01 22 2003 COW Agenda
.,
"
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA
DATE: WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 22,2003
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
ROBINSON ROOM
************************************************************************************************
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. RECEIPT OF ACCOUNTS:
a) Statement of Accounts for the month of December, 2002.
5. DEPUTATIONS:
a) 9:00 a.m.
N. McDonald, In-Camera, Legal matter (see Items 11 a) and 11 b).
b) 9:30 a.m.
Ontario's Lake Country, re: accomplishments for 2002 and area
tourism promotional plans for 2003.
6. CORRESPONDENCE:
a) Oro-Medonte Chamber of Commerce, correspondence re: Awards Banquet, March 6,
2003.
b) Ontario Provincial Police, correspondence re: fourth quarter statistics for 2002 and year
end statistics.
c) McLarens Toplis Claims Representative, correspondence re: Hydro One Inc. and Moon
Point Home Owners Association, power surge damage claim.
'!
d) Hawkestone and Area Community Association, correspondence re: development of
lands, Hawkestone Community Hall.
..
....
,..
.,
e) Edgar Community Hall, correspondence re: Ontario Early Years Playschool use of hall.
f) Midland Public Library Board, minutes of December 12, 2002 meeting.
g) Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission, minutes of November 21, 2002 meeting.
h) Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission, correspondence re: Air Traffic Procedures
Brief.
7. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
a) Mayor J. Neil Craig re: County of Simcoe Human Services Committee, Land
Ambulance Reports, Items HS03-005 and HS03-001.
b) Report No. ADM2003-006, Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, re: Warminster Fire Hall
Property.
c) Paul Gravelle, Treasurer, Report on Tax Arrears as at December 31,2002.
d) Report No. FD2003-1, Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief, re: Monthly Fire Report, December,
2002.
e) Report No. FD2003-2, Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief, re: 2002 Fire Report.
8. PUBLIC WORKS
None.
9. ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES:
a) Report No. EES2003-03, Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering and Environmental
Services, re: Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, request to enter into a
Memorandum of Understanding to construct a monitoring well at the Township Gravel
Pit located at Line 7 North and Old Barrie Road.
b) Report No. EES2003-04, Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering and Environmental
Services, re: request for Resolution of Council to Support Bill 125.
l'
"
2
10. BUILDING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
a) Report No. PD2003-01, Andria Leigh, Senior Planner, re: Development Application
Status Report for January - December, 2002.
b) Report No. PD2003-02, Andria Leigh, Senior Planner, re: Committee of Adjustment
Decisions from January 16, 2003.
c) Report No. BD20203-01, Ron Kolbe, Director of Building/Planning, re: Building Report,
December, 2002 and Year End Summary.
11. IN-CAMERA:
a) N. McDonald, Legal Matter (see Item 5a).
b) Graham, Wilson & Green, re: Legal matter.
c) Report No. TR2003-01, Paul Gravelle, Treasurer, re: Tax Arrears, File No. F22-11954.
d) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, Legal Issues Update.
12. ADJOURNMENT:
3
ADDENDUM
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
Wednesday, January 22,2003
7. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
f) Mayor J. Neil Craig, information re: Nottawasaga Valley Conservation
Authority 2003-2005 Business Plan (copy available in the Clerk's office for
review).
11. IN-CAMERA:
e) Mayor J. Neil Craig, update re: Trail Advisory Committee resignations.
f) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, reo Personnel Matter.
.....
t
--.--. -
.
.
-k'; ---.........)
Without Prejudice
Dr. Andrea Woloszczuk Deputation: To Oro-Medonte Council February 5, 2003
My name is Dr. Andrea Woloszczuk. I am here tonight 0 address the changes that are
being proposed for a stretch ofwaternont on Lake Simcoe, entitled Parldands in ,Plan 709.
