. that Council express its disapproval of all of the recommendations
contained in the Report of the Expert Panel on Water and Wastewater
Strategy which gives Regional Municipalities exclusive jurisdiction over
all elements of the water and wastewater sector at the exclusion of
lower tier municipalities with less than 10,000 customers; and,
2. that the Clerk forward a copy of the Council's resolution to all Ontario
muniCipalities with populations under 35,000 and including all iower tier
municipalities within the Regions of Niagara, Waterloo and York for
their support to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario.
Should you wish a complete copy of Report PW-05-062, please contact the
Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake. Clerk's Department at (905) 468-3266.
On behalf of the Council of the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake we would look
forward to your support and ask that you forward it to the Association of
Municipalities of Ontario.
Y~~
Holly Dowd
Town Clerk
copy: Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)
First Capital of Upper Canada - 1792
I4J
"
PublcWOIlls
T_ (905}<I6ll-3218
F_COO5} 46&.f722
Ni3glira~On~'Jilre
1593 Creel< Road
P.O. Box 100
Vi<giI. Ontario
LOS no
Report:
PW.o!Hl62
si.bmiU8do..: .
'NOvember OIl, 2005
Report To:
Subject:
ORIGIN
Public works Advisory Committee
Report of the Water Strategy Expert Panel
The Expert Panel on Water and Wastewater Strategy was created by an
Order-in-Council on August 16th in 2004. The creation of the panel was,a foflowup to
Justice O'Conner's report on the Walkerton Inquiry.. It's broad mandate was to
recommend the best way to organize and deliver water and wastewater services in
, Ontario. The Panel's Report was released to the public on July 22nd, 2005 and
contains 51 recommendations (copy attached).
The report deals With several areas of reform which stem from the Panel's mandate:
. the organization, structure and govemance of Ontario's water and wastewater
systems;
. how water rates should be set, regulated and kept affordable;
. how much investment is needed in the sector, and how this might be financed;
. the future of the Ontario Clean Water Agency, a provincially-owned body that
provides operating and other services to the sector; and
. several related issues, including conservation and innovative approaches to service
delivery.
DISCUSSION
The report documents the Panel's justification leading up to the recommendations.
SDme of the recommendations are particularly disconcerting for our municipality. If
carried through in its present form, they Will cause considerable upheaval.
The basis for the conclusions is a generalization of trends in the water and wastewater
industry. In reading the report, whether or not the present two-tier arrangement in
Report: PW.(}5.062
Page 1
03/01 2006 11:39 FAX 905 468 2959
TOWN OF NOTL
14I 003/011
Sb~
.
Niagara, with split responsibilities, is working in the best interests of the customer is of
no account
The thrust of the recommendations is to reduce the number of water and wastewater
systems by consolidating them primarily at the upper tier level of municipal government
This would support a number of other initiatives that have been proposed including
overseeing by a new regulatory body, an Ontario Water Board. It is argued that it is
through economics of scale and scope, the preparation of business plans, a proper
governance framework, and strict regulatiDn thatthe primary objective can be achieved.
While at the Provincial level these appear to be justified, they clearly do not take into
account the myriad of issues faced by. local govemments if the proposed
recommendations are implemented.
In, Niagara, responsibility for the delivery of water and wastewater services is shared
between the Region and the Area Municipalities. In particular, our Council, as
operating authority, currently has responsibility for the water distribution and wastewater
collection systems within the limits of the municipality. It carries out its responsibilities
through its municipal department structure. All municipal functions including
. maintenance, operations and capital works are intrinsic to the Public Works
Department. Consequently any shift of responsibility from the lower tier to the upper
tier would create a negative ripple effect on service delivery in other areas of municipal
involvement. This will include fleet maintenance, engineering, irrigation, cemetery
operations and winter maintenance of roads. Water meter readings and water and
wastewater billing which has recenUy been contracted to Niagara-on-the-Lake Hydro
would also be impacted. Extracting these water and wastewater services will be
detrimental to the functional viability of other service areas at the local level.
The suggestion that the Town is not of sufficient size in terms of customer base, doesn't
have sufficient expertise, or the resources to ensure sustainability is not appropriate
given that the Town has always taken an aggressive approach to infrastructure renewal
spending on its water distribution and wastewater collection systems. In accordance
with the Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act, the Town hired a consultant to
undertake a study of water and wastewater full cost assessment and recovery in
2004/2005. That study was completed earlier this year and, as a result, Council
adopted a new rate structure which ensures long term viability of the Town's water and
wastewater systems. Regrettably, the report of the Expert Panel only glosses over the
split jurisdiction systems currenUy in place in three such Regional Municipalities in this
Province and refers to them as "anachronisms".
It is suggested that Council take a position in opposition to a number of the
recommendations made by the Panel (refer to Annex F, attached), specifically:
Recommendation 4.9 "The Municipal Act should be amended to give all Regional
Municipalities exclusive jurisdiction over all elements of the water and wastewater
sector."
Report: PW~2
Page 2
03/01 2006 11:39 FAX 905 468 2959
TOWN OF NOTL
@004l011
, .
r-'u
" -
'-'
Stn..lcture. CaDacitv and Scale
Any and all recommendations which provide for water services by upper tier and single
tier municipalities at the exclusion of lower tier municipalities with less than 10,000
customers should also be opposed. '
These are identified as Recommendations 4.1, 4.2, 4.4 and 4.9. Recommendations
4.3,4.5,4.6,4.7,4.8 and 4.10 are either of no consequence or of benefit to the Town.'
Governance
The current water service set up is not threatened by the enabling legislation being
proposed to allow municipalities to form corporations to deliver water and wastewater
services. Consequently, Recommendations 5.1 through 5.6 are not of particular
concern as they are not prescriptive.
Reaulations
The formation of an Ontario Water Board to oversee regulation of the water services,
while adding another bureaucratic layer to the provincial scene, does not negatively
impact the Town. Therefore, Recommendation 6.1 through 6.6 are not at issue.
Timinq and Fundina
Financing issues have not been a primary concern for the Town in maintaining its water,
and wastewater infrastructure. This is less of a concem over the long haul now that the
, Town has completed its full cost assessment and recovery plan and implemented its
new rate stn..lcture. The current debt forSt. Davids Sanitary Sewers is being financed
by way of a low interest loan through the Ontario Municipal Economic infrastructure
Financing Authority. Other than this, the Town's water and wastewater systems are
debt-free. As such, Recommendations 7.1 through 7.9 do not conflict with the Town's
present course of action and are acceptable.
Pricina and Rates
The Town has, as of April 1st of this year, changed from a declining block rate stn..lcture
to that of a constant portion (fixed amount) and non-decreasing volumetric (uniform
rate) charge as is being promoted for both water and wastewater. There is no objection
to the contents of Recommendations 8.1 through 8.8.
Innovation
Recommendations 9.1 through 9.3 can be supported as the water sector has long held
the need for improved resources at the Ministry of the Environment to provide a
supportive role to the industry.
Report: PW~
Page 3
03/01 200611: 39 FAX 905 468 2959
TOWN OF NOTL
1(1] 005/011
Ontario Clean Water Aaency
Staff does not have any position With respect to Recommendations 10.1 through 10.8
whiCh do not affect the Town. Recommendation 10.9 can be supported in respect of
the need for material assistance in emergencies. .
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Expert Panel's Report contains a definite bias towards "bigger is better". It makes
blanket statements regarding the state of affairs in the water sector which do not reflect
local conditions and draws conclusions'from these. Whereas a case can and should be
made for the "made in Niagara-on-the-Lake" solution which is already in play; No doubt
we will find that a number of our neighbouring municipalities are of like mind on this
point. Certainly the withdrawal of water and wastewater functions at the local level will
be detrimental to a number of service areas as well as displacing valued employees.
The Town has always been diligent in maintaining and upgrading its water distribution
and wastewater collection systems. It has ensured that its service rates covered both
operating and capital expenditures on a "pay as you go" principle. Not all communities
have kept pace with their water and .sewer needs. A transfer of responsibilities from the
area municipalities to the Region would mean that Niagara-on-the-Lake customers
. would be funding works in these other communities.
If Council wishes to retain some control over the price its residents are paying for water
and wastewater services, it is imperative that a strong clear voice be presented to the
Province in response to the Expert Panel's Report through the Association of
Municipalities of Ontario.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended
1. That Council express its disapproval of all of the Recommendations contained
in the Report of the Expert Panel on Water and Wastewater Strategy which
gives Regional Municipalities exclusive jurisdiction over all elements of the
water and wastewater sector at the exclusion of lower tier municipalities with
less than 10,000 customers.
2. That the Clerk forward a copy of the Council's resolution to all Ontario
municipalities with populations under 35,000 and including all lower tier
municipalities within the Regions of Niagara, Waterloo and York for their
support to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. .
Report. : PW..()5-()62
Page 4
03/01 2006 11:39 FAX 905 468 2959
Respectfully submitted,
AlTAcHMENTS
TOWN OF NOTL
I4J 006/011
Lew Holloway
Chief Administrative Officer
Report: pw~2
First Capital of Upper Canada - 1792
Page 5
OF NOTL
~ OQ7 /011
_A N N EX F. Summary of recommendations
.. Recoaunenduion 4.1
The Province should require, under sections 3,
4,9,10 and, if nccessary,l1 ofSWSSA,
the creation ofbusiness plans for submission to
the Onl2rio Waw: Board. These plans should
be produced by single-tier municipal1ties" not
located within the boundaries of a county; by
regional municip:W.ties; and by counties, working
in cooperation with the lower-tier municipalities
and separated single-tier municipalities within
their boundaries.
.. tua:---....dation 4.2
The geographical basis of a business plan may,
if agteaI with the relevont jurisdiction(s),
extend beyond the boundaries of the county.
single-tier municipality or regional municipality;
and should contain wherever possible a minimuin
of 10,000 customers.
.. 1lCC"~d.nnn4.3
The business plan should be consistent with all
requirements ofSWSSA and SOWA, with provin-
cial growth management policy, and with municipal
offiCial p1ans; should include a governance, finan-
cial and accountability model and a proposed rate
st:h1ctIJre; and sbould rake into account:
- efficiencies available through technological
choice and innovation as well as economies of
scale and scope;
_ efficient provision of service, including existing
or revised contracting possibilities;
- natu.ral economic communities, ~ch as
centres which draw commuters from the
surrounding area; .
_ management of septage on a .CO\lllty or multi- .
county basis; and
- the governance principles in Recommendations
5.1 through 5.5.
.. Recommendation 4.4
The business plan should be approved by county
or regional municipal council and by the council
of any included separated city and submitted to
the Ontario Water Board by June 30, 2007.
.. tua:-m.......A.oti.... 4.5
The Wam Board may tequire deficiencies in
a business plan or group ofbusiness plans to be
made good, without relaxing the time \irie,
before it accepts the business p1an(s) and begins
detailed analysis. .
.. R__d.tina 4.6
TheWater Board should no later than June 30,
2008 render a decision on the business plan.
Where, despite requests for the repair of defi-
ciencies, an adequate plan has not been submitted,
or the Board does not approve the plan that was
submitted, the Board may ""ercise the powers
. under section 12 of SWSSA..
.. Recommendation 4.7
Section 54 of the OWRA should be repealed.
.. Rccoft...n~nildtioa 4.8
The principal municipality in e3Cb cluster in the
North should take the lead in developing the
business plan. following the process and time
frame set out in Recommendations 4.1 through
4.6 and involving municipalities and local services
boards, and rust Nations communities in the
cluster as appropriate.
.. Recoaunendation 4.9
The Mtmieipal Act shouId be amended to give all
Regional Municipalities ""elusive jurisdiction over
all e\ements of the water and wasteWater sector.
.. Recommendation'UO
The provincial g<lY"tlllDent should provide one-
time financial assisbnce consisting of a uniform
. per-customergtant for the total customer base
covered by each business plan, to be paid when
the Water Board accepts the plan.
-----6W4TfRTlGHT-' TOe.~~;;"'-<h...e ..0.''''0', w.... .n. wastew.W IO<to'
._-~-----_.
03/01 2006 11:40 FAX 905 468 2959
TOWN OF NOTL
. Rec:ommendaDon5.1
The Province Should amend O. Reg. 168103,
under the M",,;Lipal Ad, to allow munidpalities
to form corporations to deliver water and WllSte-
w:ater services and to own or lease the rel.ewnt
assets, or to deliver a range of municipal services
including water and wastewater, and to mske it
possible for mo~ than one munidpality to Share
in the ownership of such corporations.
. Ilecoaimendauoo 5.2
At least two-thirds of the directors of the board
of a water service should be drawn from private
life, with any remainder consisting of appoint-
ments.from municipal council.
. Recommendalion 5.3
A shorehoIder's dedantion betw<:en the municipal
owner and a corporation delivering water services
should set out, at a minimum:
- The powers, selection, and terms of
board members;
- Reporting and account:lhility requirements;
- Stand2rd of care and diligence (and indemnifi-
cation when acting in good&ith);
_ The requirement for an annual business plan,
annual and quarterly public reporting, and
a public annual general meetipg;
- Actions requiring shareholder ratification,
such as the annual business plan, rates,
or a dividend policy;
- The shareholder's residual power of
direction; and
- Any other basic matters of operations and
policy in which the Shareholder is concerned.
. llecommendauoo5.4
Water services should have responsibility for
metering, billing and coUCcting arrangements,
and Should maintain separate accounts from
those of their municipality; water provided to
the municipality should be priced at the same
rate that other customers pay; and aD other
transactions between the parties,' such as
overhead, should be priced at mada:t value.
141008/011
. Recommendation 5.5
All financial flows between water services
mdmunicipalities should be reported publicly.
. Recommendalion5.6
The Province Should commission md publish
basic contraCt temp"'-tes for water md waste-
water operations ranging from short-term
operating contractS to long-urmlease and
concession arrangements.
. RecommendatiOn 6.1
The Province should create a new regulatory
body called the Ontario Water Board, reporting
to the Legislature through the Minister of the
Environment, md grant the powers of the Minister
under SWSSA to the Board. The Board should
analyze and rule on water service business plans
and compliance with quality management certiIi-
cation, and may hold hearings, recei.., submissions
and mala: decisions regarding, among other
things, business plans, issues of service quality,
abuse of dominant position, md franchise areas.
. Recommendation 6.2 .
The Ontario Water Board should require water
services to provide information annually about
their compliance with its regulatory regime and
their financial and service performmce, md
should ensure that this information is made
available to the public in away that allows mean-
ingful comparisons with the goals set by each
water service and the performance of a peer group.
. Recommendation 6.3
The Water Board should normally require an
update of business plms only every five years,
on a suggered basis; my proposed material .
change to the plm before the end of the five-
Y"ar period should be submitted to the Board
for app~oval.
.. Recommendation 6.4
The Province should amend the Safe Drin1.ing
mzter Act to include a certilication and
licensing procedure for wastewater operations
on the model of the Drinking Water Qyality
Management Standard.
.---------------------6---
.. RuommemIation 6.S .
Once a water or ~ system operator is
licensed under SDWA, and operating under
a business plan approved by !he Water Board.
it should no longer be required to obtain a
Cerrifi.cate of.Approval for any system addition
or c:hongc approved by a professional engineer.
Section 43 of SDW~ and other references to
a certificate of compliance for municipal water
and wastewater systems should be repealed.
.. Reeom.meadation 6.6'
The Ministry of !he Environment should,
in consultation with municipalities and water
services, create a registry of all non-municipal
systems serving between six and 100 users;
should identify those that pose !he most urgent
risks to public health and, working with muni-
cipalities and water services. act as quickly as
possible to mitig:tte those risks in the most
cost-effective way possible; and should develop
a long-term plan to minimize the risks and
costs associated with !he remaining systems.
.. Recommendation 7.1
In addition to ordin:uy commercial borrowing,
corporatized water services should have the
power to issue revenue bonds.
.. Recommendation 7.2
Aftu exhausting all other normal means of
collet:tion, water services should be able to transtCr
an-ears to the municipality. which would then
place the an-ears on the propertY tax ron as a lien
on !he associated real property that is collectible
as taxes. The amount of the lien should include
all outstanding bills, accruedinrerest, and related
legal and collection costs.
.. Ra1ommendalion 7.3
Water service business plans should be based on
a transition to full-cost recovery of not more
than five years liom initial submission of the
business case to the Water Board.
'WATERTI.OT' lb. case 'or cb.... In On.."o', ...... ..d ..."....t.r ..ctor
NOTL
I4l 009/011
,
.
.. Recommendatioo 7.4
The Ontario Water Board should provide
guidance to the water sector to ensure consistent
application of full-cost recovery regulations and
appropriate accounting standards.
.. Recommendation 7.5
COMRlF and any future gnnt programs for
water or ~ projects in a sustainable
sysfml should be phased out by the start of the
2012 municipal fisc.al year. In !he meantime,
gnnrs should be conditional on the project being
in compliance with all relevant legislation 2Ild
the recommendations of this report, including
!he recommendations on business planning.
.. R.c:eo-mendatioo 7,6
The focus of any water component of provincial
and federal infrastructure programs should be
unsust:linable systems only; funds should not
be limited to capital purposes, and should be
routinely avaibble once eligibility criteria an: met.
.. lUcommeodatiOG 7.7
OSIFA should focusits efforts on
infrastructure needs other than water and
wasrewater in/iastructure.
.. p.....mmendation 7.8
. Whereaveragew.l.ter and Wastewater unit costs
in a water service will be more th2ll 25 times the
provincial average unit cost of production under
full-cost recovery, after all possible cost savings,
cross-subsidizalions and consolidations have
. been considered, and on the petition of the water
service owner, the Water Board should have the
power to dec1an: the water service unsust3inable
and place !he relevant assets and liabilities under
provinciai truSteeship.
.. Recomm-dalion 7.9
The Province should operate and maintain, under
contract, unsu.stainable water services, sbso1bing all
costs above !he 2.5 times avenge threshold, until
it has found.a way of reducing costs below that
threshold; whereupon it may petition !he Ontario
. Water Board for an unwinding of the truSteeShip.
11:40 FAX 905
. . .
, .
. Recommendation 8.1
Metering should be mandatory in all $USl2inahle
Water systems.
. Reco~8.2
The water rllte may include a constant portion,
representing the fixed costs of providing the
service, and must include a non-decreasing
volumetric chaJie.
. Recommendation 8.3
VoIumeaic water rates should not discriminate
mlong industrial, commercial, institutional,
residential, reaearional or municipal classes of
ClIStOlIler of a water system.
. RecommeodaDon 8.4
Water service business plans should include an
assessment of the costs and benefitS of using.
seasonally varying prices to flatten demand.
. Reco~8.s
A development charge should be used to pay
for any increase in capacity that benefits a
specific consumer or new group of consumers;
where development charges are not avaibble
to the water service, business plans must show .
how expansion will be paid for without burdening
existing customers.
. Recommendation 8.6
In Ibe case of a major industrial development
wilb benefits lD the provincial eronomy as a whole,
Ibe Province may elect to pay some or all of the
incremental water and wastewater capital costs.
. Recommendation 8.7
Where the cost of a subsidy from the genernl
customer base to an existing group of residential
consumers would be less than Ibe social costs
of not providing the subsidy, and as long as the
subsidy will not make rates unaffordable to
general customCt8. the general customer base
may be used to subsidize service to that group.
OF NOTL
~ 010/011
. Recommendation 8.8
Wastewater facilities should be able to eharge for
seprage handling and treatment, with charges set
out in the rate st:r\JctUte developed through the
business planning process.
. &commendation 9.1
MOE should devote additional resowxes on a
continuing basis to assisting in the timely adap-
tation of innovative technologies and techniques
for use in Ontario's water and waslcW2ter sector.
. JW:,o,pmc:ndacion 9.2
The Ministry of the Environment should ensure
that training is more readily available in remote
locations, through distance learning, "cin:uit
rider" trainers, accreditation of more qualified
institutions or organizations, and recognition of
ao:reditation from other provinces having certifi-
cation standards similar to those of Ontario.
. Recommendation 9.3
MOE should wode with the Ontario Municipal
Warr.r Association (OMWA) and the Ontario
Water Works Association (OWWA) to assess
the need to increase the number of people ...w-
able to undertake professional and directorial
roles in the Ontario water industry, and to offer
training and skills upgrading as necessary.
. Recommendation 10.1
The Province should amend the Capital
Inwstment Plan Act to dekte reference to
OCWA; OCWAshould be incorporated under
the OntaritJ Business Corporations Act and have
all the ordinary pOVl'Crs. responsibilities and
liabilities of a normal OBCA corporation,
with the Province as its sole shareholder; OCWA
should cease to be an agent of Ontario, and its
employees should cease to be members of the
Ontario Public Service.
-~-+--
03/01 2006 11:40
905
.. Rcmmmendation 10.2
The Province should dnft a new Shareholder
Declaration setting OUt the activities, goals and
governance of the corporation, which should
include the fu:edom to enter into joint venrum;
and other arrangements with other sector partici-
pants, whether in the public or private sector.
.. Recommendation 10.3
The Province should name a board composed
of experienced and competent pc:op1e from the .
private sectOr who bave fun authority to appoint
the chief c:xecutive and senior officers ofOCWA
.. Recomm.....d.,;_ lOA
1De new board should draw up a strategic plan
aimed at achieving OCW.Ns fun potenti1ll in
its revitali7.ed form in the context of Ontario's
refonned water sector and, if It wishes, in other
markets as.well.
.. Recommend!Woo 1005
On the basis of its aa:q>tance of the strategic
plan, the Province should ensure that OCWll.s
apit:ol strUctUre is appropriate t<> the activities
it will carry out.
.. Recommendation 10.6
The Province should no longer guarantee the
obligations of OCWA nor indemnifY its actions;
OCWA should pay all norm1ll t:IXeS and be able
to make independent banking ammgements.
.. Recommendacion 10.7
Before May 2006, unless a suitable new revenue
source for the pipeline~, the Province
should arrange for the wind-up of the New
T ccumseth Improvement Society md provinci1ll
assumption ofits assets md such ofirs debt as
cannot be serviced from re.lSOnable user charges.
'WATERTlO.T' Th. ,... ,., <fI.n.. tn- 00''''.'' ....., .od ....tew..., ",<t.,
,.-'
K.
,
\n
, ,
d---
.. . Recommendati01l10.8
If the Province assumes the pipeline and its debt.
it should then arrange for OCWA or another
certified operator to operate the pipeline under a
long-term lease or concession :unngement, with
the contraetor having the pOWtt to maximize
the revenues of the pipeline so long as the effect
is not to increase .the price of wal<:t to Honda
beyond what it would otherwise have been, nor
to mm water rates for other customers unac-
ceptably high. in the view of the Watet Boud.
.. p:.............".cfati01l10.9
Emagency plam requU:ed under SDWA should
include arrangements with nearby water services
for mutual assistance in c:magencies.
~ 011/011
~ .
" -
111I111I11I1111I11I11I
ROYAL LEPAGE
111I11I11111111I11I11I
How you find
a great
real estate agent.
............. ........ ........... ............ ............ ............... ...".. ........ ........... ........ ....... ....... ....
y~cl:)~\1 ~b
January 14, 2006
Corporation ofthe Township ofOro-medonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro-Medonte, Ontario
LOL lEa
~
Alln: Ms. Jennifer Zieleniewski, C.A.O.
Dear Jennifer:
I am writing on behalf of my client, who has expressed an interest in purchasing the 10 acre
parcel ofland legally described as Part Lot 21, Con. 5 with Highway 11 frontage and is currently
owned by the Township ofOro-Medonte. A determination on the status of this land and
availability would be very much appreciated.
With thanks,
,
C''-~^
Paul Miller
Sales Representative
,;
~
.
.
0
-:
,
;
0
~
~
~
~
,
.
<;
E
~
~
1
.
,
"
.
0
~
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:
~
~ ~
0
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
f:)d - \
Lake Simcoe Regional Airport
224 Line 7 North, RR#2
Oro Station, Ontario
Canada
LOL 2EO
Phone: (705) 487-0999 Fax: (705) 487-1411
Email: Isra@csolve.net Web: www.lakesimcoeairportcom
January 5, 2006
I)~~
{}-~fv
c>
'J
{JeJ-
t
Mayor, Council, City Administrator and Treasurer
Corporation of the City of Barrie
70 Collier Street, PO Box 400
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5
Mayor, Council, City Manager and Treasurer
Corporation of the City of Orillia
50 Andrew Street South
Orillia, Ontario
L3V 7T5
Mayor, Council, CAO and Treasurer
Corporation of the Township ofOro-Medonte
PO Box 100
Oro, Ontario
LOL 2XO
Members of Council, City Administrators and Treasurers:
RE: Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Semi-Annual Report
Further to Clause 4 of the Accountability Policy for Municipal Agencies, the Lake Simcoe Rcgional
Airport has prepared a review of the past years' activities, for your perusaL At the February 2006
Commission meeting, a final review of 2005 tinancials and approval of the 2006 .Airport Budget ,vii!
be completed and the necessary request(s) will be submitted to Councils.
The following notes relate to the report.
a) The Airport Commission is anticipating to conclude fiscal 2005 with an approximate operating
surplus of $20,000.00.
b) Despite a volatile calendar year that saw energy cosls spike to new record highs; fuel sale
volumes to iet and turbine aircraft using the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport have iucreased by
approximately 23% compared to fiscal 2004 figures. Additionally, overall 2005 fuel sale
volumes at Lake Simcoe Regional Airport have increased by approximately 14% overall,
compared to fiscal 2004. The airport has seen a tremendous and positive rate of growth in this
segment of business over the past 4 years. In addition to increased usage from the
commercial/industrial sector of Simcoe County, particularly the automotive sector, the airport
1
~
J
has also experienced an Increased usage from Casino Rama entertainers, Ministry of Health air
ambulance flights, as well as seasonal vacationers. In fact, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport is
considered as the airport of choice by Casino Rama for any of the entertainers using air
transportation.
c) Pursuant to the July 2005 Semi-annual report, the airport is pleased to confirm the occupancy of
various new tenants all whom have taken residence in Weatherwise Aviation hangar facilities.
I) Firestorm Turbines - This unique firm specializes in aircraft turbine engine maintenance,
overhauling and retrofitting. The most recent project that Firestorm Turbine was involved
with was the design and construction of a turbine (jet) engine test-pod complete with an
afterburner, for the Canadian Department of National Defence. This diverse firm also has a
marine division. At present, this firm has 4 employees. For more information, please visit
www.firestrm.ca.
2) Aero Covers - This firm moved to the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport from the Ottawa
area. Aero Covers manufacturers aviation canvas materials ranging from airport wind
direction indicators (windsock) to aircraft engine and wing covers. This firm also has a
marine division. At present, Aero Covers has 4 employees. For more information, please
visit www.aerocovers.com.
3) TransGlobal Aviation - This Toronto area-based firm moved it's operations to the Lake
Simcoe Regional Airport providing professional aircraft sales, acquisitions and consulting
advice ranging from small recreational aircraft to modern business jets and helicopters. At
present, TransGlobal Aviation has 2 employees. For more information, please visit
www.transalobalaviatlon.net.
4) Georgian ,!!ay Helicopters Inc. - This 'start-up' operation provides helicopter sightseeing
flights, charters, surveying and aerial photography. With offices located in the Airport
Terminal Building, GBH Inc. hangars its helicopter in the new Weatherwise Aviation
facility. This firm presently has 2 employees. For more information, please contact 705-
487-HELL
The Lake Simcoe Regional Airport also remains as host to the Provincial headquarters of
Hydro One Helicopter Networks, two flight schools (Canadian Flyers International and
Future Air), the Ontario Provincial Police (office space) as well as various corporate and
private/recreational based aircraft.
d) The Lake Simcoe Regional Airport's Capital Works plan for fiscal 2005 is anticipated to
conclude on schedule and budget. The Automatic Weather Observation fu'stem was activated
in mid August and received Transport Canada approval in late September 2005. The
complimenting and state-of-the-art GPS approaches (total of 6 new approaches) have received
draft approval from Nav Canada and have an anticipated aeronautical publication date of late
February 2006. Both of these enhancements will not only increase accessibility to the
commercial users of the airport but will also provide increased operational safety factors. The
South Apron expansion initiative forming part of the airport's 2004 Capital Works Program has
been a tremendous asset particularly in consideration of the airport's increased traffic volumes,
not only through increased revenue generation, but also enhanced operational safety factors.
e) Despite a continued delay in further hangar construction activities while the airport Fire
Protection Plan and applicable upgrades are under final review (stemming from site plan
control process), Weatherwise Aviation maintains a keen interest In continued developments at
2
~
the airport not only to include further commercial hangar development activities, but also
potential recreational hangar developments. When a resolution to the fire protection issue was
not in sight, the Township of Oro-Medonte requested that the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport
Commission take lead in developing and implementing a solution. Since then the LSRA has
worked diligently to broker a solution that is acceptable to all parties involved. Accordingly, the
Commission has retained the professional services of FCS Fire Consulting Services Ltd., an
independent consulting firm specializing in fire protection planning and zoning. Once a solution
has been realized, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission will approach the member
municipalities to present the proposal and recommend a funding model. The completion of this
initiative will not only enhance overall airport safety; but also will allow for continued and
future airport developments.
f) During the April 21, 2005 Commission meeting and in accordance with the airport's strategic
direction, staff was authorized to retain the services of the multi-national strategic counsel
practice group, Fasken Martineau, for the development and execution of a Strategic
Communications Plan. The plan includes three phases with an estimated completion period
within the first quarter of 2006. The goal of this initiative is to develop and execute a strategic
communications plan that leverages the resources of the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport in order
to increase and enhance the profilc amongst the public and key political and bureaucratic
decision-makers.
The attached information is for your perusal. Should you have any qucstions, please do not hesitate to
contact the undersigned at (705) 487-0999.
Sincerely,
La~ Regional Airport
~Vu-
Michael J. Drumm
Airport Manager
,
cc Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission
3
~e
20060GRA/ROMA
Combined Conference Announ
\
\
Premier Dalton McGuinty has confirmed that he will address the conference on Wednesday,
February 22"".
Steve Paikin, co- host of TVO's Studio 2 and author, will also address the delegates on Wednesday
morning.
Long Service Awards: Honouryour long-lirne ernployees at the Awards Luncheon. Information on
Long-Service Awards is posted on the OGRA web site and the forms are also being mailed.
Companions' Program: For highlights on the Cornpanions' Prograrn see the OGRA web site.
MUNICIPAL DELEGATIONS TO MINISTERS: Deadline for requests is FEBRUARY 3"'.
Municipal delegations with Ministers are being scheduled on Monday, February 20th and Tuesday,
February 21"
To-date, the following Ministers have confirmed that they will rneet with rnunicipal delegations at the
conference: Minister Dombrowsky, Minister Kwinter, Minister Peters, Minister Gerretsen, Minister
Cansfield, Minister Rarnsay, Minister Caplan, Minister Takhar and Minister Broten.
../;;/i'
The deadline for requesting a delegation is Friday; February 3, ,WOO.
Forrns should be submitted on-line, and, if you are requesting a meeting with more than one Minister,
please complete ONE FORM PER REQUEST.
Forms are available on the OGRA web site www.oqra.orq and ROMA web site www.rorna.on.ca
OITlario Good Roads Association
6355 Kennedy Road. Unit #2
Mississauga, ON
l5T 2L5
b-\-
The Corporation of the Township ofOro-Medonte
Post Office Box 100, Administration Centre
Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
Page 1 of7
Marui Beal
8 Deer Park Road, Oakville, ON L6M 3X4
Email:
1-905-827-9010
November 28, 2005
ATTENTION: Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk
Neil Craig - Mayor - Township Oro-Medonte
Harry Hughes - Deputy Mayor - Oro-Medonte
REFERENCE:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING FOR PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING BY-LAW AND
PROPOSED PLAN OF SUBDIVISION IN THE
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE... 2005-ZBA-22 &
2005-SUB-Ol
Ladies and Gentlemen;
I own the 100-acre property that abuts the back border of the
proposed land, referenced above. This proposal, to subdivide the
land adjacent to mine, specifically for building a recycling and
compo sting plant owned and operated by Try Recycling, is a cause
of grave concern to me, as a next door neighbour and as a
ratepayer.
This letter serves as mv official notice of opposition to the
subject proposal for this land to be rezoned from
A!!riculturallRural to Economic Develovment to allow the
conseauent subdivision of this land for use as a recvclin!! plant.
1
My property borders the entire back boundary of the proposed
recycling and composting plant. I am directly affected by the use
of this land zoned for Economic Development.
The following is an initial listing of my objections, concerns and
observations regarding the proposed future use of this land
abutting my property. This list is not complete and further study of
the proposed plan will no doubt provide additional concerns:
OUTSTANDING ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES NOT ADDRESSED IN
THE ORo-MEDONTE "PEER REpORT" THAT I WANT TO SEE
ADDRESSED:
Incomplete information:
Confirmed and supported by the town's own 'Peer Report' ,
submitted by R.J. Burnside & Associates Ltd., in October of this
year;
"Insufficient information has been provided by Try
Recycling, and the town, to enable any presentation of
professional opinion requested by the town regarding the
proposed use of this land. "
Traffic review is inaccurate.
See R.J.Burnside report re: traffic and access reVIew report
comments:
"The study provided by Try Recycling contains deficiencies
that compromise our ability to reach conclusions on the
proper methods to mitigate the impact of the proposed
development... without correct analysis; it is not possible to
reach conclusions on the appropriate traffic mitigation
measures. "
On a more personal note, I have concerns regarding:
Wind direction: - I am located directly downwind from the
proposed recycling/compost site raising issues of, and not
restricted to:
2
Air Pollution: - The resulting dust from the grinding of dry
wall, concrete and other building materials
would, in my opinion, produce air borne
particulate, resulting in the downwind
poisoning of the environmentally sensitive
re-forested area of thousands oftrees that I
have planted directly along the back border
of the proposed site. This pollution will
render my plantation lumber as worthless.
- My 40 acres currently under sweet corn,
will also be affected by air borne particulate
as it is grown for human consumption.
- Asthmatic family members will also be
seriously compromised by air borne
concrete and drywall dust, polluting the
environment.
Noise pollution:- The noise of back-up alarms on trucks and
backhoes for12 hours a day, 6 days a week,
month in/month out will result in a total loss
of enjoyment of my property
- The decibel level of the open air industrial
grinders, as they process concrete and
drywall, are of great concern to me. The
possibility of the enjoyment of a peaceful
summer evening next door to this plant,
seems improbable.
Visual pollution: The height and continuous grinding noise of the
30' conveyer belt proposed, with airborne dust spewing from the
top is of great concern.
Ground water pollution: My property is the source of several
creeks that run throughout Oro-Medonte. The creation of berm
3
barriers for noise and the plant's existence itself, will disturb the
water table. Try Recycling states theywill do frequent testing of
ground water. Ifbuilt, I will be doing weekly testing of ground
water as well. My results, be they the same or different from Try
Recycling's, will be forwarded immediately to the Ministry of the
Environment. My reports with the possibility of different values
will halt the plant operation on an ongoing basis, resulting in a
stockpiling of debris awaiting processing causing environmental
and visual eyesores. (See '
Revenue Loss: - My re-forested trees (tens of thousands) will be
rendered as valueless for resale once covered with the white
powder from this recycling operation. (See attached photo and
Silverculturist report.)
The future use of my property as a revenue generating 'Corporate
Retreat', well into in the start-up stages, is now halted and in
serious jeopardy of continuing thereby eliminating future revenues
currently planned.
Timing: - Weare now in December's busy vacation and holiday
season. An initial request on my part for professional assistance at
this time is met with offices closed into January. The timing of
this matter awaiting the Town's decision does not afford the
necessary time for residents to properly assess the proposed
amendment, prior to the cutoff date imposed by the Municipal
Board.
Quality and Enjoyment of Living: -.The affect on my enjoyment
of my property and quality of living are in serious doubt once the
noise and pollution and traffic for this plant are underway
General Comments:
As agreed by the neighbours, my property is a breathtakingly
beautiful piece of land that abuts this proposed recycling site. (See
photo). With its series of ponds, Maple stand and re-forested
4
acreage, my land in its current pristine condition, is an asset to the
Township ofOro-Medonte. I have been diligent in maintaining
my land over the last 25 years and as a result, it is currently
enjoyed by both owners and neighbours alike, winter and summer.
Local residents make use of the hiking trails for skiing or walking,
the ponds for skating in winter and swimming in summer and all
enjoy the observation of the abundant wild life created and
supported by the network of ponds I have created and roadways I
have constructed.
I have been a conscientious neighbour and landowner for the last
25 years and have actively managed the land including the great
expense of an Aquaculture (fish farming) start-up operation,
engineering of roads and ponds and active re-forestation and crop
management. (See Woodlands Improvement Award attached
signed by the Ministry of the Environment).
In addition to my official objection to this subdivision and
proposed recycling plant, I would also request that the deadline
for other 'Submissions of objection and/or appeal" be moved
and/or delayed into March of 2006.
My understanding that the date for a 'statement of objection' ofthe
27th of January by the Ontario Municipal Board does not give
interested rate payers the time necessary to properly assess their
position.
i months ago, the Town ofOro-Medonte was made aware of Try
Recycling's interest in locating their second plant in Oro-Medonte.
As the landowner most directly affected by this development, I
was only made aware ofthe proposed site a week ago as of this
writing. I feel it is only fair to request the same amount of time (7
months) is made available to the ratepayers to thoroughly access
the impact of the existence of a plant managed by Try Recycling.
I do not feel these concerns and requests are unreasonable, given
that the entire plant backs onto my land.
5
I believe it would 1?e in the best interest of the Town ofOro,
Medonte to pause atldtake a mores~udied approach in order to
assess the impact of this proposed development. This would be
prudent for the future developmental possibilities and use of this
land.
s-\-
As "Fathers of the Town" you are making decisions for the well
being of all residents of ORO. You must ask yourselves, "Is a
recycling plant entrance, landscaped or not, really the fIrst thing we
want potential investors in Oro-Medonte to see as they step off
their plane? (see 'Evaluation Grid' attached, offered by Try
Recycling as proof of maintenance... .NOTE: their lowest score
was on "Landscaped Areas" and "Floral Displays".)
Summary:
Re: the Planning analysis for Rezoning Application, filed with the
town in July 2005, it states: (Page 3 - section 4.2 County of
Simcoe Official Plan, Paragraph 4):
"The policy also requires various development standards to
be met. These standards and the proposal's compliance to
them are as follows... the proposed use is not located in the
vicinitv of incompatible surroundinllland uses. "
I believe the proposal for this plant recycling operation
contravenes the town's own guideline stated above, that were put
into the planning analysis in order to prevent this exact same type
of conflict situation.
I request at this time that any decisions or activity concerning this
proposal be copied to me. This would include and is not limited to
any decisions made by the town in this regard.
6
A recycle plant in my backyard will reduce the value of my
property to nil (as per F. Schafer Real Estate). My retirement is
severely and negatively affected by the creation of this plant in my
backyard.
Of all the township residents, I alone will take the fIrst and greatest
financial hit,
r thank you for your attention to this matter, upcoming election
notwithstanding.
Yours truly,
~/;:;?C/( BJ-/?
M. M. Fife
E Yz Lot 10, Oro Line 8
905-827 -9010
Cc:
Stacey & Jim Graham, Try Recycling
Mr. Graham Sr. of Try Recycling
Oro-Medonte Rate Payers Group
Bruce Hoppe, Director of PI arming, Oro-Medonte
Graham Wilson & Green Solicitors
Nancy Fletcher (nee)
Oro Township web site
Ends.
DocumentslOro
7
~=
a 6'.1 1:I"";>'~:~7?~..~~
t~,'~" -.,
.:~ -' .~~
- ...:.;1;....
".'.
.b~/~~-.......~:
'.;q'
I
i f;~. ~
~~;
,;,~- ~(
~',.i . ..!$!._~~...
Recycle plant location at bottom of picture, not visible in this shot
This property borders the back of the proposed site.The shot is about 10 years old. Refores'
i)P-& 0 -I)Z~ /JL~ ti6 A-~~;rh &ZJx;
,,~.-~
-=--~-= ':::;:-_..==:.==-=----=~
_.~~-=-~~.:'1 ='.'~~_~ ==.....~~,~..-:.........~~~~
~~9
~
"'-'
~~
",',
"'j.."
OJ
~;~~~~~tl6.1Jll.~L.I~:u~1,i~3~_~~-~-gC.~~~-~4r~~~l).s-~~~~"t'i
~ MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES
~:".
~
\
,
~
{Ii:'!
i
,~
Presented to: MARGARET M. (MARNIE) FIFE
In recognition of your participation in the Woodlands Improvement
Act Agreement program on the occasion of the 25th Anniversary
of the Woodlands Improvement Agreement Act (1966-1991).
. Ministry of
Natural
~ I Ontano %
~ MINISTER
..:0;;:::" -',......'c. _' -- __, - - - k--- '___n... '-" -'.~ "-. .-,-- - ~ -,,-. -.' ".'-',' .... ~
.... ~~7~e'~~~~~~7JT~u~r~7P~ ~r~
FOAL! 24 0BI'01
Page I of:!
s~-
<:::,
Marilyn Pennycook
From:
Sent:
To:
John Thornton
Monday, January 23, 2006 2:57 PM
Dan Buttineau; Jennifer Zieleniewski: John Crawford; Harry Hughes; Paul Marshall; Neil Craig; Ralph Hough;
Ruth Fountain; Marilyn Pennycook
Cc:
Subject: Doctor in Oro-Medonte
January 23, 2006
Marilyn Pennycook
Clerk Township Oro-Medonte
RE: Physician Recruitment for Oro-Medonte
Dear Mayor and Council:
The executive of the Oro-Medonte Doctor Recruitment Committee have reviewed Report No Adm2006-009 -Ad
Hoc Committee Medical Services prepared by Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAD for council's consideration at the
Committee of the Whole Meeting on Wednesday, January 25, 2006.
While acknowledging that it may be well intended, the procedures and process suggested for this working group
appears to have overlooked the urgency for action and the excellent work that has already been accomplished.
Physician Recruitment teams in Barrie, Orillia and Oro-Medonte are already established and the Township of
Oro-Medonte has the results of its Medical Survey with data and an extensive list of individuals who could be
contacted as potential representatives. The members of Ad Hoc Working Medical Services Group should
composed of those who can immediately capitalize on this work.
Everyone concerned with the wise use of tax dollars would prefer to see them used to provide services rather than
for advertising in local newspapers.
Our Suggestions are as follows:
NAME
We support the name of the body to be "Ad Hoc Working Group-Medical Services"
REPORTING TIME
We are concerned that the reporting date of July I, 2006 is too late. This report would be coming at a
time that council and perhaps the physician recruitment committees recess for summer break and with the
timing of municipal elections the reality of establishing this date is to put the matter off until there is a newly
elected council. We believe that the Ad Hoc Working Group can be established quickly through consideration
of its membership and the process followed to determine representation.
We also recommend that minutes of meetings be forwarded to Council on an ongoing basis for information and
feedback rather than waiting to submit a final report. The Ad Hoc Working Group-Medical should aim to
complete its report within a month of formation.
1/23/2006
Page 2 of~
COMPOSITION
Two Members of Oro-Medonte Council who have expressed and interest and desire to work on the Ad Hoc
Working Group. (We note that Deputy Mayor Harry Hughes has expressed and interest in chairing this Group,
is Oro-Medonte's representative to the Barrie Doctor Recruitment Committee and is on the Board of RVH)
One member from each of the Barrie and Orillia Physician Recruitment Committees.
(We note that Pamela Colquhoun BSc, MBA Physician Recruitment Leader has already expressed an interest in
joining)
Both Members of the executive of the Oro-Medonte Doctor Recruitment Committee. (John Thornton and Mac
Shiells have extensive background knowledge of the work that has already been done, which is necessary to
expedite the work of the Group.)
Representation from the Oro District Lions Clubl Medonte Lions 1 Lioness Clubs who have the potential to
provide support to an initiative.
One member of the Oro- Medonte Chamber of Commerce (There is a direct connection between access to
medical services and economic development)
Whatever number of addition members of the public Council may deem appropriate as long as the members can
be selected without the expense and delay of using the newspaper advertising process. It is recognized that the
above representation may well fulfill the reports intent of have representation from across the municipality..
One staff as a resource to the group.
MANDATE
To combine the resources of the Physician Recruitment Committees of Barrie, Orillia, Oro-Medonte and
representatives of the Oro Medonte, Council, Chamber of Commerce, Service Clubs and residents to identify
physicians willing to locate in Oro-Medonte and to determine the process by which the Council of Oro-Medonte
will support and their relocation to facilitate immediate action.
OBJECTIVES
. Develop and implement strategies to recruit family physicians for permanent practice and locum tenant's
opportunities in Oro-Medonte.
. Determine the funds to be made available for doctor recruitment.
. To determine a short and long term financial plan for the encouragement of doctors to locate in Oro-
Medonte.
. To liaise with local charitable groups and residents associations to encourage concrete community
support.
. To identify and complete negotiations with Physicians by March 15,2006. To have at least one
physician servicing residents of Oro-Medonte by July 1,2006.
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:
. The Chair will facilitate a strong working relationship among all members of the group. .
. The Chair will facilitate the committee in its initiatives leading to an adequate supply of physicians to the
community including, but not limited to: a recruitment strategy, a financial strategy, a settlement strategy
and a monitoring strategy.
. The Ad Hoc Working Group will ensure that support for the physicians family moves are maintained
during a transition period, and that the community response to the new physicians are monitored.
1/23/2006
.
Page 3
-
Thank you for you consideration of our suggestions. We plan to attend the Committee of the Whole Meeting on
Wednesday, January 25, 2006 and would welcome questions or any additional information Council may have.
We would also welcome the opportunity to address Council should we feel futher clarification is needed.
John Thornton 835-5862
1121/2001i
Main Identity
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"Kim & Don Hargreaves" <kdhargreaves@sympatico.ca>
<hhughes@bconnex.net>
Friday, January 20, 2006 12:56 PM
5th line North
October 12,2005
Oro Medonte Council Members.
This letter is being written in regards to the deplorable condition of
the 5th line north between IS/16th side road and the Old Barrie Road. Over
the past several years the traffic flow on the 5th line has increased
dramatically for what we feel are the following reasons. First it is an
overpass concession and one of the few overpass concession that is not paved
from the 15th SR .to the aId Barrie Road. Second, with the County dump on
the Old Barrie Road the 5th line is on the roads that people below Highway
11 use to access the dump, along with the waste disposal trucks that pick up
the trash for the township. Many dump trucks also use the 5th line when
going to the dump or hauling soil to customers below the highway, as well as
an increase in tractor trailer use hauling consumer goods to local
businesses Another reason for the increase in traffic is Hardwood Hills
which is open year round. Many of there clientele use the 5th line because
of the direct route to Hard Wood Hills. Just an general increase in the
population in the area had also increased traffic flow on the 5th.
The 5th line is graded 3 or 4 times minimum and oiled yearly, this
helps with the dust control but does not help with the condition of the
road. The road quickly becomes wash board from one end to the other shortly
after grading is done. This becomes hard on our vehicles farm machinery and
increases the cost to repairs and maintain our vehicles and equipment.
We feel that a long term solution and cost saving measure to this
problem would be to tar and chip the concession. We have observed other
roads in the township i.e. 4th line N to Bass Lake Rd., 10th line N from
Bass Lake Rd. To County Rd. 22. These roads have similar or less traffic
flows than the 5th line does. We would appreciate and strongly recommend
that Council consider our request to tar and chip the 5th line N from the
IS/16th SR. to the Old Barrie Rd, as your budget proposals for 2006 will
soon begin.
Page 1 of 1
S1}
~0l'S"' .:uw t.
~~~
Nau;n ~
1/23/2006
.~ l
0fi~;J~
cr'?~ 2~t;;
~ 177~
41.. . d~~~/.,k, -1''' db}' fO>!..' - ;/JL~ ./
C/ta~r- I /'
;' __ ~ ~/ 14r/ .Ij /1,)2CJt'# - c7.t
=r h."w-=7 ~wfd ~/~
~ L-:/ ~~~j' Lc/~--/
It ~ CG~ .2 #41 vL/ r-d /#~ to
~J ~d ./ ~ <n?d- ~/ ~/il;J
tr'.~
:I-~ ..
~
;t~~U,
..:.
I); -
t;i
"
s,
.
j~.~~,,---.--,
Jf.-R'<;( -',."
~~5
~
it ','- .
..Lr'''~"._'5' $
""~'-7''''-~dfY
'~z:5-
-\
\
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
II
To:
MEMORANDUM
II
From:
H. Daynard
R.M. File #:
Date:
January 24, 2006
Roll #:
Subject: Administration Building Phone System Report ADM2006-005
Details on the Oro-Medonte Administration Telephone System are provided below as requested in
the deferral of Council Report ADM2006-005.
The Oro-Medonte Telephone System located at the Administration Building is at full capacity. The
system has been at or near this capacity for the last year. During the day call volume can get to the
point where no lines are available to call out of the building. When there are no lines available out
that also means that taxpayers, outside staff, and other third parties are getting a busy signal when
they try to call in. Complaints of busy signals have been addressed to the receptionist.
The hardware and electronics used in the current telephone system of 30 telephones, were
purchased in 1995 at a cost of $14,697.00 and are considered old technology. New parts for the
system are not readily available, making used and refurbished parts the alternative. With time even
the refurbished and used parts will likely be harder to find. The Township of Oro-Medonte currently
has a limited number of phone sets and many of them only have access to 6 of the 9 phone lines.
This has become an issue when finding phones for additional staff, OMS Chairs, and consultants.
The Voice Mail on the Township's current system is reconditioned and was purchased in 2001 at a
cost of $2,997.00. This system is also considered old technology. It is no longer in production and
once again the ability to find parts could be an issue just as for the hardware. There are no warranty
or service plans offered on this system. The maintenance and setting up of users is a cumbersome
process and there is a cost involved with every maintenance change.
Bell was called to investigate options that would be available to improve the Township's phone
system. These options are listed in attachment #1.
The following quotes were obtained for a New Telephone System from Sell and Kenney
Communications. The new system includes hardware, phone sets, voicemail and the ability to adapt
to changing technology.
Business Communications Manaaer Teleohone SYStem
Bell Kennev Communications
Equipment
Business Communications included included
Manager System
40 Head sets included included
New Voice Mail included included
1 year manufacturers warranty included Included
5 Year extended option Available No Available
Purchase Price $24,644.04 $23,521.00
Purchase Price + 5 Year Extended $30,484.00 Not available
Warranty
(see attachment 2 for more details)
It is recommended that Council enter into a purchase agreement with Bell for the Business Communications
Manager Telephone System in the amount of $30,484.00.
/
-2-
Options For Oro-Medonte Phone System
Cost of adding just 9 jack and sets to current setup approx $9504 including PST.
. 9 jacks
. 9 sets
. expansion port
. Additional phone jacks
. new reception module
. keep old voicemail (No longer sold or serviced with maintenance contracts by Bell)
. keep old sets
. Not IP capable
. Not capable of growing with new technology
Cost of upgrading current setup approx $21600 including PST.
. New voicemail
. New phone sets
. Additional phone jacks
. Not IP capable
. Not Capable of growing with new technology
Cost of New System $24644.04 including PST.
. New voicemail
. New phone sets
. Additional phone jacks
. IP capable
. Capable of growing with new technology
. I year of warranty (covers parts, labour, software)
. Bell service call rate in 2006 $135/hr
Cost of New System + 5 year extended warranty $30,484 including PST (+network $32,931.53)
. New voicemail
. New phone sets
. Additional phone jacks
. IP capable
. Capable of growing with new technology
. 6 years of warranty (covers parts, labour, software)
A~-t"'L\<l'\e J
Comparison of Two Phone quotes --- New Option
Bell
The Original Purchase price including PST is $32,931.53.
The purchase price including PST is $30,484 (excluding Data jacks originally included)
Includes I Year manufacture warranty.
Includes 5 Year Extended warranty at price of$5839.99 after incentives of$934
Warranty includes 7days a week 24 hours a day service.
No costs for tech calls and repairs for full 5 years
Includes 40 new sets
$24644.04 Without 5 Year warranty
Kenney Communications
The Purchase price including PST is $23,521.00.
Includes I Year manufacture warranty.
5 year extended warranty not available.
Support through Kenney Communications paid on per call basis.
Includes 40 new scts
~C~ - 5
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
ADM2006-005 Committee of the Whole Harold Daynard
Subject: Department:
Council Administration Building Administration
Phone System
C.ofW. Date:
Januarv 11, 2006
Motion # R.M. File #:
Date: RolI#:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
I BACKGROUND: ~
The Oro-Medonte Administration Building has the Norstar Phone System. This current phone
system is becoming too stressed to meet the Townships' day to day needs. These stresses include
increased numbers of phone sets, lines, users and calls. The voice mail associated with the same
phone system is also not supported any longer.
Current Phone System:
1. Norstar Phone System
~ 9 phone lines available
~ Voice Mail (No longer supported by Bell)
~ NotlP capable (Voice over Internet)
~ Will not be compliant with new technology
~ Difficult system to manage
The following Phone System was investigated as a replacement for the Norstar System.
2. Business Communications Manager
~ 151ines
~ New Voice Mail (Fully Supported)
~ IP Capable
~ New Phone Sets
~ Built to be compliant with new technology for many years to come
~ Centralized software management system for easy implementation
~ 5 Year extended Warranty
~C\ - \0
II ANALYSIS:
I
The following is the proposed solution for The Township of Oro-Medonte by Bell.
We have the option of purchasing or leasing the New Phone System.
These options were reviewed with the Township Treasurer.
The Purchase price including PST is $32,931.53.
Leasing the equipment for 5 years at a monthly cost of $605.16 plus PST would result in a total cost
of $39,214.37.
The Bell representative anticipates that the equipment would be relevant for at least ten years.
Lease costs for years 6 to 10 are not determinable at this time. However, the lease costs for years 6
to 10 would add to the total cost of the leasing option. As such, the outright purchase of the
equipment is the preferable option.
Staff recommend the purchase of the above noted telephone equipment at the price of $32,931.53
as quickly as possible. It is further recommended that the financing of this purchase be determined
during 2006 budget deliberations.
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
II
1. THAT Report No. ADM2006-005 be received and adopted.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Purchasing and Tendering Procedures By-law, for the
reasons identified in Report No. ADM2006-005, Council deems it appropriate to enter into a
purchase agreement with Bell rather than to request proposals for new Telephone Systems.
3. And that staff be authorized to enter into a purchase agreement with Bell for the Business
Communications Manager Telephone System as specified in Report No. ADM2006-005
R~Z7;::e
Harold Daynard
Manager of Information Technology
C.A.O.
O!fJIlWiL
J
C.A.O. Comments:
Dept. Head
- 2 -
Dept. Report No. TR2006-02 To: Committee of the Whole Prepared By: Paul Gravelle
Subject: Capital Contribution Department: Treasury
- Coldwater Community
Centre
Council
C.ofW. Date: January 17, 2006
Motion # R.M. File #:
Date: RolI#:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
II BACKGROUND:
~
At the Committee of the Whole meeting of April 27, 2005, Council considered a draft joint municipal
agreement between the municipality and the Township of Severn pertaining to capital contributions
relating to the Coldwater Community Centre.
The draft agreement contained a funding formula for the Township of Oro-Medonte's contribution
based on the number of electors in the previous election.
The Township's annual contribution is presently $4,418.
Staff was directed to negotiate an agreement with the Township of Severn whereby each
participating municipality's capital contribution would be based on the percentage of users from that
municipality in relation to the total number of users of the facility applied to an annual contribution to
a reserve that would ensure funds would be available to meet future capital needs.
Please find attached a revised draft agreement reflecting the said premise.
I ANALYSIS:
II
The Township of Severn is presently completing an asset management program that, once
completed will allow them to determine the community center's long-term capital requirements and
the annual contribution required to meet long-term financial needs. In the interim, they are proposing
lo\)~~
. the entering into of a two year agreement whereby the Township of Oro-Medonte's contribution would
be based on the total amount of users in the prior year expressed as a % applied to the current
year's capital needs.
As the annual contribution is not specifically stated, we believe a clause must be added to give the
Township of Oro-Medonte recourse in the event of a significant increase in the requested annual
contribution. Accordingly, we respectfully suggest that the following clauses be added:
"In the event that the amount determined to be the Township of Oro-Medonte's annual contribution
exceeds $10,000, the Township of Oro-Medonte may terminate this agreement by providing written
notice to the Township of Severn within 20 days of written notification from the Township of Severn of
the current year's expected capital contribution."
"The Township of Severn shall provide the Township of Oro-Medonte written notice of the current
year's capital contribution determined in Section 1."
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
,
1. THAT Report No. TR2006-02 be received and adopted.
2. THAT the Township of Severn be advised of the proposed amendments to the draft joint
municipal agreement pertaining to capital contributions to the Coldwater Community Center.
RespectfUlly submitted,
p~ J
.
Paul Gravelle
Treasurer
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
(11 ,~
\~~ ~
C.A.O. I) J
Vi II o~
I
~
Dept. Head
- 2-
'"'"
J
JOINT MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
The Corporation of the Township of Severn
("Severn")
- AND -
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
("Oro-Medonte")
WHEREAS the Corporation of the Township of Severn is the owner
of the Co1dwater & District Community Centre ("Centre");
AND WHEREAS the parties hereto are desirous of entering into an
Agreement to provide for the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte to
submit an annual contribution to the Corporation of the Township of Severn
for capital improvements to the Co1dwater & District Community Centre and
provide for the residents of Oro-Medonte to use the facility on the same terms
as the residents of Severn;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to provide for the appointment of
a representative of Oro-Medonte to participate on a Subcommittee of the
Township of Severn Recreation & Facilities Advisory Committee to recommend
capital improvements of the Centre to Severn Township Council;
NOW IN CONSIDERATION of the covenants and conditions and subject to the
terms and conditions of this Agreement, the parties agree as follows:
1. That Oro-Medonte shall submit a contribution towards anticipated
capital improvements to the Centre on or before July 31 st of the current
year, in accordance with the following calculation:
. Total amount of annual users expressed as _% from the prior
year X annual capital needs
~1~
"!"
2. That Severn shall annually contribute from tax revenues as required to
meet the annual capital improvements required.
3. That the residents of Oro-Medonte, in consideration of this Agreement,
shall have all the same rights and privileges to use the Centre as the
residents of Severn.
4. That a representative of Oro-Medonte shall be appointed for the term of
Council and invited to attend all Subcommittee Meetings of the
Recreation & Facilities Advisory Committee when consideration is being
given to the capital improvements for the Centre.
5. The representative of Oro-Medonte shall have the same rights, including
voting rights, as every other member of the Subcommittee at meetings
which the representative is requested to attend. Severn shall advise Oro-
Medonte, in advance, of all such meetings at which the representative is
entitled to attend and vote.
6. That members of the Subcommittee shall, as required, report to their
respective Councils.
7. The respective Councils of Severn and Oro-Medonte shall enact a By-law
authorizing the execution and adopting the provisions of this Agreement.
8. The execution of a By-law by either municipality shall not be construed
as the conveyance of any share of the assets or liabilities of the
Corporation of the Township of Severn.
9. This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the
parties and their successors and assigns for a period of two (2) years
from the date of execution ending the 31 st day of December, 2007. This
Agreement shall be reviewed prior to its expiration and may be renewed
upon the written agreement of both parties.
IN WITNESS HERETO the parties have affIxed their Corporate Seals under the
hands of their authorized signing offIcers.
CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SEVERN
MAYOR
CLERK -TREASURER
V2V
~, ."
.
CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-
MEDONTE
MAYOR
CLERK
~r
1
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
ADM2006-008 Committee of the Whole Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk
Subject: Department:
Council Ad Hoc Committee - Administration
Animal Control By-law
C.ofW. Date:
Januarv 25, 2006
Motion # R.M. File #:
Date: RolI#:
II BACKGROUND:
I)
A public meeting was held by the Township to solicit input from the public on amended regulations
with respect to licensing kennels. Comments and concerns of residents were received on all aspects
of the Township's By-law to "Regulate, License and Control Animals within the Township of Oro-
Medonte" (Attachment #1). To comply with legislation, an amended by-law was enacted by Council
prior to January 1, 2006. However Council further directed that an Ad Hoc Committee of Council be
formed to review the contents of the by-law in depth.
t ANALYSIS:
II
Consideration has been given to the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee and following is the
suggested composition, mandate and term of the Working Group. Because of the required
composition of a "committee" as defined in the Municipal Act, it is recommended that the name of this
body be "Ad Hoc Working Group - Animal Control By-law".
Mandate:
To review the regulations contained in the Township of Oro-Medonte
By-law to "Regulate, License and Control Animals within the Township
of Oro-Medonte" and provide recommendations to Council should
amendments be required.
Term:
The Ad Hoc Working Group - Animal Control By-law will provide any
recommendations to Council for amendments to the by-law by June 1,
2006.
Composition:
2 Members of Council
2 Kennel Owners resident within the Township of Oro-Medonte
2 Non-Kennel/Dog Owners resident within the Township of
Oro-Medonte
~
1 staff resource
A draft letter to residents (Attachment #2) and advertisement (Attachment 3) to be placed in the
newspaper inviting submissions for membership on the Working Group are attached for information.
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
~
1 . THAT Report No. ADM2006-008 be received and adopted.
2. THAT an Ad Hoc Working Group - Animal Control By-law be formed reflecting the composition of
2 members of Council, 2 kennel owners resident within the Township of Oro-Medonte, 2 non-
kennel/dog owners resident within the Township of Oro-Medonte and one staff resource person.
3. THAT this Ad Hoc Working Group - Animal Control By-law report any recommendations for
amendments to the Animal Control By-law to Council for consideration prior to June 1, 2006.
:;t~'; '~b:Qed' , ,~
I/~'-/~
Marilyn Pennycook
Clerk
C.A.O. Comments:
Date, (f-;)iJ lop
!
C.A.O.
~A-~
V
Dept. Head
- 2 -
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
BY-LAW NO. 2005-119
"Animal Control By-law"
A By-law to regulate, license and control animals
within the Township of Oro-Medonte
and to Repeal By-law No. 2002-076
WHEREAS the Livestock, Poultry and Honey Bee Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, L.24,
the Animals for Research Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.22. the Pounds Act, R.S.O. c. P.17, the
Dog Owners' Liability Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 0.16, the Health Protection and Promotion
Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.7, contain provisions enabling municipalities to pass By-laws;
AND WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S,O. 2001, c.25, as amended,
defines spheres of jurisdiction under which a municipality may pass by-laws;
AND WHEREAS the spheres of jurisdiction include animals;
AND WHEREAS Section 103 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended,
states that if a municipality passes a by-law regulating or prohibiting with respect to the
being at large or trespassing of animals, the municipality may specify procedures and
penalties;
AND WHEREAS Section 150 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended,
authorizes a municipality to license, regulate and govern any business carried on within
, the municipality for the purpose of Health and Safety;
ANDWHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
deems is advisabie to provide for the licensing. regulating and controlling of dogs and to
provide for the removal of dog excrement on public or private property within the
Township of Oro"Medonte;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
deems is advisable to regulate and license establishments for the breeding and/or
boarding of dogs, Within the corporate limits of the Township of Oro-Medonte;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
deems is advisable to provide for the regulating and prohibiting the keeping of pigeons
within the Township of Oro-Medonte;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
deems is advisable to exercise the authority to reguiate and prohibit the keeping of
animals;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte hereby enacts as
follows:
1.0 TiTLE:
This by-law may be referred to as "The Animai Control By-law".
2.0 DEFINITIONS:
2.1
"Animal" means any member of the animai kingdom of living beings,
excluding humans, without limitation. "Animal" shall include mammals,
birds and reptiles.
2.2
I
"Animal Control Officer" includes the persons or Association who has
entered into a Contract with The Corporation of the Township of Oro-
Medonte to control animals. This includes any employee appointed by the
Corporation.
2.3 "Boarding" shall mean the taking in of dogs for a period of time for capital
gains.
2.4 "Breeding" shall mean the generating of offspring resulting in pure-bred
dogs.
2.5 "Council" means the elected Council of The Corporation of the Township
of Oro-Medonte.
2.6 "Dog" shall mean a maie or female canine, over the age of twelve (12)
weeks.
2.7 "Dog Tag" means a marking device issued by The Corporation of the
Township of Oro-Medonte, or its authorized agent.
2.8 "Kennel" means any premises where dogs are boarded or are kept for the
purposes of breeding.
2.9 "License" shall mean a certificate issued by the Township of Oro-Medonte
upon compliance to this by-law permitting an owner to operate a Kennel.
2.10 "Livestock" means animals or poultry, designated as livestock and
includes cattle. fur-bearing animals, goats, horses, rabbits, sheep, swine,
fowl, ox.
2.11 "Municipality" means The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte.
2.12 "aNT. SPCA" shall mean the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty
to Animals or any local branch of the Ontario Humane Society.
2.13 "Owner" includes an assessed owner, tenant, occupant or any person
having an inlerest whether equitable or legal in the land.
2.14 "Planner" shall mean the official or employee of the Township charged
with the duty of administering the provisions of the Zoning By-laws.
2.15 "Police Officer" means a police officer as defined by the Police Services
Act.
2.16 "Prohibited animal" shall mean birds or reptiles.
2.17 "Pure-bred" shall mean any dog that is registered or eligible for registration
with an association incorporated under the Animal Pedigree Act (Canada).
2.18 "Township" shall mean The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte.
2.19 "Under Control" shall mean that when an animal is not on the property
where it is usually kept, the animal must be leased or chained, and must
be held securely by the person accompanying the animal and that person
must be physically able to control the animal.
3.0 APPENDICES:
3.1 Appendix A: Licensing, regulating and controlling dogs.
3.2 AppendiX B: Regulating and licensing of kennels for breeding and
boarding dogs.
3.3 Appendix C: Regulating and prohibiting the keeping of pigeons.
3.4 Appendix 0: Regulating and prohibiting the keeping of animals.
4.1 A: Licensing Fees
4.2 Schedule B: Applicalion for Kennel License
5.0 OFFENCES:
5.1 Every person who contravenes any Provision of this By-law is guilty of an
offence and shall be liable to a fine in the amount to be determined
pursuant to the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33, and every
such fine is recoverable under the Provincial Offences Act.
5.2 The conviction of an offender upon the breach of any provisions of this By-
law shall not operate as a bar to a prosecution against the same offender
upon any continued or subsequent breach of any provisions of the
Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, Section 442, as amended from time
to time, shall further apply to any continued or repeated breach of this By-
law.
5.3 If any court of competent jurisdiction finds that any of the provisions of this
By-law are ultra vires the jurisdiction of Council, or are invalid for a reason,
such provision shall be deemed to be severable and shall not invalidate
any of the other provisions of the By-law which shall remain in full force
and effect.
This By-law shall be enforced by the By-law Enforcement Department andlor its
Agents.
NOTE: Any person may appear before a Justice of the Peace and swear an
information charging the owner of an animal with a breach of this by-law.
6.0 REPEAL:
6.1 That By-law No. 2002-076 is hereby repealed in its entirety.
7.0 ENACTMENT:
7.1 That Appendices "A", "B", "C" and "D", and Schedules "A" and "B: attached
hereto shall form part of this By-law;
7.2 That this by-iaw shall expire 60 months after final passing.
7.3 This by-law shall take effect on the final passing thereof.
BY-LAW READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2005.
BY-LAW READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21ST DAY OF
DECEMBER, 2005.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
Appendix" An
( -
to By-law No. 2005-119 for
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
LICENSING, REGULATING AND CONTROLLING DOGS
1.0 Every owner of a dog or dogs shall, on or before the 1 'I day of March in each and
every year, or upon becoming the owner ot a dog or dogs, register such a dog
with The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte and procure a licensing
dog tag for each dog owned.
2.0 Every dog tag shall bear the serial number and the year in which it was issued
and a record shall be retained by the Township of Oro-Medonte, for the period of
time as specified in the Township's Records Retention By-law, showing the name
and address of the owner and the serial number of the tag.
3.0 The owner shall keep the dog tag securely fixed on the dog at all times and such
tag is non-transferable and shall expire and become void upon the sale, death or
other means of disposal or transfer of the dog so registered and licensed.
4.0 The fee charged for the replacement 01 a lost dog tag shall be as provided for in
Scheduie "A" of this by-law.
4.1 Every dog tag issued pursuant to this by-law shall expire on the last day of
February, following the year in respect of which it was issued and the
license fee paid to The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte at the
time of issuing of the dog tab shall be as provided for in Schedule "A" of
this by-law.
4.2 No person or persons shall keep a dog or dogs in a single dwelling unit
unless each dog has a dog tag issued pursuant to Appendix "A" of this by-
law.
4.3 No person shall, nor shall anyone household own. possess, or harbour, or
board, or license more than two (2) dogs unless the person or household
holds a valid kennel license issued pursuant to Appendix "B" of this by-
law.
5.0 No owner of a dog shall allow the dog to run at large within the limits of the
Municipality of the Township of Oro-Medonte.
5.1 For purposes of this section, a dog shall be deemed to be running at large
when found elsewhere other than on the property of the owner and not
under control of a competent and responsible person.
6.0 No owner of a dog shall allow the dog to howl or bark excessively or otherwise
become a nuisance.
7.0 SEIZURE AND IMPOUNDMENT
7.1 Subject to Section 5 of AppendiX "A" of this by-law, a Police Officer or an
Animal Control Officer may:
7.1.1 Seize and impound any dog found running at large; and
7.1.2 Restore possession of the dog to the owner thereof, where:
7.1.2.1 The owner claims possession of the dog within five (5) days
(exclusive of statutory holidays and Sundays) after the date of
seizure; and
7.1.2.2 The owner pays to the Police Officer or Animal Control Officer
a pound tee as provided for in Schedule "A" of this by-law for a
dog seized and impounded, plus any costs of the poundkeeper
chargeable to The Corporation of the Township of Oro-
Medonte. This fee shall increase as provided for in Schedule
"A" of this by-law, for each additional occurrence within a
calendar year.
7.1.2.3 No dog shall be returned to the owner unless it has been
licensed in accordance with the provisions of this by-law and
any purchaser of a dog without a dog tag shall obtain a dog tag
for the current year before delivery is made.
7.2 Where a dog is impounded. the owner, if know, and whether the dog is
claimed trom the pound or not, shall be liable for the pound and
maintenance fees granted by the ONT. SPCA, and shall pay all fees on
demand to the Animal Control Olticer.
7.3 Where, at the end of the said five (5) days, possession of the dog has not
been restored to the owner under Sub-section 7.1 of Appendix "A" of this
by-law, the Animal Control Olticer may sell the dog for such price as
he/she deems reasonable.
7.4 Where the owner of a dog has not claimed the dog within five (5) days
after its seizure under Sub-section 7.1 of Appendix "A" of this by-law, and
the dog has not been sold, the Animal Control Officer may kill the dog in a
humane manner or otherwise dispose of the dog as he/she sees fit and no
damages or compensation shall be recovered on account of its killing or
other disposition.
7.5 Where a dog seized under Sub-section 7.1 ot Appendix "A" of this by-law,
is injured or should be destroyed without delay for humane reasons of
safety to persons or animals, the Police Officer or Animal Control Officer
may kill the dog in a humane manner as soon after seizure as he/she sees
fit without permitting any person to reclaim the dog or without offering it for
sale and no damages or compensation shall be recovered on account of
its killing.
8.0 Every person who owns, controls or harbours a dog shall immediately remove
any excrement left by such dog on public or private lands within the Township of
Oro-Medonte. and shall dispose of such excrement in a sanitary manner.
9.0 Notwithstanding Section 5 of Appendix "A" of this by-law, proof that the owner is
either a blind person or an otherwise physically disabled person shall constitute a
defense to the prosecution of such an offence.
Appendix "B"
( -
to By-law No, 2005-119 for
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
REGULATING AND LICENSING OF KENNELS FOR BREEDING AND BOARDING
DOGS
1.0 KENNEL LICENSING
1.1 No person shall own, operate, manage, control, supervise, or have on any
property any kennel unless a license has been issued for such kennel by
the Township of Oro-Medonte.
1.2 Only the owner of the property upon which the kennel is proposed to be
located may apply for and receive a kennel license.
1.3 Every owner who applies for a license shall do so on the form prescribed
by this by-law as Schedule "B" of this by-law.
1.4 Every owner applying for a license for breeding purposes shall submit the
following documentation;
1.4.1 Copy of active membership in the Canadian Kennel Club or any
other Association incorporated under the Animal Pedigree Act
(Canada);
1.4.2 A written, up-to-date approval from the ONT. SPCA with any costs
involved borne by the applicant; to ensure compliance with this by-
law;
1.4.3 Verification of current rabies vaccination or written verification by a
veterinarian of satisfactory rabies protection for all dogs kept or to
be kept at the subject kennel for breeding purposes.
1.5 Every applicant for a kennel license for boarding purposes shall submit the
following documentation;
1.5.1 A written. up-to-date approval from the ONT. SPCA with any cost
involved borne by the applicant: to ensure compliance with this by-
law;
1.6 Every application for a license shall be approved by the Planner for the
Township, in accordance with the Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-
law and the Site Pian Control By-law.
1.7 All applications for a license and renewal of a license require an
inspection. by the Township of Oro-Medonte's By-law Enforcement
Department or designate, to ensure compliance with all applicable
legislative requirements.
1.8 Prior to the issuance of a license, the applicant shall pay a fee as provided
for in Scheduie "A" of this by-law.
1.9 No person shall be granted a license if such person has been convicted of
an offence pertaining to animal cruelty, under the Criminal Code of
Canada.
1.10 Any owner issued a license pursuant to this by-law shall apply to the
Township of Oro-Medonte to obtain approval for proposed changes to the
Information contained within Schedule "B" and Section 1.6 of Appendix "B"
of this by-law.
1.11 Every license issued pursuant to this by-law shall expire on the last day of
February in the year succeeding the date of issue, and every application
for renewal of a license shall be finalized on or before the same date.
'~
1.12 In the event that the owner fails to renew a license issued pursuant to this
by-law before the expiry date, the owner shall make application for a new
license.
1.13 A license issued pursuant to this by-law is non-transferrable.
2.0 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DOGS
2.1 The maximum number of dogs permitted in anyone kennel for which a
Breeding Kennel License has been issued shall not exceed 25 dogs.
2.2 The maximum number of dogs permitted in anyone kennel for which a
Boarding Kennel License has been issued shall not exceed 50 dogs.
2.3 The maximum number of dogs permitted in anyone kennel for which a
Breeding and Boarding Kennel License has been issued shall not exceed
50 dogs.
3.0 CONFINEMENT OF DOGS
3.1 All dogs shall be confined inside the kennel structure during Ihe hours of
11;00 p.m. to 7;00 a.m.
4.0 REVOCATION OF LICENSE
4.1 Any kennei license application which fails to meet the minimum
requirements prescribed herein. shall be refused for reasons of non-
compliance with the provisions of this by-law. In the event that a license is
refused, the owner has the right to a hearing under the Statutory Powers
Procedures Act, R.8.0. 1990, c. 8.22, as amended.
4.2 Any license issued under the provisions of this by-law may be revoked
prior to expiration for any breach of the proviSions of this by. law, in which
case the owner shall have the right to a hearing under the Statutory
Powers Procedures Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22, as amended.
Appendix "e"
c
I
,
to By-law No. 2005-119 for
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
REGULATING AND PROHIBITING THE KEEPING OF PIGEONS
1.0 No personal shall keep or have any pigeons or racing pigeons unless such use
conforms with the zoning regulations and subject to Appendix "CO of this by-law.
2.0 Persons may be permitted to keep or have registered racing pigeons, subject to
the following conditions:
2.1 The owner shall be a member of a pigeon racing club within the Canadian
Racing Pigeon Union.
2.2 An owner must be a member in good standing of a pigeon racing club.
2.3 Racing pigeons shall have a seamless identity band registered to each
owner.
2.4 Racing pigeons must always be under control and never permitted to be a
nuisance. Flight times will be supervised.
2.5 The loft to be deemed an accessory building of standard construction, and
will require a building permit pursuant to zoning regulations to erect the
loft.
2.6 The loft position should reasonably be set on the property with due regard
to distances from dwellings.
2.7 The loft must be neat, attractive, painted inside and outside, and well
maintained hygienically.
2.8 The owner shall restrict the number of pigeons in their possession to forty
(40) or fewer provided however that during the months of April to October,
this number may be increased to provide for the raising and racing of
young pigeons hatched that year.
2.9 The racing pigeons shall be contained in the loft subject to Appendix "CO of
this by-law.
2.10 Food provided for racing pigeons shall be contained within the loft.
2.11 The club to which an owner belongs may be notified about any complaints
so that steps may be taken to rectify a legitimate problem. If the owner is
in conflict with the by-law provisions, failure to comply will deny him the
racing pigeon exemption.
3.0 INSPECTIONS:
3.1 An Animal Control Officer under this by-law:
3.1.1 Has the power to enter upon and examine any yards, vacant lots,
grounds or buildings, other than a dwelling, at any reasonable time
or times; and
3.1.2 May be accompanied by such other person or persons as they
deem necessary to properly carry out their duties under this by-law.
4.0 REMOVAL OF ANIMALS:
4.1 The Animal Control Officer and/or his/her Agents shall be authorized to
seize any animals of an owner who has contravened the provisions of this
by-law and refuses to remove the animals. Any costs or charges
associated with the seizure of such animals shall be charged against the
owner of the animals.
Appendix "0"
\
,
to By-law No. 2005-119 for
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
REGULATING AND CONTROLLING ANIMALS
1.0 No person shall keep, possess or harbour a Prohibited Animal, on any land
within Ihe Township of Ora-Medonte.
2.0 Notwithstanding Section 1, the prohibition shall not apply to:
2.1 A veterinary hospital;
2.2 An ONT. SPCA shelter or the animal contra I pound which complies with
the Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law;
2.3 Any animal being displayed or exhibited for a set period of time in a
municipally sanctioned event. which is operated in accordance with
Township of Ora-Medonte conditions;
2.4 A bona fide farming operation for the keeping of any cattle, horse, goat,
sheep, swine or chickens as permitted under the Township of Oro-
Medonte Zoning By-law.
Schedule U An
to By-law No. 2005-119 for
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
DOG LICENSING FEES
For one dog (male or female)
For one dog spayed or neutered
- Replacement dog tag
IMPOUNDMENT FEES
Pound Fee
Pound Fee increase for each additional OCCurrence
within a calendar year
$ 20.00
$15.00
$ 2.00
$ 50.00
Multiples of $ 50.00
KENNEL LfCENSING FEES
New License
Breeding Kennel License
Boarding Kennel License
Both Breeding and Boarding License
Renewal of License
Breeding Kennel License
Boarding Kennel License
. Both Breeding and Boarding License
$ 125.00
$ 125.00
$ 125.00
$ 80.00
$ 80.00
$ 80.00
Schedule "B" to By-law No. 2005.119
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
APPLICATION fOR KENNEL LICENSE
This application is a:
New Application 0
Renewal
o
Type of License:
Pure~bred Breeding 0
Boarding
o
Breeding and Boarding
o
Name of Kennel:
Owner:
Mailing Address:
Postal Code:
Telephone Numbers
Home:
Business:
(If more than one Registered Owner with different address, attach a separate sheet)
Legal Description of Property on which Kennel is to be operated:
Roll Number:
4346-
lot:
Concession:
Plan:
Municipal Address:
Kennel will be operated by:
o Same as registered owner; or
Name:
Address:
Postal Code:
Telephone Numbers
Home:
Business:
If Owner is a Corporation:
Name of all Shareholders
Address
% of Shares
Professional Affiliation of Owner (or Operator)
Canadian Kennel Club
Yes 0
No 0
C.K.C. No.:
Other (specify)
Personal infonnalion contained on this form is collected pursuant to The Municipal Freedom of Information and
Protection 0' Privacy Act, and will be used for the purpose of the issuance of a kennel license. Questions about this
collection should be directed to the Freedom of Information Coordinator, The Corporation of the Township of Orc.
Medonte, 148 Line 7 South Box 100, Ora, Ontario LOL 2XO
Schedule "B" to By-law No. 2005-119
DECLARATION
. \IJ,
. I
I (we) hereby certify that I (we) have knowledge of the particulars contained in the foregoing
statement, and I (we) solemnly affirm that the same are in every respect fully and truly stated to
the best of my (our) knowledge and belief, as if made under and by virtue of the Canada
Evidence Act and I (we) solemnly affirm that I (we) have not been convicted under the Criminal
Code of Canada pertaining to animal cruelty.
Dated this the
day of
,20_
Applicant
Applicant
Boarding Kennel Applicants Only:
I, , hereby certify on behan of
, a boarding kennel establishment,
that dogs kept on our premises and under our watch and care, are not being offered for sale.
Date
Signature
NOTE: Council has the right to refuse any kennel application.
Bywlaw Enforcement Department Inspection/Comments:
Date
Signature
Comments:
Planning Department Comments:
Date
Signature
Comments:
ONT. SPCA:
Inspection Received
Yes 0
No 0
Date Received
Personal information contained on this form is collected pursuant to The Municipal Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act, and will be used for the purpose of the issuance of a kennel license. Questions about this
collection should be directed to the Freedom 01 Information Coordinator, The Corporation of the Township of Oro-
Medonte, 148 Une 7 South Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
\
~
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
BY-LAW NO. 2006-003
A By-law to amend By-law No. 2005-119 (A By-law to regulate, license and control
animals within the Township of Oro-Medonte)
WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended,
defines spheres of jurisdiction under which a municipality may pass by-laws;
AND WHEREAS the spheres of jurisdiction include animals;
AND WHEREAS Council did on December 21, 2005, enact By-law 2005-119 to
regulate, license and conlrol animals within the Township of Oro-Medonte;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte hereby enacts as
follows:
1. That the Dog Licensing Fees as identified in Schedule "A" to By-law No.
2005-119 be deleted in its entirety and that the following be substituted therefore:
DOG LICENSING FEES
For one dog (male or female)
$ 25.00
.
For one dog spayed or neutered
$ 20.00
Replacement dog tag
$ 2.00
2. This by-law shall come into force and take effect on March 1, 2006.
BY-LAW READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2006.
BY-LAW READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 18TH DAY OF
JANUARY, 2006.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
Mayor, J. Neil
Clerk, Marilyn Pennycook
- \(0
January 19, 2006
Dear Resident:
Firstly, thank you for your participation in the public meeting, or alternatively
submitting your comments, with respect to the Township's animal control by-law
review. It became apparent during the review of the by-law that there was a
wealth of knowledge in the community regarding matters regulated by the by-law.
With this incentive, Council has determined that an Ad Hoc Working Group be
set up to further discuss these regulations. As well as this letter, an
advertisement is to be placed in the local newspapers inviting participation.
For reasons of practicality, the composition of the Ad Hoc Working Group has
been established at six; two Council members, two kennel owners, and two non-
kennel/dog owners. A staff person will also be assigned for liaison purposes.
The mandate of the Committee will be to further review the Animal Control By-
law, gather information and, if warranted, ultimately provide recommendations to
Council to amendment the by-law.
If you have an interest in participating as a member of this Ad Hoc Working
Group, please contact the Clerk in writing, stating your name, address, telephone
number, and the reason you wish to be considered as a member. You may mail,
e-mail (clerk@ oro-medonte.ca), or fax (705-487-0133) your letter. Please note
that the deadline for submissions is February 10, 2006.
Thank you for your interest.
Jennifer Zieleniewski
Chief Administrative Officer
c.c. Mayor and Members of Council
\
!
- \
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
AD HOC WORKING GROUP
ANIMAL CONTROL BY-LAW
Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte will establish an Ad Hoc Working Group
to review the regulations of the municipality's By-law to Regulate and Control
Animals. The composition of the Ad Hoc Working Group has been established at
six; two Council members, two kennel owners, and two non-kennel/dog owners.
A staff person will also be assigned for liaison purposes. The mandate of the
Committee will be to further review the Animal Control By-law, gather information
and, if warranted, ultimately provide recommendations to Council to amendment
the by-law.
If you have an interest In participating as a member of this Ad Hoc Working
Group, please contact the Clerk in writing, stating your name, address, telephone
number, and the reason you wish to be considered as a member. You may mail,
e-mail (clerk@ oro-medonte.ca), or fax (70S-487-0133) your letter. Please note
that the deadline for submissions is February 10, 2006.
Marilyn Pennycook
Clerk
'.l
\y~ - \
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Committee of the Whole Prepared By:
ADM2006-009 Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO
Subject: Department:
Council Ad Hoc Committee - Administration
Medical Services
C.ofW. Date:
January 25, 2006
Motion # R.M. File #:
Date: RolI#:
~ BACKGROUND:
II
As a result of the survey conducted of residents in the Township and submissions by members of the
public with respect to medical services within the Township of Oro-Medonte, Council directed at its
meeting of January 11, 2006 that an Ad Hoc Committee of Council be formed to investigate the
feasibility of providing incentives to qualified physicians for the provision of medical services for the
residents of the Township.
II ANALYSIS:
II
Consideration has been given to the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee and following is the
suggested composition, mandate and term of such a committee. Because of the required
composition of a "committee" as defined in the Municipal Act, it is recommended that the name of this
body be "Ad Hoc Working Group - Medical Services".
Mandate:
To investigate the feasibility of providing incentives to qualified
physicians for the provision of medical services for the residents of the
Township and make recommendations to Council.
Term:
The Ad Hoc Working Group - Medical Services will provide any
recommendations for consideration to Council with respect to
incentives by July 1, 2006.
Composition: 2Members of Council
1 representative of the Barrie Physician Recruitment Committee
1 representative of the Orillia Physician Recruitment Committee
1 resident from each Ward of the Township
1 staff resource
An advertisement will be placed in the 3 newspapers circulated within the Township to invite
submissions for the resident members of the Working Group.
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
II
1. THAT Report No. ADM2006-009 be received and adopted.
2. THAT an Ad Hoc Working Group - Medical Services reflecting the composition of 2 members
of Council, 1 representative of the Barrie Physician Recruitment Committee, 1 representative
of the Orillia Physician Recruitment Committee, 1 resident from each Ward of the Township
and one staff resource person.
3. THAT this Ad Hoc Working Group - Medical Services report any recommendations to Council
for consideration prior to July 1, 2006.
Respectfully submitted,
/\J
l;~
J@Jjnifer Zielenie~
Chief Administrative Officer
- 2 -
'1
(j
ITEM FOR:
SECTION:
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE:
SUBJECT:
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
~e ',-I
~:4-, ~&
~i~~
CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE
Planning Delegated Authority
CS 06-018
January 11,2005
Oro-Medonte OPA 16 & 170MB Hearing (Phase 1)
Proposed Settlement
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the policy changes outlined in Schedule I of CS 06-018 concerning a proposed settlement
of the Ontario Municipal Board hearing related to Oro-Medonte Official Plan Amendments 16 &
17 be supported;
AND THAT the Clerk provide a Notice to the Ontario Municipal Board in support of the
settlement referencing OMB Case Number PL040812.
BACKGROUND:
In November 2004, Corporate Services Committee (CSC) approved modified Amendments 16
and 17 to the Official Plan of the Township of Oro- Medonte. These amendments proposed
housekeeping changes as well as policies that more specifically address land use planning for the
Oro Moraine and Aggregate Resources. Following the Corporate Services Committee's
approval, several appeals were received. The Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) divided the
hearing into 3 phases, with each phase pertaining to separate, specific issues. Phase 1 deals with
policies as they relate to the Oro Moraine and Aggregate resources. The parties are: Aggregate
Producers Association of Ontario (AP AO), Lafarge Canada, the Township of Oro-Medonte, and
the County of Simcoe
Issues Summary
Phase 1 ofthe hearing is underway. All parties involved have worked diligently in an effort to
resolve the outstanding issues. On November 29, 2005, the advisors for all parties agreed, in
principle, on a set of modifications to OPA 16 and 17. With the support of the Township and the
County for these mutually acceptable modifications, the Aggregate Producers Association of
Ontario and Lafarge will withdraw their appeals to OPA 16 & 17.
A major point of contention was that Official Plan Amendment 16 originally included a statement
indicating that applications to amend the Township Official Plan that were within the natural core
area would not be considered by Council. As a result of the negotiations, all have agreed that
OP A 16 will be modified to consider applications that extend into the natural core area for the
purposes of a new or expanded aggregate pit, subject to certain circumstances and conditions.
Extensions into the natural core area can only occur if the natural environment will be enhanced
in both the short and long terms. This concept of net environmental gain is a key element of the
January 11,2006
Corporate Services CS 06-018
Page 2
settlement and is provided fori1lSection 3.7.11 of the Simcoe County Official Plan (SCOP).
The proposed settlement also includes minor changes to clarify wording and/or the intent of the
various policies. Due to the volume of minor wording changes, Schedule 1 outlines only the
major changes proposed in the settlement to provide an indication of the policy direction of the
settlement.
The proposed settlement and modifications remain consistent with the Provincial Policy
Statement, conform with the County of Simcoe Official Plan, and address County interests.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:
There will be a reduction in legal fees associated with the appeals.
SCHEDULES:
The following schedules are attached hereto and form part ofthis Item:
Schedule 1 - Details of the Settlement
rri1.
I!fif
Schedule 1 to
CS06-018
PREPARED BY: Nathan Westendorp
APPROVALS:
R. Newlove, General Manager of Corporate Services
M. Aitken, Chief Administrative Officer
Date
December 28, 2005
December 29, 2005
Page 1
Phase 1
There were a number of minor changes made to the document to clarify wording and to ensure
that the intent oft~e Municipality was .as clear as possible and which give effect to the
settlement. Below is a description of some of the changes as presented to, and subsequently
supported by, the Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte:
1. The determination of what "environment first" means has been articulated within Section
A 1 (The Community Vision) of the Official Plan. Within the adopted and approved version
of OPA 16, it was indicated in Section A1 that the 'environment first' philosophy "means
that the protection of the environment shall take precedence over development." This
sentence has been eliminated and replaced with the following:
'The environment first philosophy is a land use planning philosophy that is
to be considered in making all planning decisions whereby the importance
of maintaining, restoring and where possible enhancing or improving natural
features and ecological functions is recognized and promoted as a
Township priority to be considered with other interests in accordance with
Provincial Policy and legislation."
The intent of the above change is to ensure that the Official Plan applies an appropriate
balance to the consideration to all planning applications under the Planning Act.
2. A new strategic objective has been added to Section A2.1 (Natural Heritage). This new
objective is as follows:
'To maintain, restore and where possible, enhance or improve the diversity
and connectivity of natural features and ecological functions recognizing
linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface
water features and groundwater features".
The above addition accurately reflects the intent of the Municipality as articulated within
OPA 16.
3. A new objective has been added to Section A2.3 (Mineral Aggregate Resources) which
indicates the following:
'To encourage the development of aggregate resource extraction
operations in appropriate areas."
The intent of the above objective is to ensure that new operations are directed to areas
which are not significant from a natural heritage perspective.
4. Section A2.3 (Mineral Aggregate Resources) has been slightly modified to ensure that
\.y t -l.\
.
.
Schedule 1
Corporate Services Committee CS 06-018
Page 2
new extraction operations minimize impacts instead of having minimal impacts on the
environment. The term "minimize" is a word used in the Provincial Policy Statement.
5. A new objective has been added to Section B1 (Oro Moraine Planning Area):
'To minimize the negative impact on the proposed development on the open
and natural character of the Oro Moraine Planning Area. n
6. Section B1.7 (Environmental Impact Studies) has been modified to indicate that
Environmental Impact Studies will not be approved by Council. Instead, the policy states
that:
'~n EIS must be considered by Council in consultation with other
appropriate agencies. "
The intent of the change is to clarify the process under which applications are approved.
At the present time, Council does not approve an EIS, it considers the approval or non-
approval of a planning application instead.
7. Section B1.10.1.4 (Development Policies) has been modified to indicate that amendments
to the Official Plan will not be permitted in the Core area, except to permit necessary
conservation or enhancement initiatives. A "notwithstanding" has been added to this
section, which permits the consideration of new or expanded extraction operations in
accordance with the Mineral Aggregate Resource policies of the Official Plan.
8. Section B5.1.1.2 (Contents of an EIS) has been modified to require the preparation of an
updated wetland evaluation in accordance with the Ministry of Natural Resources
classification system, if development is proposed in the vicinity of or within a non-
Provincially significant wetland.
9. Section C12.1 (Objectives - Mineral Aggregate Resources) has been modified by adding
a new objective as follows:
"Ensure that the aggregate extraction operations are designed to minimize
visual impacts and impacts on the open natural character of the rural area."
This addition was made to ensure that, through the preparation of visual impact studies,
extraction operations are appropriately designed.
1. Section C12.4.2 (Development Adjacent to Lands in Mineral Aggregate Resources
Designation) were significantly modified to ensure that new development requiring
Planning Act approval within 300 metres of the Mineral Aggregate Resources designation
are properly reviewed, to ensure that the new use does not have an impact on existing or
proposed operations on lands within the Mineral Aggregate Resources designation.
2. A new Section C12.4.3.2 (Special Policies for lands within the Core Area) has been
added to the Official Plan. This section indicates that an application to establish a new or
be met:
the Core
A-2 may
a) The areaproposedtobeextracted is not the siteofa Provincially significant
wetland, a Provincially significant ANSI or significant portions of habitat of
threatened or endangered species;
b) Aportioll of the prope:rlytobe licensed is contiguous to or across a
T@wnship municipal road or road allowance from lands designated Mineral
Aggregate Resources (Licensed), lands designated Mineral Aggregate
Rf'}sources. (Potential) or .Iands designated other than 'Core' area on
Schedule A-2, as amended from time to time;
c) The site plans prepared under the Aggregate Resources Act demonstrate
that tIle proposed extraction will be appropriately phased and, where only
part of the property to be licensed is in the 'Core' area and it is reasonably
possible to do so, the lands in the 'Core' area shall be extracted in the last
phase;
d) The lands to be extracted that are within the 'Core' area are to be
progressively rehabilitated in a phased manner as soon as possible after
extraction in the 'Core' area ceases as set out in an appropriate
rehabilitation plan;
e) The site plans prepared under the Aggregate Resources Act identify those
area of the site not to be extracted and further, that provision be made on
the site plans that those portions of the non extraction areas not required for
berming or operational reasons, be subject to natural heritage enhancement
measures complementary to the surrounding natural features and related
ecological functions for which the Core area has been identified. Such
enhancement shall be initiated prior to, or in conjunction with, preparing the
initial phase of the site for excavation;
f) The rehabilitation plan prepared under the Aggregate Resources Act
requires use of native species and vegetation which are naturally self
sustaining that will enhance and support the ecological function of the
surrounding 'Core' area;
g) The application to extract in the 'Core' area shall result in net environmental
gain on lands within the Oro Moraine Planning Area, as set out in Section
C12.4.9;
h) Where an aggregate extraction operation has been approved based on a
net environmental gain as set out in subsection g) above, subsequent
applications for new or expanded aggrega.te operations in the same vicinity
may build upon existing approved environmental gain measures in the
context of the 'Core' area;
i) The proposed aggregate extraction operation will not have a negative
impact on the natural heritage features and related ecological functions,
taking into account the rehabilitation plans and the net environmental gain
1
\s, '" -
,
".
Schedule 1
Corporate Services Committee CS 06-018
Page 4
as set out in Section C12.4.9;
j) The application shall include an assessment by a qualified professional of
the quality and quantity of the aggregate on the site; and,
k) All other applicable requirements of this Plan, that are not inconsistent with
the foregoing, have been met.
3. A new Section C12.4.3.5 (Special Policy for the Environmental Protection One
designation) has been added to the Plan. This section makes it very clear that new or
expanded aggregate operations are not permitted in Provincially significant wetlands,
Provincially significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest or significant portions of
habitat of endangered or threatened species. According to the Provincial Policy
Statement, new development is permitted within wetlands that are not considered to be
Provincially significant. On this basis, this new section has been added to provide the
basis for consideration of aggregate extraction operations within the Environmental
Protection One designation (this only applies to lands not located on the Oro Moraine).
This section requires that rehabilitation of any pit within such an area will result in
enhanced natural heritage features and ecological functions when compared to the pre-
extraction state or measures to compensate for the loss of the wetland feature.
4. Section C12.4.3.6 (Application requirements) has been significantly modified, as it relates
to new aggregate extraction operations. These changes are below:
. The adopted and approved OPA 16 indicated that all studies prepared in support
of an application will be based on Provincial standards, regulations and guidelines
where applicable and appropriate. Both APAO and Lafarge had some concerns
about this wording since it implies that Provincial standards, regulations and
guidelines could be ignored in the consideration of an application. In order to deal
with this issue, the words "where applicable and appropriate" have been deleted
and replaced with "where they exist".
. With respect to haul routes, there is a new policy that requires proponents to
demonstrate that a new haul route is, or can be made, safe and capable of
handling the volume of traffic proposed.
. Another new policy relating to haul routes is the requirements that any proponents
demonstrate that the selection and design of the proposed haul route has taken
into consideration and addressed the impacts on existing and permitted sensitive
land uses along the proposed haul route. There was a considerable amount of
discussion regarding this policy, since it replaces a policy that said "has considered
existing permitted and proposed land use and land use activities along the
proposed haul route and has demonstrated that these uses will not be significantly
affected." Given that there are no Provincial standards, guidelines or regulations
on haul routes, a concern was expressed as to how "significantly affected" would
be measured. The revised wording goes part way to addressing this concern of
the municipality and ensures that all impacts have to be taken into consideration
and addressed before Council can be satisfied that a proposed haul route is
Schedule 1
Corporate Services Committee CS 06-018
t'-;
Page 5
suitable for a use as a haul route.
. A new policy regarding the assessment of visual impacts has been added, with this
policy requiring the preparation of a visual impact study that considers potential
visual impacts from adjacent roads and from those policies that may be potentially
effected.
5. Section C12.4.3.7 (Assessment of Impacts) includes a policy that deals with how the no
negative impact test will be dealt with. The new policy is below:
Where a policy in this Plan requires that there be no negative impact on a
natural heritage feature or related ecological function, the assessment of
negative impact shall consider the proposed progressive and final
rehabilitation of the site and, if applicable, any compensation and or
enhancement recommended in the EIS.
6. Section C12.4.5 (the Creation of new Lots for Private Haul Routes) was discussed during
the settlement negotiations. It was expressed that the Township has some concerns
about the policy, since it would provide for the creation of new lots and not provide for the
establishment of easements instead. As a result a number of changes are being
recommended to this policy to indicate that it is the Township's preference that
easements for private haul routes be considered first, before new lots for private haul
routes are considered. An easement is much more preferable than a new lot since
easements can be cancelled, whereas a new lot exists in perpetuity, unless it is added to
an adjacent parcel of land.
7. A new Section C12.4.9 (Net Environmental Gain) has been added to the Plan. There are
three pages of new policy in this section with intent to establish the basis under which
applications which require the demonstration of net environmental gain are to be
considered. (Please refer to pages 6 through 8 of this Schedule 1)
8. The definition of negative impact has been deleted from the Plan. The adopted and
approved version of OPA 16 defined negative impact as "Means any negative change to
the ecological integrity of a natural heritage feature and its associated ecological
functions." After a considerable amount of discussion, it was agreed that the definition of
negative impact as set out in the Provincial Policy Statement would be appropriate.
However, given that the definition of negative impact in the 2005 PPS is different than the
1997 PPS (and is far superior) it was the Township's position that the 2005 definition
should be used instead. Both APAO and Lafarge disagreed. In the spirit of compromise,
it was agreed that there would be no definition included within the OPA 16 document,
recognizing that any application submitted to the municipality subsequent to the release
of the 2005 PPS would be subject to the definition of negative impact in the 2005 PPS.
.
loi:.:i
,
Schedule 1
Corporate Services Committee CS 06-018
Page 6
Net Environmental Gain Policies
C12.4.9 Net Environmental Gain
C12.4.9.1
Introduction
Where this Plan requires that net environmental gain be achieved, it must be
demonstrated through an EIS that the ecological functions of lands within the
natural heritage system on the Oro Moraine will be enhanced in both the short term
(less than 10 years) and the longer term as a result of the approval of an
application to establish a new or expanded mineral aggregate extraction operation,
in accordance with the policies of this Section. Any requirement to demonstrate net
environmental gain shall only apply to those portions of a site designated 'Core'
where the site has more than one land use designation.
C12.4.9.2 Area Under Extraction
The replacement, without any enhancement, of the natural heritage features and
related ecological functions within any 'Core' area proposed for extraction would
not by itself demonstrate net environmental gain,
If the natural heritage features and related ecological functions within the area
proposed for extraction and formerly within the 'Core' area are enhanced as part of
the rehabilitation process, then the long term net environmental gain policy in this
Section would be met.
Lands that are proposed for extraction, but which are outside of the 'Core' area,
may fulfill the long term component of net environmental gain, if they are planned
to be enhanced as part of the rehabilitation plan.
Lands that are proposed for extraction, but which are outside of the 'Core' area,
may, through progressive rehabilitation, contribute to the short term component of
net environmental gain.
C12.4.9.3 Long Term Enhancements
Long term enhancements may include:
a) The enhancement of lands that are not within the 'Corridor' or
'Enhancement' areas in a manner that would support their inclusion into a
'Core' area, 'Corridor' area or 'Enhancement' area.
b) The enhancement of existing 'Corridor' areas in a manner that would
support their inclusion into the 'Core' area.
.
Schedule 1
Corporate Services Committee CS 06-018
lDe-1
Page 7
,.
c) The enhancement of the natural heritage features and related ecological
functions within the area under extraction and formerly within the 'Core'
area, after extraction ceases.
d) The enhancement of existing 'Enhancement' areas in a manner that would
support their inclusion into the 'Core' or 'Corridor' area.
While the above listed enhancements are listed in order of preference of the
Township, this order shall not be interpreted as mandatory.
C12.4.9.4 Short Term Enhancements
Short term enhancements may include:
a) The enhancement of lands within the 'Core' area.
b) The enhancement of existing 'Corridor' areas in a manner that enhances
their function as linkages.
c) The enhancement of lands that are not within the 'Corridor' or
'Enhancement' areas in a manner that would support their inclusion into a
'Corridor' area.
d) The enhancement of lands in a manner that would support their
establishment as new 'Corridor' areas between 'Outlier' areas shown on
Schedule A-2 and the 'Core' area.
e) The enhancement of existing 'Enhancement' areas in a manner that would
support their inclusion into a 'Corridor' area.
f) The enhancement of lands in a manner that would support their
establishment as new 'Enhancement' areas.
While the above listed enhancements are listed in order of preference of the
Township, this order shall not be interpreted as mandatory.
While short term enhancements shall be initiated as soon as reasonably possible
after the commencement of excavation, it is acknowledged that the full benefits of
the enhancements will be over the longer term.
C12.4.9.5 Off-Site Enhancements
a) Short and long term enhancements may be achieved on the lands that are
under application. However, it may be necessary for short term
enhancements to occur on lands that are not subject to the application, if
the majority of the lands under application are to be extracted and as a
.
~~ ~ \0
y
Schedule 1
Corporate Services Committee CS 06-018
Page 8
result, limited opportunities for short term enhancement are available. In
addition, the EIS shall consider the function of the 'Core' area that will be
extracted in identifying the extent of short term enhancements that should
be proposed. As a general principle, the higher the function of the Core
area, the more short term enhancement will be required.
b) Off-site candidate sites for enhancement, if necessary, shall be proposed by
the applicant, after consultation with the Township. These sites may include
other lands owned or controlled by the applicant, lands owned by the
Province, County, Conservation Authority or Township or other private
lands. Other private lands may also be considered, subject to an
appropriate agreement to achieve the enhancements. Candidate sites may
be identified by the Township in advance, in consultation with the
Conservation Authorities and others, as required.
c) Off-site areas may be re-designated to an appropriate designation at the
same time as lands within the 'Core' area are being re-designated for
extraction purposes.
C12.4.9.6 Nature of Enhancements
For the purposes of this section, enhancements may include:
a) increases in the spatial extent of the Core, Corridor, or Enhancement areas;
b) increases in biological and habitat diversity;
c) enhancement of ecological system function;
d) enhancement of wildlife habitat;
e) enhancement of natural succession;
f) creation of wetlands, water systems or woodlands;
g) enhancement of riparian corridors;
h) enhancement of groundwater recharge or discharge areas; and,
i) establishment or enhancement of linkages between significant natural
heritage features or areas.
~\
,
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: COMMITTEE OF THE Prepared By:
WHOLE
PW2006-02 Jerry Ball
Subject: Department:
Council
Request for Speed Reduction Public Works
C.ofW. - Line 4 North between Date:
County Road #19 and Mount January 18, 2006
Motion # St. Louis Road R.M. File #:
T08-25505
Date: RolI#:
II BACKGROUND:
II
Correspondence (attached) was received from local residents on Line 4 North, requesting that the
existing speed limit of 80 km/h be reduced to 60 km/h along their road. This section of Line 4 North
is a surface treated road running from County Road #19 to the Mount Sl. Louis Road, and has an
MDT count of 225 vehicles per day. There are 30 homes located within the 3.1 km. stretch, along
with one intersection that provides access to Amantacha Court. This portion of Line 4 North has a
rolling terrain, which creates four horizontal curves and restricts sight distance at approximately 50%
of the local driveways.
II ANALYSIS:
I
Upon completing a site inspection of Line 4 North and applying the guidelines from our Roadway
Service Standards for reducing speed limits, it is recommended that the existing speed limit of 80
km/h be reduced to 60 km/h. This recommendation is based on the fact that the safe sight stopping
distance can be achieved in a 60km/h zone and not within an 80 km/h zone. Also, with the horizontal
curves and the number of residents within this section of road, a 60 km/h zone will increase safety for
vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
II
1. THAT Report No. PW2006-02 be received and adopted.
2. THAT the speed limit on Line 4 North, from County Road #19 to the Mount St. Louis Road, be
reduced to 60 km/h.
3. THAT the Clerk brings forward the appropriate By-law.
4. THAT the Public Works Department installs the necessary signage.
5. AND THAT the Public Works Superintendent advises the local residents of Line 4 North and the
O.P.P. accordingly.
Respectfully submitted,
~
Jerry Ball
Public Works Superintendent
ar~
It ID~
1/)/ {
,
/J.
II
- 2-
.
From:
Sent:
To:
Tom Kuilder
Friday, Seplember 23,20058:39 AM
Marilyn Pennycook; clerk@oromedonle.ca
To The Mayor and Council of Oro-Medonte,
I am writing in regard to the speed limit on Line 4 North between County Road 19
(Moonstone Road) and Mt. St. Louis Road. This is a school bus route with many children
living in. a concentrated area in the north 2 km of this section of Line 4 North. It is my
opinion that the speed limit of 80 km/h is too high for this section. The line of sight
available to a driver, particularly when driving northbound, is inadequate to avoid a
pedestrian when travelling at the current speed limit due to the hilly terrain. There is
an unnecessary risk to pedestrians and vehicles as one is unable to see northbound
vehicles when exitting the driveway. This risk could be minimized if the traffic in the
area was limited to a lower speed.
Sincerely,
Tom Kuilder
5342 Line 4 North
705-835-7606
ORO.MEDONTElOW
MOTION# (,.
SEP 2 8 2005
MEETING: COUNCILD
C. OF W.
J
c . ~ \')
RECEIVED
SfP 2 9 1005
ORO-MEDONTE
TOWNSHIP
September 26, 2005
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Box 100
Oro, ON LOL 2XO
Attention:
Marilyn Pennycook
Township CIeri<
Council Members and Clerk Pennycook:
I live at 5330 Line 4 North, along the strip of the 4th Line between Moonstone and Mt St Louis Roads. My
residence is close to Moonstone Road.
Vehicle and pedestrian traffic along this stretch of the 4th Line have increased measmably in the four years
that I've lived here - pedestrians of all generations out enjoying our lovely area and often pushing a baby
carriage, school-aged children getting on and off their school bus, bicyclists of all ages, runners, and more.
This, in combination with a narrow road, the many blind spots on the road due to the rolling hills, and
vehicles mming at speeds of 80 kpm and frequently greater, is causing great concern in our neighbourhood
that there is going to be a vehicle accident involving pedestrian traffic. One which would be preventable if
the vehicle were moving at a slower speed and therefore had greater opportunity to see pedestrian traffic.
I therefore respectfully request that Council consider reducing the speed limit for vehicles on this stretch of
the 4'" Line to 60 kilometers per hour.
Thank you for your attention to this matter,
Yoprs truly,
.r~ -T'v..
Kim Tyler U/\ .
5330 Line 4 North
RR#I
Hillsdale, ON LOL I VO
705-835"()276
-5
. .
Marilyn pennycook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
mike cox
Tuesday, October 04, 2005 7:27 PM
Marilyn pennycook
Safety 4 th Concession
October 4 / 05
To; Mayor and Members of Oro- Medonte Twp. Council, c/o Ms. Marilyn Pennycook Twp.
Clerk
near Mayor and Members ;
We would like to add our voi~es to those Township, residents who are currently asking
your consideration to have the speed limit reduced on the-Fourth Concession., between the
Mount, St Louis Rd and' Simcoe County Rd # 19 '
OUr request , is based on both safety and quality of life concerns . This section of the
Fourth concession has , over. the past ten years , experienced significant residential
development . The result has been , a comparatively high residential density for what has
historically been considered' a rural area . ~his section of roadway is, frequently a place
where small groupS of children ,( boarding and alighting from school buses) and adult
pedestrians walk , and to some extent socialize .
understandably , the township should not be expected to install sidewalks .
It is reasonable however ,to ask our elected representatives to recognize , and manage
the risks that occur when pedestrians are forced to share a busy high speed road way
This concern is accentuated by ( "crest of hill ", ) sight distance limitations, that now
make 80 kph , an unsafe speed limit along this section of the Fourth !
In- recent years , _a traffic pattern has emerged, where vehicles use this section of the
Fourth and the Old Fort Rd. as a short cut between the # 400 highway and Hwy # 12 . This
makes the traffic volumes on these sections
of road unique It's worth noting that a similar high density residential
area exists on this same route . This area is located on the Old Fort Rd near Hwy * 12 .
Unfortunately the speed limit in that area was not 'changed to 50 kph until a fatality
occurred several years ago . The similarities between our stretch of the Fourth and this
section of the. Third are clear.
Both form part of a high traffic volume short cut linking the 400 Hwy with Hwy # 12
Both have " crest of hill ~ sight distance safety concerns
Both are higher density residential areas .
Both have school chi~dIen and adult pedestrians in regular conflict with vehicles
traveling at speed .
In light of the above , we ask that this Council recognize the unique safety concerns
that have developed along this short section of the Fourth concession . We also ask
council to manage this concern by adopting a by-law'that will reduce the speed on the
section of the Fourth concession between the Mount St. Louis Road and the Moonstone Road
to 50 kph .
Respectfully Yours
Gayle and Mike Cox
Myrna and David Scott - Parker
Michelle and David Zillinger
Loraine and Robin Smith
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: COMMITTEE OF THE Prepared By:
WHOLE
PW2006-03 Jerry Ball
Subject: Department:
Council Request for "No Parking Public Works
Zone" - Village of
C.ofW. Hawkestone Date:
January 18, 2006
Motion # R.M. File #:
T07 -25723
Date: RolI#:
II BACKGROUND:
II
Correspondence (attached) was received from residents of the village of Hawkestone raising
concerns relating to safely entering the village on County Road #20. This SOO metre section of
County Road #20 was originally part of Line 11 and runs from Hwy. #11 to the Ridge Road. The
concern arises from the local service station using the west side of County Road #20 to park
customer vehicles. Although this has been a practice of the service station operator for the past few
years, it is restricting motorist visibility when approaching the intersection of County Road #20 and
Ridge Road.
Eastbound motorists must travel past the stop sign into the intersection to obtain a sight line of
approaching southbound traffic, which could also interfere with northbound straight-through vehicles.
Additional traffic generated into the village of Hawkestone, due to the f1yover at Hwy. #11 and the
recent opening of the Liquor Control Board outlet, will add to the sight visibility concern at this
intersection.
II ANALYSIS:
~
Upon completing a site inspection to review the concerns at the above-noted intersection, it is
recommended that consideration be given to create a "No Parking Zone" on the west side of County
Road #20, from the intersection of Ridge Road, northerly approximately 160 metres, to improve sight
distance visibility and safety.
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
\b-'d
II
1. THAT Report No, PW2006-03 be received and adopted,
2. THAT the County of Simcoe be requested to consider creating a "No Parking Zone" on the west
side of Line 11 (County Road #20), from the intersection of Ridge Road, northerly approximately
160 meters.
3. AND THAT the County of Simcoe advises Mrs. Lloyd Leigh and residents of Hawkestone of their
decision.
Respectfully submitted,
Jerry Ball
Public Works Superintendent
('~f~~
"V
I D~
~DII
I
\J
- 2 -
. ,
"',
(
The Mayor and Council
Township of Oro-Medonte ,
148 Line 7 South,
Box 100 ,Oro
Ontario ,LOL 2XO
To whom it may concern .
6C- ~~/
'I -)
N 16th.,
t av. ,~005
Residents of Hawkestane are concerned about safety on Line 11 entrance
into Hawkestone,
Hawkestone has approximately 180 homes plus the Soke! Property
Association have approximately 50 residences and a trailer park.
There is a general store with a Liquor Control Board outlet.
Hawkestone Yacht club which has several boats park there And people
traveling to and from club especially during summer season.
Fire Station.
Girl Guide Camp.
United Church with weekly services and other events,
I ORO.f,iECONTE TOWNSHIP
r ~MjTIO~JF 5
,
[
,
I
MEETING: COUNCIL 0
I C. OF W. .
DEe 1 4 Z005
Hawkestone community hall with various function all year round.
In addition to residents of Hawkestone there are approximately 175 homes in
Simco side at bottom of Line 10 south that would use this Line 11 if traveling
to Barrie or coming from Orillia due to the fly over at the highway,
The are also a number of residents on Lakeshore between the 12th and 13th
lines of Oro-Medonte that uses Line 11 due to the fly over at the highway.
There are several school buses using this road traveling both to East 01'0
Elementary school and the local high schools in Orillia.
The intersection of Line 11 and Ridge Road has a three way stop and dur:to
the hill cars traveling north out of Hawkestone are not required to stop at the
intersection .
Traveling south on Line 11 there is an incline before you reach intersection.
The speed limit entering village is 50 Km.
The main problem is the local service station which also has gas pumps has
several cars parked all over their property. They also park cars on the west
side of Line 1 1 , This creates a visibility problem when cars are entering or
leaving the station. The danger increases in winter months when snow
banks are on sides of road.
The enclosed pictures were taken on Oct. 4th ,2005 and Oct5,2005 both in
the morning.
The residents are requesting that you investigate the possibility of installing
no parking signs from the intersection of Ridge Road north on Line eleven
on both sides of the road. This would eliminate the congestion in this area
and provide improved visibility in this area and address the safety issue tor
cars entering and leaving service station
We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
:
I
~)
~).,A___ _
p 7~ v~v~
\
#/ ~ y!J \
'._ ._ A / '
'c~/F / /,.".- \
t2/ ,N (!'r:y'UJ. ~cli4/)
c/c Mr . Christian Meile,
Transportation Manager County of Simcoe
Committee of Adiustment Minutes
Thursdav January 12. 2006. 9:30 a.m.
In Attendance: Chairperson Lynda Aiken, Member Dave Edwards, Member Allan
Johnson, Member Michelle Lynch and Secretary-Treasurer Andy Karaiskakis
Absent Member: Garry Potter
1. Communications and Correspondence
Correspondence to be addressed at the time of the specific hearing.
2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest
None declared
3. Hearings:
9:30
Doug Shaw
Plan 882, Part Lots 22, 23 (Oro)
1079 Lakeshore Road East
A-39/03 (Revised)
In Attendance: Doug Shaw, applicant
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Allan Johnson, seconded by Michelle Lynch
"That the Committee hereby approve minor variance A-39/03 as revised subject
to the following conditions:
1. That the size and setbacks of the proposed garage be in conformity with
the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the
Committee;
2. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief
Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and
binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13;
3. That the proposed garage be no larger than 59m2 (644 fe);
4. That the proposed garage be no closer than 1.8 metres (6 feet) from the
interior side lot line;
5. That the proposed garage be no closer than 3 metres (10 feet) from the
front lot line to the closest corner of the garage; and,
Committee of AdjustmentwJanuary 12, 2006
Page 1
6. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of
compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2)
verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey/real
property report.
.. ...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment~January 12, 2006
Page 2
9:40
Marion Homer
Conc.9, South Part Lot 22 (Medonte)
6331 Line 8 North
2005-A-53
In Attendance: Marion Homer, applicant and David Fell, contractor
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Dave Edwards
"That the Committee hereby approve Minor Variance Application 2005-A-53
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the front yard for the proposed kennel shall be no closer than 94.99
m (311.6 ft), as shown on the Site Plan prepared by Galbraith, Eplett,
Worobec Surveyors dated September 15, 2005;
2. That the proposed structure shall be used in accordance with the
permitted uses of the Agricultural/Rural (NRU) zone;
3. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the
application and on the Site Plan dated September 15, 2005 submitted with
the application and approved by the Committee.
4. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of
compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2)
verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey/real
property report; and,
5. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's
Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final
and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13.
.....Carried."
Committee of Adjustment~January 12, 2006
Page 3
9:50
Spasov
Plan 864, Lot 4 (Oro)
245 Shoreline Drive
2005-A-54
In Attendance: Mike Spasov, acting on behalf of owner
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Allan Johnson
"That the Committee hereby approve Minor Variance Application 2005-A-54
subject to the following conditions:
1. The dwelling maintain the existing 4 metres (12.9 feet) and 7.5 metres (24.8
feet) for the north-west and north-east corners of the dwelling respectively
setback from the interior side lot lines;
2. That the height of the new roofline be no higher than 11 metres (36 feet);
3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's
Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final
and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13;
and,
4. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the
application and on the sketches submitted and approved by the Committee.
.....Carried."
Committee of Adjustment~January 12, 2006
Page 4
10:00
David & Shelley Fell
Lot 110, Plan M29 (Medonte)
2005-8-56
2005-A-55
In Attendance: David Fell, applicant
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Allan Johnson, seconded by Dave Edwards
"That the Committee hereby grant Provisional Consent regarding Application
2005-B-56 subject to the following conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the
severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to
the Secretary-Treasurer;
2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
3. That the severed lands be merged in title with 37 Alpine Drive and that the
provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to
any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands;
4. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands
and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
5. That the shed be removed or relocated in compliance with the Zoning By-
law;
6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and,
7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled
within one year from the date of the giving of the notice.
.. ...Carried."
Moved by Dave Edwards, seconded by Michelle Lynch
"That the Committee hereby approve Minor Variance Application 2005-A-55
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the applicants fulfil the conditions of Consent Application 2005-B-56
.. ...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment-January 12, 2006
Page 5
%#
10:10
Judith Lauder
Part Lots 1 & 2, Plan 860 (Oro)
2653 Lakeshore Road East
2005-B-57
In Attendance: Christian Lauder, acting on behalf of applicant, Iris Roe, 303
Shoreline Drive
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Dave Edwards, seconded by Allan Johnson
"That the Committee hereby grant Provisional Consent regarding Application
200S-B-S7 subject to the following conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the
severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to
the Secretary-Treasurer;
2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
3. The rear property line would have to be located a minimum distance of 40
metres (131 feet) from the rear wall of the house to allow for existing
septic system;
4. That the severed lands be merged in title with 467 Shoreline Drive and
that the provisions of Subsection 3 or S of Section SO of The Planning Act
apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject
lands;
5. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands
and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and,
7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled
within one year from the date of the giving of the notice.
.. ...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment~January 12, 2006
Page 6
"
10:20
Angus & Marjorie Ferguson
North Part Lot 12, Plan 640A (Oro)
2 Wilson Street
2005-A-57
In Attendance: Doug Akers, representing Casselmans', future owners of 2
Wilson Street, Marjory Shedd, 103 Shoreline Drive
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Dave Edwards, seconded by Allan Johnson
"That the Committee hereby approve Minor Variance Application 200S-A-S7
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the proposed dwelling be located no closer than 3 metres (10 feet)
from the front and rear property lines;
2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of
compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2)
verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation that the dwelling be
located no closer than 3 metres (10 feet) from the front and rear lot lines;
3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's
Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final
and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13;
and,
4. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the
application and on the sketch submitted with the application and approved
by the Committee
.. ...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment-January 12, 2006
Page 7
10:30
Fred Shellswell
Conc.7, South Part Lot 2 (Medonte)
3548 Line 7 North
2005-A-56
In Attendance: Fred Shellswell, applicant
Secretary-Treasurer read letter from Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner,
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, dated January 6, 2006
verbatim to the Committee members and those present in the audience.
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Allan Johnson, seconded by Michelle Lynch
"That the Committee hereby approve Minor Variance Application 200S-A-S6
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the size and setbacks of the proposed dwelling be in conformity with
the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the
Committee;
2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of
compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2)
verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation so that
i) the dwelling be located no closer than 91.4 metres (300 feet)
from the front property line, and;
3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief
Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and
binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13.
.. ...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment~January 12, 2006
Page 8
10:40
CNR Contracting
Plan 798, Lots 73, 74, 75, 77, 78 (Oro)
11 Sunnyside Ave.
2005-B-55
In Attendance: Martin Kichuk, representing applicant
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Dave Edwards, seconded by Allan Johnson
"That the Committee hereby Defer Consent application 2005-B-55 for the
creation of a new residential lot to allow the opportunity for staff to discuss with
the applicant the options to address the deficient lot area for the retained lands
as a result of the severance.
.. ...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment~January 12, 2006
Page g
10:50
Steve Meyer
Cone. 9, West Part Lot 7 (Medonte)
370 Warminster Sideroad
A-1/03 (Revised)
In Attendance: Steve Meyer, applicant
Secretary-Treasurer read letter from Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner,
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, dated January 6, 2006
verbatim to the Committee members and those present in the audience.
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Allan Johnson, seconded by Dave Edwards
"That the Committee hereby approve Minor Variance Application A-1/03 as
revised subject to the following conditions:
1. That the size and setbacks of the proposed dwelling be in conformity with
the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the
Committee;
2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of
compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2)
verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation so that
3. the dwelling be located no closer than 5 metres (16.4 feet) from the
Environmental Protection Zone;
4. the dwelling be located no closer than 14 metres (45.9 feet) from the slope
that exceeds 33%, and;
5. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief
Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and
binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, C.P. 13.
.. ...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment~January 12, 2006
Page 10
5. Other Business
i. Adoption of minutes for the December 15, 200S Meeting
\
-i
Moved by Allan Johnson, Seconded by Dave Edwards
"That the minutes for the December 1Sth 200S Meeting be adopted as
printed and circulated
., .Carried."
ii. Modify conditions of approval for 200S-A-SO (Harris)
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION to MODIFY CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL
WHEREAS Committee deems it necessary to clarify the conditions of the minor
variance and finds the modifications to be minor and of a technical nature, and
WHEREAS Committee deems the changes to the conditions to be minor and
therefore no Notice of the change to conditions is required;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Dave Edwards
"That the conditions to Minor Variance 200S-A-SO be modified by adding a
condition (6):
6. That the deck be no closer than 6.7 metres (22 feet) for the north west
corner of the deck from the front lot line.
...Carried."
6. Adiournment
Moved by Michelle Lynch, Seconded by Dave Edwards
"We do now adjourn at 11 :SO a.m."
... Carried."
(NOTE: A digital copy of this meeting is available for review.)
Chairperson,
Lynda Aiken
Secretary-Treasurer,
Andy Karaiskakis, ACST(A)
Committee of Adjustment-January 12, 2006
Page 11
- \
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Committee ofthe Whole Prepared By:
BP 2006-004 Bruce Hoppe, MCIP, RPP
Subject: Places to Grow Department:
Proposed Growth Plan, Building and Planning
Ministry of Public
Infrastructure and Renewal
Council
C.ofW. Date: January 23, 2006
Motion # R.M. File #:
Date: Roll No:
On June 13, 2005, the Province passed the Places to Grow Act, 2005 as a foundation for preparing growth
plans within the Greater Golden Horseshoe of Southern Ontario. The legislation will be implemented via the
Places to Grow plan, a draft of which was released in November, 2005. A copy of the Places to Grow
document has previously been distributed to Council, and copies are available either on the Provincial website
or on file with the Planning Department. Comments to the Ministry of Public Infrastructure and Renewal are
being received until January 27, 2006 (Attachment #1).
The purpose of this report is to highlight relevant excerpts of the plan and identify areas of concern to the
Township with a view to providing comments to the Province.
This issue has been discussed at a recent Simcoe County planners meeting, and similar areas of concem
have been identified. Attachment #2 for Council's information is a report presented to County Corporate
Services Committee on January 11, 2006 related to this matter.
1
LYSIS
The Places to Grow plan is another planning tool that has been developed by the Provincial government in
recent months. After the growth plan has been finalized, area municipalilies will be required by legislation to
bring their Official Plan into conformity with the relevant policies. Staff have been advised that the conformity
exercise will need to be undertaken within three years from finalization of the growth plan. It is understood that
the plan is intended to complement other initiatives such as the Inter-Governmental Action Plan (IGAP), the
Assimilative Capacity Study (ACS), and the Greenbelt Protection Plan. The County of Simcoe will firstly
update their Official Plan, which will form the basis for the review of the Official Plans for the area municipalities
within the County.
The Places to Grow plan deals with a wide area, from Niagara in the south, through Waterloo and into Simcoe
County in the north and easterly into Peterborough County. The Township of Oro-Medonte is located within an
area designated as the 'outer ring', which describes the outlying area of the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
Twenty-five urban growth centres throughout this large area have been identified, the closest of which is
Downtown Barrie which is designated as an area of intensification.
In terms of policy directives, the growth plan focuses on the efficient use of existing services and infrastructure
such as sewer, water and public transit. While the plan is largely an 'urban' document, its impacts on the many
rural municipalities including Oro-Medonte needs to be more fully evaluated. Specific policy directives of
concem include the following:
1. The plan requires that the creation of more than 3 lots need to be directed to designated settlement
areas. This policy would be consistent with the prohibition of new estate residential subdivisions and
should not impact the creation of single lots by consent in the Township.
2. The target of the creation of one job per household for expansion of small settlement areas may be
challenging. This would mean in effect that secondary plan studies would need to accommodate
employment lands which mayor may not be desirable. Further, the plan does not provide clarity on
how such employment targets can be satisfied. For instance, many jobs are available in nearby
agricultural sectors, home-based businesses and/or transient work such as contractors without the
traditional office or factory environment.
3. A 40 percent intensification target for Simcoe County is being proposed. This figure is extremely
aggressive and it is staff's understanding that even within the most urban communities such as Barrie
and Orillia this figure will be almost impossible to achieve. These intensification targets may result in
vast changes to urban form, and decisions respecting the provision of higher density residential
developments will need to be made.
4. The population of Simcoe County is expected to grow from 392,000 (2001) to 667,000 (2031). This
population is to be distributed within the 16 local municipalities within the County as well as the two
separated Cities of Barrie and Orillia. There is no guidelines as to how this will be distributed therefore
the implementation of the growth plan needs to be more fully evaluated. Moreover the fact that the two
largest growth centres are administratively separated from the County is not addressed. Having said
this, is it staff's understanding that the sub-area assessment contemplated will be satisfied by the IGAP
study which includes the two cities.
5. The County of Simcoe will be responsible to allocate population and household growth in the County
and in every Municipality. The ability of a municipality to provide lands which can be serviced by
municipal water and sewer services will have to be factored in to the analysis. For example, if it is not
possible in a given municipality to develop on full sewer water services, then that municipality would
theoretically not be allocated much growth as part of the exercise. Future growth scenarios within the
2
Township's settlement areas such as Craighurst and Hawkestone will likely only be considered on the
basis of communal sewage and water systems.
6. The potential of growth within recreational areas outside of settlement areas has not been
accommodated within the growth plan.
7. The plan requires municipalities to review natural heritage features on a comprehensive basis. It is
noted that the Township has already completed such an analysis for the Oro-Moraine and recently
updated the policies and mapping for the remainder of the Township as well. In addition to the above,
the Growth Plan requires that there be a resource extraction strategy established as well in areas that
have a potential to provide mineral aggregate resources to the construction industry. Such a strategy
has already been articulated in the Township as part of the Oro Moraine planning exercise. To this
end, it is noted that many of the objectives of the Province, as articulated within the Growth Plan are
already objectives of the Township of Oro-Medonte.
8. While the encouragement of public transit is a noble goal, is may be impractical outside the limits of
major urban centres. The fact that this plan is an urban-based growth tool may not adequately deal
with growth issues within rural settings. A 'one-size-fits-all' approach when looking at larger urban
centres such as Toronto, Hamilton and Peel Region may be unworkable.
II CONCLUSIONS
I
The proposed Growth Plan contains broad growth management policy which is geared towards large urban
centres. Many of the principles in terms of protection of the environment, efficient use of urban services and
discouragement of scattered residential growth are sound. There are concerns, however, respecting how the
plan will be implemented and the applicability of some of the proposed policies within smaller municipalities
with limited services such as municipal water and sanitary sewage.
II RECOMMENDATIONS
II
On the basis of the above, it is recommended to Council:
1. THAT Report No. BP 2006-004 be received and adopted, and that a copy of the report be forwarded to
the Ministry of Public Infrastructure and Renewal.
'IClfUIlY Su mitted;
llGL
Br ce Hoppe, MCI ,RPP
Director of Building and Planning
C.A.O. Comments:
Dale, rd--!f/ 01-
l5fbN}
C.A.O. U
Dept. Head
NmCfig-; 4,
~
Ontario
Minister
6th Floor, Mowat Block
900 Bay Street
Toronto ON M7A 1L2
T eJ.: 416 325-0424
Fax: 416 325-3013
www.pir.gov.on.ca
1L2
325-0424
Telee. 325-3013
www.pir.gov.on.ca
Mailing Address:
777 Bay Street
4th Floor, Suite 425
Toronto ON M5G 2E5
Adresse postale :
777, rue Bay
4a etage, bureau 425
Toronto ON M5G 2E5
November 24, 2005
A Message from the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal
I am pleased to present you with the Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe. It has been developed under the authority of the Places to Grow Act, 2005.
By 2031, the population of the Greater Golden Horseshoe will increase by 3.7 million
and 1.8 million new jobs will be added. If managed properly, this growth will fuel our
economy and offer the prospect of a better life for our children and grandchildren.
The growth planning process embodied in the Places to Grow Act. encourages broader,
more comprehensive planning that links land use planning with future infrastructure
needs. It gives us new mechanisms to deal with planning issues that may transcend
the interests and boundaries of individual municipalities.
The Proposed Growth Plan builds on the informed feedback and suggestions we have
received from municipalities and other key stakeholders in response to the Draft Growth
Plan we released last February.
For further background information, visit the ministry website at www.pir.Qov.on.ca
This is an exciting time in Ontario. I look forward to your continued support as we
finalize a Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and work towards its effective
implementation.
Yours sincerely,
David Caplan
Minister
,
COUNTY
ITEM FOR:
SECTION:
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE:
SUBJECT:
CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE
Planning
CS 06-003
January 11, 2006
Places to Grow
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Item CS 06-003, which outlines and comments on the Places to Grow PIan for the Greater
Golden Horseshoe, be received for information, and a copy sent to the Ministry of Public
Infrastructure Renewal.
AND that Staffreview the priorities and functions of the Planning Division and report in
February.
BACKGROUND:
The Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal (MPIR) released a Proposed Growth Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) dated November 2005. Refer to Schedule 1 attached. As stated
in the introduction "The Plan is to guide decisions related to transportation, infrastructure planning,
land use planning, urban form, housing, natural heritage and resource protection to promote
economic prosperity."
The Plan outlines a very urban centred vision for future residential and employment growth, and
identifies Banie as the Urban Growth Centre within Greater Simcoe (Banie, Orillia and County).
The catch phrase being used to summarize the Plan is that "urban areas are to grow up, rather than
out." Hi-lites of the PIan are as follows:
. Population share to 2031 for Greater Simcoe of 667,000, including 260,000 households and
254,000 employment opportunities.
. Setting a target that 40% of all future growth be within existing built up areas by 2015;
. Intensification targets for residential and employment lands. These targets differ based on
the size and nature of the urban area (Toronto 400 residents and jobs per hectare, to smaller
centres like Banie of 150 jobs and residents per hectare).
. New development in Greenfield areas are to achieve a minimum density target of 50
residents and jobs per hectare.
. Identifies a general transportation system and it's various components, encourages linking
communities through alternative modes of transportation, utilizing demand management
systems, and promoting public transit.
. All development of more then three lots is to go to settlement areas.
. Expansions of small cities and towns are to result in a minimum of one job being created per
3 residents.
. Efficient utilization of existing water and waste water systems and community
infrastructure.
January II, 2006
Corporate Services Committee 06-003
Page 2
. MPIR and the Ministry of Natural Resources are going to identify a natural heritage system
for the GGH.
. Prime agricultural areas are to be identified by MPIR and the Ministry of Agriculture and
Food
. Sub-area assessments are to be completed based on upper-tier municipal boundaries to
further implement the Plan.
lt is to be implemented through Official Plans and all Planning Act and Condominium Act decisions
will be expected to conform to it. MPIR advised that the Inter-Governmental Action Plan (lGAP)
presently underway is to be considered the sub-area assessment for Greater Simcoe.
Summary of Comments from County perspective:
. The Plan is verv urban and the application of goals and targets for smaller settlement areas
may prove challenging.
. The requirement that more then three lots go into settlements may increase pressure for
single lots in the rural areas.
. The MPIR is to be the approval agency for every built boundary, and for many other related
matters. This is a substantial work load.
. The target of creating one job per household for expanding small setllement areas seems like
a tall order. This is perhaps more challenging then the required density of 50 residents and
jobs combined per hectare in Greenfield (designated, not built) areas, which in and of itself
will be challenging for small setllements. It appears a lot of municipal planning work may
have to be reconsidered to meet such targets.
. It is our understanding (based on MPIR comments) that 40% is a County-wide
intensification target and can be shared among selected setllements, and that all settlements
are not expected to support intensification. It is a County-wide target. This approach is
strongly supported by the County.
. Flexibility is necessary with respect to the application of node and corridor concepts outside
major urban areas where settlements within a municipality may each serve a different role.
. Simcoe County is a community onto itself; and also considered a playground for the Greater
Toronto Area (GTA). Appropriate policies supporting this role and function should be
included in the Plan.
. lt is hoped that the inclusion of municipalities within the GGH will not limit their ability to
work with, and form partnerships with adjacent municipalities that are not subject to the
GGH Plan.
. It is unclear how the issue of municipal boundaries is to be addressed. This issue is also not
addressed in the Provincial Policy Statement. If one reads the Provincial documents
carefully the focus of growth is a setllement area and is not necessarily subject to municipal
boundaries. It seems to be an assumption that is not directly addressed, unless that is a
specific intent. This is an issue not only to the City ofBame but to other urban
municipalities in the County that have the potential to reach their boundaries within the
defined planning horizon.
. Regulations to implement the Plan need to address areas where commitments to
development have been made and where matlers are already before the OMB. They also
need to consider what happens to the built boundary over time as Greenfield areas build out,
and also how the intensification targets will change as the built boundary changes.
.
January II, 2006
Corporate Services Committee 06-003
Page 3
. The principles embodied within the Plan maintain the current philosophy of the County
Plan. 11 adds intensification targets and makes urban boundaries more challenging to alter.
Staff hope that the Province will provide sufficient support and process direction for the
implementation of the Plan, or will alternatively provide adequate support to the upper tier
to complete the assigned tasks.
. Staff support consideration of the IGAP as the County's sub area assessment and would like
to be the first consideration for the undertaking of all the other work outlined in the Plan.
We are subject to phenomenal growth pressure and urgently need to address the matters
included within the Plan. We suggest that this work be completed through the County with
assistance and funding from MPIR. The Plan prescribes a lot of work and activity to the
upper tier.
In a 32 page policy document, the Plan uses the words "upper-tier" 25 times in a prescriptive, task
related manner. This work is in addition to implementation of tasks included for the County in the
Provincial Policy Statement, and the County's own policy initiatives. Based on this substantial
work load, it is now necessary for the Planning Division to review its current focus on development
approvals at the local level and focus on upper-tier planning functions. Staff propose to bring a
report forward to next meeting to review the priorities and functions of the Planning Division.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:
There are no financial implications at present.
SCHEDULES: Schedule I - Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe,
November 2005
Schedule 2 - MPIR Guide to Places to Grow
Schedule 3 - MPIR Backgrounder - Implementation
Schedule 4 - MPIR Backgrounder - Intensification
~j ~ ~ ~
Schedule 1 Proposed Schedule 2 Guide to Schedule 3 Technical Schedule 4 Technica
Places to Grow Nav 2 Places to Grow.pdf Backgrounder Ifrl)lerrlBackgrounder Intens
PREPARED BY: June Little
APPROVALS: Date
R. Newlove, GM Corporate Services
January 3, 2006
.
PLACES TO GROW
.
Proposed Growth Plan
for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
November 2005
Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal
@ Ontario
.
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Context
1.2 Vision for 2031
1.2.1 A Vision for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
1.2.2 Guiding Principles
1.3 General Authority
1.4 How to Read This Plan
2 WHERE AND HOW TO GROW
2.1 Context
2.2 Policies for Where and How to Grow
2.2.1 Growth Forecasts
2.2.2 Managing Growth
2.2.3 General Intensification
2.2.4 Urban Growth Centres
2.2.5 Major Transit Station Areas and Intensification Corridors
2.2.6 Employment Lands
2.2.7 Designated Greenfield Areas
2.2.8 Settlement Area Boundary Expansions
2.2.9 Rural Areas
3 INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT GROWTH
3.1 Context
3.2 Policies for Infrastructure To Support Growth
3.2.1 Infrastructure Planning
3.2.2 Transportation - General
3.2.3 Moving People
3.2.4 Moving Goods
3.2.5 Water and Wastewater Systems
3.2.6 Community Infrastructure
2 PLACES TO GROW
4
4
6
6
7
8
8
10
10
11
11
11
12
14
14
15
16
17
18
19
19
20
20
20
21
22
23
24
@ Ontario
4
PROTECTING WHAT IS VALUABLE
4.1 Context
4.2 Policies for Protecting What is Valuable
4.2.1 Natural System
4.2.2 Prime Agricultural Areas
4.2.3 Mineral Aggregate Resources
4.2.4 A Culture of Conservation
5
IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION
5.1
Context
5.1.1 Places to Grow Act, 2005
5.1.2 Implementation Analysis
Policies for Implementation and Interpretation
5.2.1 General Implementation and Interpretation
5.2.2 Monitoring/Performance Measures
5.2.1 Public Engagement
5.2
6
DEFINITIONS
7 SCHEDULES
Schedule 1 Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan Area
Schedule 2 Places to Grow Concept
Schedule 3 Distribution of Population, Households & Employment
for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2001-2031
Schedule 4 Urban Growth Centres
Schedule 5 Moving People
Schedule 6 Moving Goods
8 APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Context Map: Location of the Greater Golden Horseshoe within Ontario
Appendix 2 Illustration Diagram: Growth Plan Land-use Terminology
26
26
26
26
27
27
27
29
29
29
30
30
30
32
32
33
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GROWTH Pl..flN 3
.
1 .1 CONTEXT
Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) is one of the fastest growing regions in North
America. It is also the destination of choice for many people and businesses
relocating from other parts of Canada and around the world. They resettle here
because of the high quality of life and the economic opportunities. This is a place
of prosperity where, through their skills and talents, people are building a great
future for themselves.
Over the next 30 years, communities within the GGH will continue to
experience the benefits that come with growth, including: vibrant, diversified
economies; higher education institutions; and arts, culture and recreation
facilities. However, without properly managing growth, the negative aspects
of rapid growth, such as, increased traffic congestion, risk of deteriorating
air and water quality, and the consumption of agricultural lands and natural
resources, will continue to be experienced.
This Plan has been prepared under the Places to Grow Act, 2005. It is a framework
for implementing the Government of Ontario's vision for building stronger,
prosperous communities by better managing growth to 2031. This is a plan that
recognizes the realities facing our cities and smaller communities, and that
acknowledges what governments can and cannot influence. It demonstrates
leadership for improving the ways in which our cities, suburbs, towns, and
villages will grow over the long-term.
This Plan will guide decisions on a wide range of issues - transportation,
infrastructure planning, land-use planning, urban form, housing, natural
heritage and resource protection - in the interest of promoting economic
prosperity. It will create a clearer environment for investment decisions and
will help secure the future prosperity of the GGH
This Plan builds on other key government initiatives including: the Greenbelt
Plan, Planning Act reform and the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (PPS, 2005).
This Plan does not replace municipal official plans, but works within the
existing planning framework to provide growth management policy direction
for the GGH
This Plan reflects a shared vision amongst the Government of Ontario, the
municipalities of the GGH and its residents. Successful implementation of
this Plan's vision will be dependant upon collaborative decision-making.
4
PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
In preparing for the future, it is essential that planning for the GGH take into
account the importance, unique characteristics and strengths of our economy.
These include;
. A diverse economy supported by a wide array of manufacturing industries
of which the largest is the automotive sector, and other key industry clusters
such as financial and business services, hospitality and tourism, education
and research, life sciences, information services, and agriculture;
. An economy in transition, with economic activity and wealth increasingly
generated by service and knowledge industries;
. Trade that accounts for over half of Ontario's GDP, over 90 per cent of
which is with the United States;'
. A highly educated workforce, whose social and economic diversity are
critical factors for success in the growing knowledge economy;
. Abundant natural heritage features and areas, and prime agricultural areas,
and the government's commitment to protecting them, as demonstrated
through initiatives such as the Greenbelt Plan, make our communities
more attractive and healthier places to live and work;
. Cultural amenities that offer the kinds of creative and recreational activities
that attract knowledge workers.
The GGH must remain competitive with other city-regions, yet urban sprawl
can affect its competitiveness. Despite its many assets, Ontario and the GGH
face a number of challenges in sustaining and growing its economy:
. Increasing numbers of automobiles are travelling over longer distances resulting
in clogged transportation corridors, including those that provide access to our
critical border crossings. Traffic congestion and the delay of goods movement
costs Ontario upwards of $5 billion in lost GDP each year;'
. Attractive and efficient public transit is difficult to introduce into sprawling
communities, and this limits our ability to respond effectively to growing
traffic congestion issues;
. Employment lands are being converted from their intended uses, thereby
limiting future economic opportunities;
. New infrastructure is being built to service lower-density areas while existing
infrastructure in the older parts of our communities remains underutilized;
I TO Economics. Ontario: The Land of Opportunity. September 2004, pg. 2
1 Ontario Chamber of Commerce. Cost of Border Delays to Ontario. May 2004, pg.8
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROWTH PLj\N
5
. Urban sprawl contributes to the degradation of our natural environment, air
quality and water resources, and the consumption of agricultural lands and
other natural resources so critical to the future economy.
Decades of neglect and lack of sufficient investment have resulted in the current
infrastructure deficit. Tens of billions of dollars, beyond current levels of
investment, will be required before the situation is back in balance. All levels of
government are under pressure to meet public infrastructure needs. Additional
support from federal partners; innovative, alternative partnership arrangements
that protect the public interest; and the strategic staging of infrastructure
investments are all required to respond to these challenges.
Ultimately, better investment in our cities will help to mitigate sprawl. Enhancing
infrastructure, integrating and improving transit systems, protecting valuable
natural resources and strengthening local government will all go far towards
the implementation of this Plan.
This Plan addresses these challenges through policy directions that -
. direct growth to built-up areas where the capacity exists to best accommodate
the expected population, household and employment growth while providing
strict criteria for settlement area boundary expansions
. promote transit-supportive densities and a healthy mix of residential and
employment land uses
. preserve employment lands for future economic opportunities
. identify and support a transportation network that links urban growth centres
through an extensive multi-modal system anchored by efficient public transit
and highway systems for moving people and goods
. plan for community infrastructure to support growth
. ensure sustainable water and wastewater services are available to support
future growth
. identify a natural system and prime agricultural areas, and enhance the
conservation of these valuable resources.
6
PLACES TO GROW
@Ontario
1.2 VISION FOR 2031
@ Ontario
PROPOSED C,ROWTH PLAN
7
1.2.2 GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The vision for the GGHis grounded in the following principles that provide
the basis for guiding decisions on how land is developed, resources are managed
and public dollars invested:
. Build compact, vibrant and complete communities.
. Plan and manage growth to support a strong and competitive economy.
. Protect, conserve, enhance and wisely use the valuable natural resources
of land, air and water for current and future generations.
. Optimize the use of existing and new infrastructure to support growth
in a compact, efficient form.
. Provide for different approaches to managing growth that recognize the
diversity of communities in the GGH
. Promote collaboration among all sectors - government, private and
non-profit sectors and citizens ~ to achieve the vision.
1.3 GENERAL AUTHORITY
This Plan for the GGH derives its authority from the Places to Grow Act, 2005.
This Plan is approved through an Order in Council made by the Lieutenant
Governor in Council under that Act.
This Plan applies to the GGHlands designated by Ontario Regulation 416/05.
1.4 HOW TO READ THIS PLAN
This Plan consists of policies, schedules, definitions and appendices. It also
includes non-policy contextual commentary to provide background and
describe the intent of the policies.
This Plan informs decision-making regarding growth management in the
GGH It contains a set of policies for managing growth and development to
the year 2031. While certain policies have specific target dates, the goals and
policies of this Plan are intended to be achieved within the life of this Plan.
The land-use planning process within the GGHis governed primarily by the
Planning Act and the Government of Ontario's existing planning system. The
Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides overall policy directions on matters
of provincial interest related to land use and development in Ontario, and applies
to the GGH This Plan should be read in conjunction with the applicable PPS.
8
PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
This Plan should also be read in conjunction with relevant provincial plans,
including the Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the
Niagara Escarpment Plan. These plans apply to parts of the GGH and provide
specific policy on certain matters. This Plan, in conjunction with these other
plans and the PPS, 2005 express the Government of Ontario's interests and
directions with regard to growth management in the GGH
The Places to Grow Act, 2005, includes provisions related to conflicts between
a growth plan and other provincial plans and policies.
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GROWTH PUIN
9
2.1 CONTEXT
The GGHis one of the fastest growing regions in North America. By 2031,
the future population of this area is forecast to grow by an additional 3.7 million
(from 2001) to 11.5 million people, accounting for over 80 per cent of Ontario's
population growth. The magnitude and pace of this growth necessitates a plan
for building healthy and balanced communities and maintaining and improving
our quality of life.
To ensure the development of healthy, safe and balanced communities, choices
about where and how growth occurs in the GGH need to be carefully made.
Better use of land and infrastructure can be made by directing growth to the
existing urban areas. This Plan envisages increasing intensification of the existing
built-up area, with a focus on urban growth centres, intensillcation corridors, m'!ior
transit stations areas, brownlleld sites and greyfJelds. Concentrating intensification
in these areas provides a focus for transit and infrastructure investment to
support growth.
Urban growth centres are particularly important, not only because they can
accommodate growth, but also because they will be regional focal points. They
are meeting places, and locations for cultural facilities, public institutions, major
services, and transit hubs. They also playa key role in supporting the economy of
the surrounding area. These centres are not all at the same stage of development:
some are the downtowns of older cities, while others are newly planned suburban
centres. They all have potential for accommodating significant growth.
Better use of land and infrastructure can also be achieved by building more
compact greenfield communities that reduce the rate at which land is consumed.
New communities will need to grow at transit-supportive densities, with transit-
supportive street configurations, and provide opportunities for people to work
close to where they live.
Providing opportunities for business and employment is fundamental to using
land wisely and ensuring a prosperous economic future. It is particularly important
to ensure an adequate supply of land for industrial uses traditionally found in
employment areas. This Plan strongly discourages converting ernployment areas
to other uses, including major retail uses.
There is a large supply ofland already designated for future urban development
in the GGH, there is enough land in most communities to accommodate
projected growth based on the growth forecasts and intensillcation target and
10 PLACES TO GROW
@Ontario
density targets of this Plan. It is important to understand how we will optimize
the use of existing land supply before designating more land for future urban
development. This Plan's emphasis on intensification and optimizing the use
of the existing land supply, represents a new approach to city-building in
the GGH. one which concentrates more on making better use of our existing
infrastructure, and less on continuously expanding the urban edge.
This Plan recognizes and promotes the traditional role of rural settlement areas
as a focus of economic activities for surrounding rural and agricultural areas.
This Plan is about building complete communities. These are communities which
accommodate people in all stages of life and have the right mix of housing, a
good range of jobs, and easy access to stores and services to meet their daily needs.
Complete communities are well-designed and offer transportation choices.
Complete communities, compact urban form and extensive intensification efforts
go hand-in-hand with more transit: not only do they support each other, they
are all necessary. This co-relation is fundamental to where and how we grow.
2.2 POLICIES FOR WHERE AND HOW TO GROW
2.2.1 GROWTH FORECASTS
1. Population, household and employment forecasts for all upper- and single-tier
municipalities contained in Schedule 3 will be used as the basis for planning
and managing growth in the GGH
2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will review and as appropriate,
amend the forecasts contained in Schedule 3 at least every five years in
consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities.
2.2.2 MANAGING GROWTH
1. Population, household and employment growth will be accommodated by -
a) directing a significant portion of new growth to the built-up areas
of the community through intensification
b) focusing intensification in intensification areas
c) building compact, transit-supportive communities in greenfields
d) reducing dependence on the automobile through the development of
mixed use, transit-supportive, pedestrian-friendly urban environments
e) providing convenient access to intra- and inter-city transit
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GROWTH PLf~N 11
f) ensuring the availability of sufficient land in designated employment
areas to accommodate forecasted growth to support the GGH:S
economic competitiveness
g) planning and investing for a balance of jobs and housing in communities
across the GGH to reduce the need for long distance commuting and to
increase the modal share for transit, walking and cycling
h) encouraging cities and towns to develop as complete communities with
a diverse mix of land uses, a range and mix of employment and housing
types, high quality public open space and easy access to local stores and
services
i) directing development to settlement areas except for development related
to the management or use of resources, resource-based recreational
activities and other rural land uses that cannot be located in settlement areas
j) directing major growth to settlement areas that offer municipal water
and wastewater services and limiting growth in settlement areas that are
serviced by other forms of water and wastewater services
k) prohibiting the establishment of new settlement areas.
2.2.3 GENERAL INTENSIFICATION
1. By the year 2015 and for each year thereafter, a minimum of 40 per cent
of all residential development occurring annually within each upper- and
single-tier municipality will be within the built-up area.
2. If at the time this plan comes into effect, a municipality is achieving a
percentage of intensification higher than the minimum intensification target
identified in policy 2.2.3.1, this rate of intensification will be considered
the minimum intensification target for that municipality.
3. If at the time this plan comes into effect, a municipality has established in
its official plan an intensification target that is higher than the minimum
intensification target identified in policy 2.2.3.1, this target will be
considered the minimum intensification target for that municipality.
4. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal may review and permit
an alternative minimum intensification target for an upper- or single-tier
municipality located within the outer ring to ensure the intensification target
is appropriate given the size, location and capacity of intensification areas.
5. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with
individual upper- and single-tier municipalities, will verify and delineate
the built boundary.
12 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
6. All upper- and single-tier municipalities, in consultation with lower-tier
municipalities, will develop and implement official plan policies and outline
a strategy to phase-in and to achieve the intensification target. These policies
and the strategy will -
a) be based on the forecasts contained in Schedule 3
b) encourage intensification generally throughout the built-up area
c) identify intensification areas to support achievement of the
intensjfication target
d) incorporate the built boundary delineated in accordance with
Policy 2.2.3.5 into their Official Plans
e) recognize urban growth centres and major transit statjon areas as a
key focus for development to accommodate intensification
f) facilitate and promote intensification
g) identify the appropriate type and scale of development in
intensification areas
h) include minimum density targets for intensification areas consistent
with the planned transit service levels, and any transit-supportive land
use guidelines established by the Government of Ontario
i) achieve a range and mix of housing, including affordable housing needs
j) encourage the creation of secondary suites throughout the built-up area.
7. All intensification areas will be planned and designed to -
a) cumulatively attract a significant portion of population, household and
employment growth
b) provide a diverse mix of land uses to support vibrant neighbourhoods,
including residential and employment uses
c) create high quality public open spaces with site design and urban design
standards that support opportunities for transit, walking and cycling
d) support transit use for everyday activities
e) generally achieve higher densities than the surrounding areas
f) ensure an appropriate transition of built form to adjacent areas.
8. Ministers of the Crown and municipalities will use infrastructure investment
and other implementation tools and mechanisms to facilitate intensification.
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROWTH PLAN 13
2.2.4 URBAN GROWTH CENTRES
1. Urban growth centres for the GGH are identified in Schedule 4.
2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with
individual upper- and single-tier municipalities, will further refine the
scope and scale of the urban growth centres.
3. Urban growth centres will be designated in official plans and planned -
a) as focal areas for investment in institutional and region-wide public services,
as well as commercial, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses
b) to accommodate and support major transit infrastructure
c) to serve as high density major employment centres that will attract
provincially, nationally or internationally significant employment uses
d) to accommodate a significant share of population and employment growth.
4. Municipalities will delineate the boundaries of the urban growth centres
identified in this Plan within their official plans.
5. Urban growth centres will be planned to achieve, by 2031 or earlier, a
minimum gross density target of -
a) 400 residents and jobs combined per hectare for each of the urban
growth centres in the City of Toronto
b) 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare for the Brampton City
Centre, Downtown Burlington, Downtown Cambridge, Downtown
Hamilton, Downtown Milton, Markham City Centre, Mississauga
City Centre, Newmarket Centre, Midtown Oakville, Downtown
Oshawa, Downtown Pickering, Richmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway,
Vaughan Corporate Centre, Downtown Kitchener and Uptown
Waterloo urban growth centres
c) 150 residents and jobs combined per hectare for the Downtown Barrie,
Downtown Brantford, Downtown Guelph, Downtown Peterborough
and Downtown St. Catharines urban growth centres.
6. If at the time this plan comes into effect, an urban growth centre is already
planned to achieve, or has already achieved, a gross density that exceeds
the minimum density target established in Policy 2.2.4.5, this density will
be considered the minimum density target for the urban growth centre.
2.2.5 MAJOR TRANSIT STATiON AREAS ANO INTENSIFICATION CORRIDORS
I. Major transit station areas and intensillcation corridors will be designated
in official plans and planned to -
@ Ontario
14 PLACES TO GROW
a) serve as locations for large office and commercial development
b) achieve residential and employment densities that support existing
and planned transit service levels.
2. Major transit station areas will be planned and designed to provide access
from various transportation modes to the transit facility, including related
considerations for pedestrians, bicycle parking and commuter pick -up/
drop-off areas.
3. Intensification corridors will generally be planned to accommodate local
services, including commercial, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses.
2.2.6 EMPLOYMENT LANDS
I. An adequate supply of employment lands providing locations for a variety of
appropriate employment uses will be maintained to ensure the vitality of
the GGH and the provincial economy.
2. The downtown Toronto office core will continue to be the primary centre
for international finance and commerce of the GGH
3. M,!/or offIce and appropriate major institutional development will be located
in urban growth centres, mcljor transit station areas, or other areas with existing
frequent transit service, or existing or planned higher order transitservice.
4. Municipalities may permit conversion of lands within designated employment
areas, to non-employment uses or major retail uses, only through a municipal
comprehensive review where it has been demonstrated that -
a) there is a need for the conversion
b) the conversion will not adversely affect the achievement of the
intensification target and density targets, and other policies of this Plan
c) the existing or planned infrastructure and community infrastructure
required to accommodate the proposed conversion can be provided
in a financially and environmentally sustainable manner
d) lands do not comprise prime industrial lands
e) lands are not required over the long term for the employment purposes
for which they are designated, or
f) the conversion or designation is necessary to address other provincial
priorities such as community health and safety enhancement.
5. The Government of Ontario recognizes the importance of cross-border
trade with the United States. To facilitate this economic opportunity,
designated employment areas within a gateway economic zone will be identified
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GROWTH PL.AN 15
and supported for uses primarily focused on cross-border trade, movement
of goods and tourism-related opportunities.
6. Through sub-area assessment, the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal,
in consultation with other Ministers of the Crown, and in consultation with
upper- and single-tier municipalities, will guide planning for employment by-
a) identifying existing and potential economic clusters
b) assessing the demand for land associated with future economic growth
c) defining and identifying provincially significant designated employment
areas, including prime industrial lands
7. Municipalities are encouraged to designate and preserve lands within
settlement areas in the vicinity of existing major highway interchanges,
ports, rail yards and airports as areas for manufacturing, warehousing,
and associated retail, office and ancillary facilities, where appropriate.
8. In planning for employment lands, municipalities will facilitate development
of compact built form and minimize surface parking.
2.2.7 DESIGNATED GREENFIELD AREAS
I. The designated greenlJeld area of each upper- or single-tier municipality
will be planned to achieve a minimum density target that is not less than 50
residents and jobs combined per hectare. This density target will be measured
over the entire designated greenlJeld area of each upper- or single-tier munici-
pality, excluding natural heritage features and areas where development is not
permitted in accordance with provincial plans and policies.
2. Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop and implement official plan
policies, including phasing policies, and other strategies, for designated greenlJeld
areas to achieve the intensilJcation target and density targets of this Plan.
3. New development taking place in designated greenfield areas will be
designated, planned, zoned and designed in a manner that -
a) creates complete communities
b) creates street configurations, densities, and urban form that support
the early integration and sustained viability of transit services
c) provides a diverse mix of land uses to support vibrant neighbourhoods,
including residential and employment uses
d) creates high quality public open spaces with site design and urban design
standards that support opportunities for transit, walking and cycling.
16 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
2.2.8 SETTLEMENT AREA 80UNOARY EXPANSIONS
I. The policies in this section apply only to the expansion of a settlement area
within a municipality.
2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with
individual upper- and single-tier municipalities, will determine the need
for and maximum amount of additional designated greenfield area required
for each upper- and single-tier municipality to accommodate the growth
forecasts contained in Schedule 3.
3. A settlement area boundary expansion may only occur as part of a municipal
comprehensive review where it has been demonstrated that -
a) the proposed expansion does not exceed the maximum amount of
additional designated greenfield area established in accordance with
policy 2.2.8.2
b) the timing of the expansion and the phasing of development within the
designated greenfields area will not adversely affect the achievement of
the intensification target and density targets, and other policies of this
Plan, and where applicable, will be consistent with the relevant policies
of the Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment Plans
c.) the existing or planned infrastructure and community infrastructure
required to accommodate the proposed expansion can be provided in
a financially and environmentally sustainable manner
d) in prime agricultural areaS,
I. the lands do not comprise specJalty crop areas
il. there are no reasonable alternatives that avoid prime agricultural areas
HI. there are no reasonable alternatives on lower priority agricultural
lands in prime agricultural areas
e) impacts from expanding on agricultural operations which are adjacent
or close to the settlement areas are mitigated to the extent feasible
f) in determining the most appropriate location for expansions to the
boundaries of settlement areas, the policies of Sections 2 (Wise Use
and Management of Resources) and 3 (Protecting Public Heath and
Safety) of the PPS, 2005 are applied
g) for small cJties and towns within the outer ring, such expansions
maintain or result in a minimum of one full-time job per three
residents within or in the immediate vicinity of the small cJty or town,
or the expansion will directly result in the small cJty or town moving
significantly toward such a ratio.
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROWTH PLiV-J 17
2.2.9 RURAL AREAS
1. Development in rural areas may be permitted in accordance with
Policy 2.2.2.1 i, only where it is compatible with the rural landscape
and can be sustained by rural service levels.
2. New multiple lots and units for residential development will be directed
to settlement areas.
3. New lots and uses in rural areas will be compatible with, and will not
hinder, surrounding agricultural operations.
4. For lands within the Greenbelt Area, the applicable policies in the
Greenbelt, Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine Plans apply.
18 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
3.1 CONTEXT
Ready and accessible public infrastructure is essential to the viability of Ontario's
communities and critical to economic competitiveness, quality of life and the
delivery of public services. But increasing demand, low-density land-use patterns
and historic underinvestment have resulted in a substantial infrastructure deficit
to meet the needs of current residents as well as those of future Ontarians.
This Plan provides the framework for infrastructure investments in the GGH so
that existing infrastructure and future investments are optimized to serve growth
to 2031 and beyond. The policy directions for intensification and compact urban
form in this Plan guide many of the infrastructure priorities in this section. It
is estimated that over 20 per cent of infrastructure capital costs could be saved
over 25 years in the GTA - generating an estimated $12.2 billion that could
be more efficiently invested - by moving from lower density development to
more efficient and compact urban form. 3
This Plan guides strategic investment decisions to support population and
economic growth - particularly in the three key areas of transportation, water
and wastewater systems, and community infTastructure. This Plan will be supported
by long-term multi-year provincial infrastructure investment strategies, such as
ReNew Ontario, and by sustainable financing models and sound infrastructure
asset management practices.
The transportation policies in this section guide the planning and development
of an integrated transportation system needed to support a vibrant economy
and quality of life in the GGH The policies promote co-ordination and
consistency among land-use and transportation planning and investment by all
levels of government and other transportation stakeholders in the GGH To
further facilitate co-ordination and to implement transportation initiatives in
this Plan, the Minister of Transportation is exploring options for establishing
a Greater Toronto Transportation Authority.
Investment in water and wastewater systems by all levels of government has
also lagged behind GGH growth and many municipalities are now faced with
significant renewal and capacity expansion issues. There is a need to co-ordinate
investment in water and wastewater infrastructure to support future growth in
J GTA Task Force. Greater 1Omnto: Report of the GTA Task Fora. January 1996. p. 12; Slack, Enid.
Munkipaf Finance and the Pattern of Urban Growth, CD. Howe Institute. No. 160. February 2002, p. 6;
TO Economics. Greater Toronto Area: Canada5- Primary Economic Locomotive in Need of Repairs. May 2002, p. 15.
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 19
ways that are linked to the determination of how these systems are paid for
and administered. Improved maintenance and upgrading of existing systems
are necessary to ensure the provision of reliable and safe water.
Investment in community infrastructure - such as hospitals, long-term care
facilities, schools and affordable housing - should be planned to keep pace
with changing needs and to promote more complete communities. In the case
of housing, there is an underlying societal need for affordable housing in many
municipalities that is heightened by growth pressures. Long-term infrastructure
strategies such as ReNew Ontario are addressing this infrastructure gap and
directing investments to help achieve complete communities.
3.2 POLICIES FOR INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT GROWTH
3.2.1 INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNiNG
1. Infrastructure planning, land-use planning, and infrastructure investment
will be co-ordinated to implement this Plan. Infrastructure includes but is
not limited to transit and transportation corridors, water and wastewater
systems, waste management systems, and community infrastructure.
2. Priority will be given to infrastructure investments made by the province
that support the policies and schedules in this Plan.
3. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will work with other Ministers
of the Crown and other public sector partners to identify strategic
infrastructure needs to support the implementation of this Plan through
multi-year infrastructure planning, and through the sub-area assessment
of transit and transportation, and water and wastewater systems as
provided for in policies 3.2.2.4 and 3.2.5.6.
3.2.2 TRANSPORTATION - GENERAL
1. The transportation system within the GGHwill be planned and managed to-
a) provide connectivity among transportation modes for moving people
and for moving goods
b) offer a balance of transportation choices that reduces reliance upon
any single mode and promotes transit, cycling and walking
c) be sustainable, by encouraging the most financially and environmentally
appropriate mode for trip-making
d) offer multi-modal access to jobs, housing, schools, cultural and
recreational opportunities, and goods and services
e) provide for the safety of system users.
@ Ontario
20 PLACES TO GROW
2. Transportation system planning, land-use planning, and transportation
investment, will be co-ordinated to implement this Plan.
3. In planning for the development, optimization, and/or expansion of new or
existing transportation corridors, the Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal
and Transportation, other Ministers of the Crown, and municipalities will -
a) ensure that corridors are identified and protected to meet current and
projected needs for various travel modes
b) support opportunities for multi-modal use where feasible, in particular
prioritizing transit and goods movement needs over those of single
occupant automobiles
c) consider separation of modes within corridors, where appropriate
d) for goods movement corridors, provide for linkages to planned or
existing inter-modal opportunities where feasible.
4. Through sub-area assessment, the Ministers of Transportation and
Public Infrastructure Renewal in consultation with upper- and single-tier
municipalities, will further refine and address phasing and coordination
of transportation infrastructure planning and investment.
5. Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop and implement
transportation demand management policies in their official plans or other
planning documents, to reduce trip distance and time, and increase the
modal share of alternatives to the automobile.
3.2.3 MOVING PEOPLE
1. Public transit will be the first priority for transportation infrastructure
planning and major transportation investments.
2. All decisions on transit planning and investment will be made according
to the following criteria:
a) Using transit infrastructure to shape growth;
b) Placing priority on increasing capacity on existing transit systems
to support intensification areas,
c) Expanding service areas to support transit-supportive residential
and employment densities;
d) Facilitating improved linkages from nearby neighbourhoods to
urban growth centres and major transit station areas,
e) Consistency with the strategic framework for future transit
@ Ontario
PfWPCSED GROWTH f)L)\N 21
investments outlined on Schedule 5;
f) Increasing the modal share of transit.
3. Municipalities will ensure that pedestrian and bicycle networks are integrated
into transportation planning to -
a) provide safe, comfortable travel for pedestrians and bicyclists within
existing communities and new development
b) provide linkages between intensification areas, adjacent neighbourhoods,
and transit stations, including dedicated lane space for bicyclists on
the major street network where feasible.
4. Schedule 5 provides the strategic framework for future transit investment
decisions, including capacity improvements on existing transit systems to
support intensification, and proposed higher order transit and inter-regional
transit links between urban growth centres, in the GGH Schedule 5 should
be read in conjunction with the policies in this Plan. The transit linkages
on Schedule 5 provide a strategic framework and are not drawn to scale.
Actual timing, phasing and alignments are subject to further study and,
where applicable, the environmental assessment process.
3.2.4 MOVING Goo05
1. The first priority of highway investment is to facilitate efficient goods
movement by linking inter-modal facilities, international gateways, and
communities within the GGH
2. The Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Transportation,
other appropriate Ministers of the Crown, and municipalities will work
with agencies and operators to -
a) co-ordinate and optimize goods movement systems
b) improve corridors for moving goods across the GGH consistent with
Schedule 6 of this Plan
c) promote and better integrate multi-modal goods movement and land-use
and transportation system planning, including the development of
freight -supportive land use guidelines.
3. Development in and adjacent to highway corridors outside of settlement
areas will be discouraged unless it is directly related to servicing the
operations of the corridor, or required for strategic employment purposes
identified through the sub-area assessment provided for in policy 2.2.6.6.
4. The Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Municipal Affairs and
22 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
Housing, and Transportation will work with municipalities to plan and
design highway corridors in such a way to discourage development outside
of settlement areas, in support of policy 3.2.4.3.
5. Municipalities will provide for the establishment of priority truck routes,
where feasible, to facilitate the movement of goods into and out of areas of
significant employment, industrial and commercial activity and to provide
alternate routes connecting to the provincial network.
6. Municipalities will plan for land uses in settlement areas along or in the
vicinity of inter-modal facilities, truck routes, railway corridors and yards,
airports, dockyards, highways and major interchanges that are compatible
with the primary goods movement function of these facilities, while
balancing these considerations with the other policies in this Plan for
intensification areas and existing built-up areas.
7. Schedule 6 provides the strategic framework for future goods movement
investment decisions in the GGH Schedule 6 should be read in conjunction
with the policies in this Plan. The proposed corridors shown on Schedule 6
provide a strategic framework and are not drawn to scale. Actual timing,
phasing, and alignments are subject to further study and, where applicable,
the environmental assessment process.
3.2.5 WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS
1. Municipal water and wastewater systems will generate sufficient revenue to
recover the full cost of providing water and wastewater services.
2. For lands within the Greenbelt Area, all policies regarding water and
wastewater systems or stormwater set out in provincial plans, applicable
to lands within the Greenbelt Area, continue to apply.
3. Municipalities are encouraged to plan and design municipal water and
wastewater systems that return water to the watershed from which the
withdrawal originates.
4. In settlement areas, construction of new or expansions of existing municipal
or private communal water and wastewater systems should only be considered
where the following conditions are met:
a) Strategies for water conservation and other water demand management
initiatives are being implemented in the existing service area;
b) Plans for expansion or for new services are to serve growth in a manner
that supports achievement of the intensification target and density target,
c) For municipal water and wastewater systems, the plans for expansion have
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GROWTH Pl.J\N 23
been considered in the context of the Great Lakes Basin and applicable
inter-provincial, national or bi-national agreements regarding the basin.
5. In rural areas, the extension of municipal or private communal water and
wastewater systems will only be permitted to address a human health issue,
or to service existing uses that were legally established prior to the date
this Plan came into force, and such extensions shall not be used as the
basis for new development.
6. Through sub-area assessment, the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal,
in consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities, will undertake an
analysis of water and wastewater capacity and requirements to service the
growth forecasts set out in this Plan.
7. Municipalities that share an inland water source and/or receiving water
body, should co-ordinate their planning for potable water, storm water, and
wastewater systems to ensure that water quality and quantity is maintained
and improved on a watershed basis.
8. Municipalities, in conjunction with conservation authorities, are encouraged
to prepare watershed plans and use such plans to guide development decisions
and water and wastewater servicing decisions.
9. Municipalities are encouraged to implement and support innovative stormwater
management actions as part of redevelopment and intensificaUon, such as
co-ordinated approaches across several properties or across municipal
boundaries, reuse of stormwater, and on-site storage and detention.
3.2.6 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE
1. Community infrastructure planning, land use planning, and community
infrastructure investment will be co-ordinated to implement this Plan.
2. Development will take into account the availability and location of existing
and proposed community infrastructure so that new and expanded community
infrastructure can be provided efficiently, effectively, and in a logical fashion.
3. A range of appropriate community infrastructure should be provided to support
needs resulting from population/demographic changes, including those related
to intensification, and to foster cOInplete communities.
4. Services planning, funding and delivery sectors are encouraged to develop
a community infrastructure strategy to facilitate the co-ordination and
planning of community infrastructure with land use, infrastructure and
investment through a collaborative and consultative process.
5. Municipalities will establish and implement minimum affordable housing
24 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
targets in accordance with Policy 1.4.3 of the PPS, 2005.
6. Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop a housing strategy in
consultation with lower-tier municipalities, the Minister of Municipal
Affairs and Housing and other appropriate stakeholders. The housing
strategy will set out a plan including Official Plan policies to meet the
needs of all residents, including the need for affordable housing - both
home ownership and rental housing. The housing strategy will include
the planning and development of a range of housing types and densities
to support the achievement of the intensification target and density targets.
@ Ontario
PROPOSE]) CROWTH PLAN 25
4.1 CONTEXT
The GGHis blessed with a broad array of unique natural and cultural heritage
features and sites, and valuable renewable and non-renewable resources that are
essential for the long-term economic prosperity, quality of life, and environmental
health of the region. These valuable assets must be wisely protected and managed
as part of planning for future growth.
Some of these features and areas are already protected through legislation,
statements of provincial policy such as the PPS, 2005, and provincial plans such
as the Greenbelt Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and the
Niagara Escarpment Plan. This Plan supports and builds on these initiatives.
4.2 POLICIES FOR PROTECTING WHAT IS VALUABLE
4.2.1 NATURAL SYSTEM
1. Through sub-area assessment, the Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal
and Natural Resources, in consultation with upper- and single-tier
municipalities, will identify the natural system of the GGH and where
appropriate, policies for its protection.
2. The natural system will include natural heritage katures and areas and linkages
between and among these features and with natural systems outside the
GGH and inside the Greenbelt Area. It will also include sensitive or vulnerable
surface water katures and ground water katures.
3. For lands within the Greenbelt Area, the natural system will be the Natural
System as described in the Greenbelt Plan. All policies regarding natural
systems set out in provincial plans, applicable to lands within the Greenbelt
Area, continue to apply.
4. Planning authorities are encouraged to identify locally significant natural
areas that link and augment the natural system.
5. Municipalities, conservation authorities, non-governmental organizations, and
other interested parties are encouraged to develop a system of publicly accessible
parkland, open space and trails, tncludtng shoreltne areas, withtn the GGHthat -
a) clearly demarcates where public access is and is not permitted
b) is based on a co-ordinated approach to trail planning and development, and
c) is based on good land stewardship practices for public and private lands.
26 PLACES TO GROW
@Ontario
6. Municipalities are encouraged to establish an urban open space system
within built-up areas, which may include rooftop gardens, communal
courtyards, and public parks.
4.2.2 PRIME AGRICULTURAL AREAS
I. Through sub-area assessment, the Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal
and Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, in partnership with appropriate
Ministers of the Crown and in consultation with upper- and single-tier
municipalities, will identify the prime agricultural areas, including the specialty
crop areas, of the CGH and where appropriate, policies for their protection.
2. For lands within the Greenbelt Area, the agricultural areas will be the
Agricultural System as described in the Greenbelt Plan. All policies
regarding agricultural areas and the agricultural system set out in provincial
plans, applicable to lands within the Greenbelt Area, continue to apply.
3. Municipalities are encouraged to maintain, improve and provide opportunities
for farm-related infrastructure such as drainage and irrigation.
4. Municipalities are encouraged to establish and work with agricultural
advisory committees and consult with them on decision-making related
to agricultural planning.
4.2.3 MINERAL AGGREGATE RESOURCES
1. The Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Natural Resources
will work with municipalities, producers of mineral aggregate resources, and
other stakeholders to develop a long-term strategy for ensuring the wise
use, conservation, availability and management of mIneral aggregate resources
in the GGH as well as identifying opportunities for resource recovery and
for co-ordinated approaches to rehabilitation where feasible.
4.2.4 A CULTURE OF CONSERVATION
I. Municipalities will develop and implement official plan policies and other
strategies in support of the following conservation objectives:
a) Water conservation, including
t. Water demand management to reduce per capita consumption
and improve resource efficiency
it. Water recycling to maximize the reuse and recycling of water
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GRDWTH Pl..AN 27
b) Energy conservation, including
i. Energy conservation for municipally owned facilities
ii. Identification of opportunities for, and where possible locations
for, alternative energy generation and distribution
Hi. Energy demand management to reduce energy consumption
iv. Land-use patterns and urban design standards that encourage and
support energy-efficient buildings and opportunities for cogeneration
c) Air quality protection, including
i. Reduction in emissions from municipal and residential sources
d) Integrated waste management, including
i. Enhanced waste reduction, composting, and recycling initiatives
and new opportunities where appropriate
ii. Comprehensive planning for the management of residual waste
Hi. Promotion of reuse, recycling, and renovation of the built
environment
iv. Integrated approaches including recycling, reuse, waste diversion,
and the disposal of waste that cannot be recycled, composted or
otherwise diverted from disposal
v. Consideration of waste management initiatives within the
context of long-term regional planning, and in collaboration with
neighbouring municipalities
e) Cultural heritage conservation, including
i. Conservation of cultural heritage and archaeological resources
as built-up areas are intensified.
28 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
5.1 CONTEXT
Key to the success of this Plan is its effective implementation. Successful
implementation will require that all levels of government, non-governmental
organizations, the private sector, and citizens work together in a co-ordinated
and collaborative way to implement the policies of this Plan and realize its
goals. The success of this Plan is dependent on a range of mechanisms being
in place to implement the Plan's policies. This includes the legislative framework
provided by the Places To Grow Act, 2005. and the application of this Plan
to all decisions on matters, proceedings or applications, made under the
Planning Act and the Condominium Act.
A wide range of complementary planning and fiscal tools will be used to
implement this Plan. These include instruments found in the Planning Act and
the Municipal Act, 2001.
Measuring the success of this Plan will also require rigorous and consistent
evaluation of its progress. One method to measure this Plan's progress currently
under development is an index that will monitor changes in the amount of land
developed and the increased percentage of new development taking place within
the built-up areas of the GGH
5.1.1 PLACES TO GROW ACT, 2005
The Places to Grow Act, 2005 provides the legislative framework for this Plan.
It gives the Lieutenant Governor in Council the authority to establish any area
of land in the Province as a growth plan area and requires that the Minister of
Public Infrastructure Renewal prepare a growth plan for all or part of that area.
The growth plan area for this Plan is defined by Ontario Regulation 416/05.
It is set out on Schedule 1 of this Plan.
A growth plan works in conjunction with other provincial legislation, policies,
plans and regulations. Land use within the growth plan area continues to be
governed by the Planning Act and Ontario's existing planning system and is
also subject to the conformity requirements and conflict provisions of the
Places to Grow Act, 2005.
The Act also includes processes for making and amending growth plans. This
includes the requirement that the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal
review each growth plan at least every 10 years after the plan comes into force.
Under the Act, the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal may propose an
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROWTH PLAN 29
amendment to a growth plan. When an amendment is proposed, the Minister
of Public Infrastructure Renewal will give notice and invite written submissions
on the amendment. Any significant modification to the plan requires approval of
the Lieutenant Governor in Council.
5.1.2 IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSiS
In order to implement the policies of this Plan, the Minister of Public
Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with other Ministers of the Crown will:
I. verify and delineate the built boundary
2. develop a detailed assessment of the need for future designated greenfield areas
3. determine the scope and scale of urban growth centres
4. undertake sub-area assessment to refine the policies in this Plan at a regional
scale:
i. regional economic assessment to guide planning for employment
ii. refinement and phasing of the proposed transportation network
Hi. analysis of water/wastewater capacity and requirements to serve projected
growth
iv. identification of the natural system
v. identification of prime agricultural and rural areas.
The work on the built boundary, designated greenfield a/pas, and urban growth centres
will be undertaken by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, through
one-on-one consultation with individual upper- and single-tier municipalities.
The sub-area assessment will be undertaken by the Minister of Public Infrastructure
Renewal and other Ministers of the Crown, in consultation with upper- and
single-tier municipalities. The sub-area assessment will provide further
refinement to this Plan's policies and inform implementation strategies at a
scale smaller than the GGH Differing contexts within each sub-area means
that implementation strategies will need to be tailored to circumstances and
coordinated across municipal boundaries.
5.2 POLICIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION
5.2.1 GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION ANO INTERPRETATION
1. This Plan, including context sections, policies, definitions and schedules, should
be read in its entirety and all relevant policies are to be applied to each situation.
30 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
2. The appendices to this Plan are provided for information purposes only.
3. Terms in italics are defined in the Definitions section of this Plan. The
definitions apply to these italicized terms regardless of whether the terms
are singular or plural.
4. In the Definitions section, sources have been cited where the definitions are
the same or have the same content as the definitions provided in the policy
or statute cited.
5. The policies and targets of this Plan represent minimum standards. This
Plan does not prevent planning authorities and decision-makers from going
beyond minimum standards established in specific policies and targets, unless
doing so would conflict with any policy of this Plan, the applicable PPS, or
any other provincial plan.
6. The boundaries and lines displayed on the schedules, unless otherwise stated
provide strategic direction only and should not be read to scale.
7. The built boundary, shown on schedules 2, 4, 5, and 6, is conceptual and
should be used as guidance to implement the relevant policies of this Plan.
8. The settlement area boundary as shown on Schedules 2, 4, 5, and 6 is
conceptual. For the actual boundary, the appropriate municipal official plans
should be consulted.
9. Where this Plan indicates that further analysis and assessment will be carried
out but the analysis has not been completed, all relevant policies of this
Plan continue to apply and any policy that relies on information that will
be available from further analysis should be implemented to the fullest
extent possible.
10. A coordinated approach will be taken both within the Government of
Ontario and its dealings with municipalities, to implement this Plan, in
particular for issues that cross municipal boundaries.
11. Where policies contain a list of sub-policies, the list of sub-policies is to be
applied in its entirety unless otherwise specified.
12. References to the responsibilities of the Minister of Public Infrastructure
Renewal set out in this Plan should be read as the Minister, his or her
assignee, his or her delegate pursuant to the Places to Grow Act, 2005, or
any other member of Executive Council assigned responsibility for growth
plans under the Places to Grow Act, 2005.
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROWTH PU\f\J 31
5.2.2 MONITORING/PERFORMANCE MEASURES
1. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, will develop a set of indicators
to measure the implementation of the policies in this Plan.
2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will monitor the implementation
of this Plan, including reviewing performance indicators concurrent with
any review of this Plan.
3. Municipalities will monitor and report on the implementation of this Plan's
policies within their municipality, in accordance with guidelines developed
by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal.
5.2.3 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
1. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will ensure ongoing
consultation with the public and stakeholders on the implementation of
this Plan.
2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will provide information
to the public and stakeholders in order to build understanding of growth
management and facilitate informed involvement in the implementation
of this Plan.
3. Municipalities are encouraged to engage the public and stakeholders in local
efforts to implement this Plan and to provide the necessary information to
ensure the informed involvement of local citizens.
32 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
AFFORDABLE
a) in the case of ownership housing, the least expensive of:
1. housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation
costs which do not exceed 30 per cent of gross annual household
income for low and moderate income households; or
2. housing for which the purchase price is at least 10 per cent below the
average purchase price of a resale unit in the regional market area;
b) in the case of rental housing, the least expensive of:
1. a unit for which the rent does not exceed 30 per cent of gross annual
household income for low and moderate income households; or
2. a unit for which the rent is at or below the average market rent of a
unit in the regional market area.
For the purposes of this definition:
Low and moderate income households means, in the case of ownership housing,
households with incomes in the lowest 60 per cent of the income distribution for
the regional market area; or in the case of rental housing, households with
incomes in the lowest 60 per cent of the income distribution for renter households
for the regional market area.
Regional market area refers to an area, generally broader than a lower-tier
municipality that has a high degree of social and economic interaction. In
southern Ontario, the upper or single-tier municipality will normally serve as
the regional market area. Where a regional market area extends significantly
beyond upper- or single-tier boundaries, it may include a combination of upper-,
single and/or lower-tier municipalities. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
BROWNFIELD SITES
Undeveloped or previously developed properties that may be contaminated. They
are usually, but not exclusively, former industrial or commercial properties that
may be underutilized, derelict or vacant. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
BUilT-UP AREAS
All land inside the built boundary.
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROWTH PL1~N 33
BUILT BOUNOARY
The edge of the developed urban area as defined by the Minister of Public
Infrastructure Renewal.
COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE
Community infrastructure refers to lands, buildings, and structures that support
the quality of life for people and communities by providing public services
for health, education, recreation, socio-cultural activities, security and safety,
and affordable housing.
COMPACT URBAN FORM
A land-use pattern that encourages efficient use ofland, walkable neighbourhoods,
mixed land uses (residential, retail, workplace and institutional all within one
neighbourhood), proximity to transit and reduced need for infrastructure.
Compact urban form can include detached and semi -detached houses on small
lots as well as townhouses and walk-up apartments, multi-storey commercial
developments, and apartments or offices above retail.
COMPLETE COMMUNITIES
Complete communities meet a person's needs for daily living through their
whole lifetime by providing convenient access to an appropriate mix of jobs,
a full range of housing including affordable housing, schools, retail, and
community infrastructure for their residents. Convenient access to public
transportation and options for safe, non-motorized travel is also provided.
DENSITY TARGETS
The density target for urban growth centres is defined in Policy 2.2.4.5 and
Policy 2.2.4.6. The density target for designated greenfield areas is defined in
Policy 2.2.7.1.
DESIGNATED EMPLOYMENT AREA
Areas designated in an official plan for clusters of business and economic activities
including, but not limited to, manufacturing, warehousing and associated office,
retail and ancillary facilities but does not include major retail uses.
DESIGNATED GREENFIELD AREA
The area between the built boundary and the settlement area boundary.
DRINKING-WATER SYSTEM
A system of works, excluding plumbing, that is established for the purpose of
providing users of the system with drinking water and that includes any thing
used for the collection, production, treatment, storage, supply or distribution of
@ Ontario
34 PLACES TO GROW
water; any thing related to the management of residue from the treatment process
or the management of the discharge of a substance into the natural environment
from the treatment system; and a well or intake that serves as the source or entry
point of raw water supply for the system. (Sate I%ter Drinking Act; 2002)
EMPLOYMENT LANOS
Lands zoned or designated within settlement areas for employment uses.
These lands may be located outside of a designated employment area.
FULL COST
The full cost of providing water and wastewater services includes the source
protection costs, operating costs, financing costs, renewal and replacement
costs and improvement costs associated with extracting, treating or distributing
water to the public, and collecting, treating or discharging wastewater.
GATEWAY ECONOMIC ZONE
Settlement areas that, due to their proximity to major international border
crossings, have unique economic importance to the region and Ontario, as
depicted on Schedules 2, 5, and 6.
GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE (GGH)
The geographic area designated as the Greater Golden Horseshoe growth plan
area in Ontario Regulation 416/05.
GREENBELT AREA
The geographic area of the Greenbelt as defined by Ontario Regulation 59/05 as
provided by the Greenbelt Act, 2005.
GREYFlELOS
Previously developed properties that are not contaminated. They are usually,
but not exclusively, former commercial properties that may be underutilized,
derelict or vacant.
GROUNO WATER FEATURE
Water-related features in the earth's subsurface, including recharge/discharge
areas, water tables, aquifers and unsaturated zones that can be defined by surface
and subsurface hydrogeologic investigations. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
@ Ontario
PROPOSE:D CROWTH PLAN 35
HIGHER ORDER TRANSIT
Transit that operates in its own dedicated right-of-way, outside of mixed
traffic, and therefore can achieve a frequency of service greater than mixed-
traffic transit. Higher order transit can include heavy rail (such as subways),
light rail (such as streetcars), and buses in dedicated rights-of-way.
INFlll
Development on vacant or underutilized land in the built-up area.
INNER RING
Defined as the geographic area consisting of the municipalities of Hamilton and
Toronto and the upper-tier municipalities of Durham, Halton, Peel and York.
INTENSIFICATION
The development of a property, site or area at a higher density than currently
exists through:
a) redevelopment, including the reuse of brownJJeld sites,
b) the development of vacant and/or underutilized lots within previously
developed areas;
c) inJJll development; and
d) the expansion or conversion of existing buildings.
(Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
INTENSIFICATION AREAS
Lands identified by municipalities or the Minister of Public Infrastructure
Renewal within the built boundary that are to be the focus for accommodating
more intense development. Intensification areas include urban growth centres,
intensification corridors, major transit station areas, and other major opportunities
that may include inJJII, redevelopment, brownJJeld sites, the expansion or
conversion of existing buildings and greyJJelds.
INTENSIFICATION CORRIDORS
Lands along major roads, arterials or higher order transit corridors within the
built boundary that have the potential to provide a focus for higher density
mixed-use development consistent with planned transit service levels.
INTENSIFICATION TARGET
The intensification target is as established in Policy 2.2.3.I, Policy 2.2.3.2
and Policy 2.2.3.3.
36 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
INTER-MOOAl FACIlITY
A location where transfers between carriers can be made, as part of a single
journey. A typical freight inter-modal facility is a rail yard where containers
are transferred between trucks and trains.
MAJOR OFFICE
Major Office is generally defined as freestanding office buildings of 10,000 m2
or greater, or with 500 jobs or more.
MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREA
The area including and around any existing or planned higher oroer transit station
within a setUement amI, or the area including and around a major bus depot in an
urban core. Station areas generally are defined as the area within an approximate
500m radius of a transit station, representing about a IO-minute walk.
MINERAL AGGREGATE RESOURCES
Gravel, sand, clay, earth, shale, stone, limestone, dolostone, sandstone, marble,
granite, rock or other material prescribed under the Aggregate Resources Act
suitable for construction, industrial, manufacturing and maintenance purposes
but does not include metallic ores, asbestos, graphite, kyanite, mica, nepheline
syenite, salt, talc, wollastonite, mine tailings or other material prescribed under
the Mining Act. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
MOOAl SHARE
Modal share is the percentage of person-trips made by one travel mode,
relative to the total number of person-trips made by all modes.
MUlTI-MOOAl
Refers to the availability or use of more than one form of transportation, such
as automobiles, walking, cycling, buses, rapid transit, rail (such as commuter
and freight), trucks, air and marine.
MUNICIPAL COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW
An official plan review, or an official plan amendment, initiated by a municipality
that comprehensively applies the policies and schedules of this Plan.
MUNICIPAL WATER ANO WASTEWATER SYSTEMS
Municipal Water Systems are all or part of a drinking-water system:
a) that is owned by a municipality or by a municipal service board
established under section 195 of the Municipal Act, 2001,
b) that is owned by a corporation established under section 203 of the
Municipal Act, 2001,
@ Ontario
PROPOSED GROWTH flL./\N 37
c) from which a municipality obtains or will obtain water under the terms
of a contract between the municipality and the owner of the system, or
d) that is in a prescribed class (Sale ~ter Drinking Act, 2002).
Municipal Wastewater Systems are defined as any sewage works owned or
operated by a municipality.
NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES AND AREAS
Features and areas, including significant wetlands, significant coastal wetlands,
fish habitat, significant woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield,
significant valleylands south and east of the Canadian Shield, significant habitat
of endangered species and threatened species, significant wildlife habitat, and
significant areas of natural and scientific interest, which are important for their
environmental and social values as a legacy of the natural landscapes of an area.
For the purposes of this definition:
Wetlands means lands that are seasonally or permanently covered by shallow
water, as well as lands where the water table is close to or at the surface. In
either case the presence of abundant water has caused the formation of hydric
soils and has favoured the dominance of either hydrophytic plants or water
tolerant plants. The four major types of wetlands are swamps, marshes, bogs
and fens. Periodically soaked or wet lands being used for agricultural purposes
which no longer exhibit wetland characteristics are not considered to be
wetlands for the purposes of this definition.
Coastal wetland means any wetland that is located on Lake Ontario, Lake Erie,
Lake Huron, or the Niagara River; or any other wetland that is on a tributary
to any of the above-specified water bodies and lies, either wholly or in part,
downstream of a line located 2 kilometres upstream of the 1: 100 year floodline
(plus wave run-up) of the large water body to which the tributary is connected.
Fish habitat, as defined in the FisheriesAct, c. F-14, means spawning grounds
and nursery, rearing, food supply, and migration areas on which fish depend
directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes.
Woodlands means treed areas that provide environmental and economic
benefits to both the private landowner and the general public, such as erosion
prevention, hydrological and nutrient cycling, provision of clean air and the
long-term storage of carbon, provision of wildlife habitat, outdoor recreational
opportunities, and the sustainable harvest of a wide range of woodland products.
Woodlands include treed areas, woodlots or forested areas and vary in their
level of significance at the local, regional and provincial levels.
38 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
Valleylands means a natural area that occurs in a valley or other landform depression
that has water flowing through or standing for some period of the year.
Endangered species means a species that is listed or categorized as an
"Endangered Species" on the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources' official
species at risk list, as updated and amended from time to time.
Threatened species means a species that is listed or categorized as a
"Threatened Species" on the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources' official
species at risk list, as updated and amended from time to time.
Wildlife habitat means areas where plants, animals and other organisms live,
and find adequate amounts of food, water, shelter and space needed to sustain
their populations. Specific wildlife habitats of concern may include areas where
species concentrate at a vulnerable point in their annual or life cycle, and areas
that are important to migratory or non-migratory species.
Areas of natural and scientific interest (ANSI) means areas of land and water
containing natural landscapes or features that have been identified as having life
science or earth science values related to protection, scientific study or education.
In regard to the above, significant means:
a) in regard to wetlands, coastal wetlands and areas of natural and scientific
interest, an area identified as provincially significant by the Ontario Ministry
of Natural Resources using evaluation procedures established by the Province,
as amended from time to time;
b) in regard to the habitat of endangered species and threatened species, the
habitat, as approved by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, that is
necessary for the maintenance, survival, and/or the recovery of naturally
occurring or reintroduced populations of endangered species or threatened
species, and where those areas of occurrence are occupied or habitually
occupied by the species during all or any part(s) of its life cycle;
c) in regard to woodlands, an area which is ecologically important in terms
of features such as species composition, age of trees and stand history;
functionally important due to its contribution to the broader landscape
because of its location, size or due to the amount of forest cover in the
planning area; or economically important due to site quality, species
composition, or past management history; and
d) in regard to other features and areas, ecologically important in terms of
features, functions, representation or amount, and contributing to the
quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic area or natural system.
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROwn-I PlJ~N 39
Criteria for determining significance for the resources identified in sections
(c)-(d) are recommended by the Province, but municipal approaches that
achieve or exceed the same objective may also be used.
While some significant resources may already be identified and inventoried
by official sources, the significance of others can only be determined after
evaluation. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
NATURAL SYSTEM
As defined by Policy 4.2.1.1 and Policy 4.2.1.2.
NEW MULTIPLE LOTS AND UNITS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The creation of more than three units or lots through either plan of subdivision,
consent or plan of condominium.
OUTER RING
Defined as the geographic area consisting of the cities of Barrie, Brantford,
Guelph, Kawartha Lakes, Orillia and Peterborough; the counties of Brant,
Dufferin, Haldimand, Northumberland, Peterborough, Simcoe and
Wellington; and the Regions of Niagara and Waterloo.
PRIME AGRiCULTURAL AREA
Areas where prime agricultural lands predominate. This includes areas of
prime agricultural lands and associated Canada Land Inventory Class 4-7
soils, and additional areas where there is a local concentration of farms which
exhibit characteristics of ongoing agriculture.
For the purposes of this definition:
Prime agricultural land includes specialty crop areas and! or Canada Land
Inventory Classes 1, 2, and 3 soils, in this order of priority for protection.
(Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
PRIVATE COMMUNAL WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS
Private Communal Water Systems is defined as a drinking-water system that
serves six or more lots or private residences and is not owned by a municipality.
Private Wastewater Systems is defined as a sewage works that serves six or
more lots or private residences and is not owned by a municipality.
REDEVELOPMENT
The creation of new units, uses or lots on previously developed land in existing
communities, including brownlield sites. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
RURAL AREAS
40 PLACES TO GROW
@ Ontario
Lands which are located outside settlement areas and that are not prime
agricultural areas.
SETTLEMENT AREAS
Urban areas and rural settlement areas within municipalities (such as cities,
towns, villages and hamlets) that are:
a) built-up areas where development is concentrated and which have
a mix of land uses; and
b) lands which have been designated in an official plan for development
over the long-term planning horizon provided for in Policy 1.1.2 of
the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005.
SEWAGE WORKS
Any works for the collection, transmission, treatment and disposal of sewage
or any part of such works, but does not include plumbing to which the
Building Code Act, 1992 applies. (Ontario vu,ter Resources Act)
For the purposes of this definition:
Sewage includes, but is not limited to drainage, storm water, residential wastes,
commercial wastes and industrial wastes.
SMALL CITIES AND TOWNS
Settlement areas that do not include an urban growth centre.
SPECIAL TV CROP AREA
Areas designated using evaluation procedures established by the Province, as
amended from time to time, where specialty crops such as tender fruits (peaches,
cherries, plums), grapes, other fruit crops, vegetable crops, greenhouse crops, and
crops from agriculturally developed organic soil lands are predominantly grown,
usually resulting from:
a) soils that have suitability to produce specialty crops, or lands that are
subject to special climatic conditions, or a combination of both; and/or
b) a combination of farmers skilled in the production of specialty crops,
and of capital investment in related facilities and services to produce,
store, or process specialty crops.
(Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
@ Ontario
PROPOSED CROWTH PL.AN 41
SUB-AREA
A sub-area is an area identified by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal
within the Greater Golden Horseshoe at a scale generally larger than anyone
upper- or single-tier municipality.
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
Water-related features on the earth's surface, including headwaters, rivers, stream
channels, inland lakes, seepage areas, recharge/discharge areas, springs, wetlands,
and associated riparian lands that can be defined by their soil moisture, soil type,
vegetation or topographic characteristics. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
TRANSIT-SUPPORTIVE
Makes transit viable and improves the quality of the experience of using transit.
When used in reference to development, it often refers to compact, mixed-use
development that has a high level of employment and residential densities to
support frequent transit service. When used in reference to urban design, it
often refers to design principles that make development more accessible for
transit users, such as roads laid out in a grid network rather than a discontinuous
network; pedestrian-oriented uses along roads to encourage walking to transit;
reduced setbacks and placing parking at the sides/rear of buildings; and improved
access between arterial roads and interior blocks in residential areas.
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
A thoroughfare and its associated buffer zone for passage or conveyance of
vehicles or people. A transportation corridor includes:
a) major roads, arterial roads, and highways for moving people and goods,
b) rail lines/railways for moving people and goods,
c) transit rights-of-way/transitways including buses and light rail for
moving people.
TRANSPORTATION OEMANO MANAGEMENT
A set of strategies that results in more efficient use of the transportation
system by influencing travel behaviour by mode, time of day, frequency, trip
length, regulation, route, or cost. Examples include: carpooling, vanpooling,
and shuttle buses; parking management; site design and on-site facilities that
support transit and walking; bicycle facilities and programs; pricing (road tolls
or transit discounts); flexible working hours; telecommuting; high occupancy
vehicle lanes; park-and-ride; and incentives for ride-sharing; using transit,
walking and cycling; and, initiatives to discourage drive-alone trips by residents,
employees, and students.
@ Ontario
42 PLACES TO GROW
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
A system consisting of corridors and rights-of-way for the movement of people
and goods, and associated transportation facilities including transit stops and
stations, cycle lanes, bus lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, rail facilities,
park-and-ride lots, service centres, rest stops, vehicle inspection stations,
inter-modal terminals, harbours, and associated facilities such as storage and
maintenance. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005)
URBAN GROWTH CENTRES
Locations set out in Schedule 4. Urban growth centres will be delineated
pursuant to Policy 2.2.4.2, Policy 2.2.4.3, and Policy 2.2.4.4.
WATERSHED
An area that is drained by a river and its tributaries. (Provincial Policy
Statement, 2005)
WATERSHED PLAN
A watershed plan provides a framework for integrated decision-making for the
management of human activities, land, water, aquatic life and aquatic resources
within a watershed It addresses how water quality and quantity and ecosystems
are to be protected and enhanced, and includes matters such as a water budget,
conservation plan, setbacks from water bodies, stormwater management require-
ments and a monitoring plan.
@ Ontario
PROPOSE:D GROWTH PU\N 43
Boundary of Upper and Single-ller Munidpallties
Greater Golden
GreenbeltArea+ Horseshoe Growth
P1anArea++
Sources: Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Ministry of
Natural Resources and Ministry of MunldpaJ Affairs and Housing.
t~ i I
i ~!. H h I
Ii lili I 1 11111Iil;
:@@I !.I.~~
- . >! -I~
. j' '. .
.. ~!--..
i J. J lUll i~
i!f!iJHiiiU.
. ~ ~ .~. !~~l"~
! 8111 .l ~~H?
,
.
.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATiON, HOUSEHOLDS AND EMPLDYMENT FOR THE GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE 2001-2031 (fi9ures in OOOs)
POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLDYMENT
2001 2011 2021 2031 2001 20111 2021! 2031 2001 2011 2021 2031
2,590 2,760 2,930 3,080 940 1.070 I 1.180 I 1.270 1,440 1.540 1.600 1.640
1,030, 1,320 I 1,490 1,640
760 i 1,06011,300 i 1,500
I : I
530 I 660 1 810 i 960
, I
Region of Halton 390 1 520 1 650 I 780 130 190 240 300 190 280 340 390
City of Hamilton 510 1 540 I 590 i 660 190 210 240 270 210 230 270 300
~---t-:-_ I ~--.:-...I~
~ 5,81016.86 I,I/U I,"""i
, I, I
County of Northumberland 80 I 87 93 96 30 ! 34 391 42 29 I 32 I 33 33
County of Peterborough' 131 1 137 144 149 50 I 55! 611 64 54 i 59! 60 60
City of Toronto
Region of Peel
Region of York
Region of Durham
City of Kawartha Lakes
,
721 80
46 i 49
427 442
474 511
91 100
County of Haidimand
53 56
Region of Niagara
County of Brant~
129 141
157 173
Region of Waterloo
456 526
623 729
County of Wellington'
195
269 321
223
County of Dufferin
53
71 80
62
County of Simcoe*
392
484
, ~
310
730
870
820,
410
480
540
530
220
590
,
700 I
780
330
420
500
390
170
350
350
190
260
310
230
290
27
311 37 43
20
23
25 27
16
18 21 23
19 20
17
19
162
179 200 218
209 218
671 71
324 1 366
186
201
45
52 60 67
62
55
161
200 244 ! 289
282
236
68 I
171
I
85 106 128
158
99
117
137
,
2112629
19
22
25
27
667
177
1531 197
254
230
137
223 260
Source: Hemsofl Consulting Ltd, "Tile GrOl,vth Forecast for tile Greater Golden Horseshoe: ]anu<1ry 2005
Note,' Numbers rounded off to neafest 10,000 for GTAH municipalities and nearest J, 000 for outer ring municipalities.
"Includes single tier municipalities that are located geographically within county, e.g Simcoe County fo.recasts includes City of Banie and City of OnjJia.
Separate forecasts fOr all sjngJe-{jer municipalities will be deteJmined
** Totals may not add up due to rounding.
Greenbell:Area+
Greater Golden
Horseshoe Growth
PlanArea++
SOurces: Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Minlstry of
Natural Resources, Ministry of Finance and MiniStry of Municipal
Affajrsand Housing.
.OntarloRegulatlon59/05
++ontario Regulation 416/05
20 10
,
Urban Growth Centres
IntematlonalAirports
Improved Higher Order
-Transit*
_~~~~~Order
. . . Improved Inter~Reglonal
Transit to 2031 *
N-GreenbeltArea'
Proposed Airport
Greater Golden
Horseshoe Growth
Plan Area'~
* Unes shown are conceptual and Illustrative only and not to scale.
They are not aligned with infrastructure Of munidpal boundaries.
Sources: Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Ministry of
Transportation, Ministry of Natural Resources and MiniSb'y of
Munidpai Affairs and Housing.
~Ontario Regulation 59/05
HOntario Reguiation 416/05
. Intermod<llHubs
€l :r Intermoda!
~BorderCrossings
existing Major Highways * @ International Airports
---- Highway Extensions * (~ProposedAirport
Existing Rail Unes * Q;> MajorPlJrts
M,GreenbeltArea+
Greater Golden
_Growth
PlanArea++
* UnesshoWfl are conceptual and iIlustratlve only and not to scale.
They are not aligned with infrastructure or muniCipal boundaries.
SOurces: M!nistry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Ministry of
Transportation, Ministry of Natural Resources and Ministry of
Munidpal Affairs and Housing.
+OntarioRegulationS9{OS
HOntarloRegulatlon416/0S
Manitoba
Quebec
Ontario
Settlement
Areas
FEEDBACK ON THIS OOCUMENT CAN BE SUBMITTED TO -
Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal
Ontario Growth Secretariat
777 Bay Street. 4th Floor
Toronto, ON M5G 2E5
Fax: 416-325-7403
E-mail: placestogrow@pir.gov.on.ca
To submit your comments electronically, you can complete an
on-line feedback form available at www.placestogrow.pir.gov.on.ca
For more information please call our toll free line at 1-866-479-9781.
Toronto-area residents can call 416-325-1210.
We would appreciate your feedback by January 27, 2006.
.
Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal
ISBN 0-7794-9089-4
Paid for by the Government of Ontario
{[J Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2005
Existe en francais