Let me begin by explaining that our family has had a cottage in the Oro
Community for fifty years. When my father bought the land he, like our neigbours,
purchased it with deeded access to the waternont for exclusive use into perpetuity. This
beautiful stretch of land is the focal point of our community. It serves as a promenade and
swimming area for each and every neighbour to use and cherish. ,
As a childI dove from those rocks. I fished iri those waters. I dug in the cliffs by
our family dock and I enjoyed fires by the lake at dusk. It was a peaceful and friendly
environment. This is where I interacted with many other children and got to know all the
neighbours in my community. There were no hostilities, We were always open to visitors
outside the community.
Things are quite different now. Suddenly our deeded access has expired. The land
has quietly been converted to public property and in an ironic twist of fate most of that
land (86%) is now being offered for sale in a hushed manner to a few select cottagers
whose lots abut the waterfront. The township reallocation of this land is not just
inequitable. It is in direct opposition to the majority view of the community and the
public. .
. There are surrounding issues that are also highly problematic. The land is quite
valuable. The 768.5 feet of prime lakefront property is appraised at $2600 a foot, for a
total of TWO :MILLION DOLLARS. Curiously, the sale offer is not being conducted
through a real estate agency or tender. No one else in our community has ever had a
chance to purchase the land. Additionally, the appraisal methods seem questionable (I'll
get to that shortly) and the price at which the land is being sold is not being disclosed.
Furthermore, an earlier township commitment to replace our lost shoreline with
new lakefront property from block 38 has been revoked. Instead we are now suddenly
being faced with diminished land assets and the prospect of paying new taxes and liability
insurance on property that we were not responsible for in the past.
In marked contrast, cottagers, abutting the lake will be spared these expenses.
Their property values will increase dramatically. Their ability to enjoy the water will be
enhanced at the expense of everyone else. Lakeside cottagers already enjoy twenty-four
hour views of the water and are steps from the beach. We backlot residents have been here
as long, if not longer than some of the frontlot cottagers. We have histories in the waters
of Lake Simcoe and I cannot understand why our histories are not being preserved
according to the original spirit and laws of the deeded land.
I am also anxious to know how the proposals above managed to get this far without
the full understanding of the community. To my knowledge, when a municipality plans to
make land-zoning changes, the community is asked to provide input, It baftles me that we
were never notified that our deeded access was going to expire. And I would like to know
why we were never given an opportunity to renew the agreement that has worked so well
for our community in the past seventy years,
.. .
~
..
2
I would also like to know why no formal announcement was ever made .
proclaiming the land as public at the time of conversion. Looking in retrospect, it's clear .
the land turned public in 1997. Yet no one was made aware of this change at the time.
The township provided no legal notice. No mailings were sent out and no signs were
posted. The matter was never mentioned in community meetings.
Instead it appears to me that this method the Township deliberately kept up the
illusion of "deeded access" in order to cull information trom.the community. Council held
public meetings that were entitled "Restrictive Parklands" to seek public input on the
problems of maintaining waterfront parkland for the exclusive use of some. IronicalIy the
waterfront had already been made accessible to the public through an obscure forty-year
expiration law. The technical use of the work "restrictive" is misleading by appearing to
suggest that the public did not have the right to access these properties. By failing to let it
be known during these meetings that the township owned these properties, tree of all
encumbrances, it left little disagreement that something needed to be done.
The double-irony is that in these meetings the community made it clear that if the
status quo could not be maintained, it would rather have the land go public, then have it
sold off for private use. The possibility of notifying the public that they already had the
right of access, clear of all encumbrances was never presented.
Instead of simply opening the parkland to the public, the township elected instead
to dispose of this prime laketront property valued at more:than TWO MILLION
DOLLARS in a manner that would have taxpayers pay money to have it taken off their
hands. .
A search through public records (I will provide a summary to you) makes me think
that the Township closely guarded its knowledge of this forty year expiry law that enables
public access to the parklands, Nowhere in the Oct 12, 2000 public report to the former .
council is there mention of this forty-year expiry law. However, at the Jan. 2003 meetings
the township lawyer did report that he had met with the former council and made them
aware of this law before they voted. Nowhere in this same report did it mention that the
residents of Plan 709 preferred that the parklands go public if the Status Quo could not be
maintained.
By keeping this information from the public for more than two years until January
7,2003 when it was finally revealed through the township lawyer, in spite of repeated
requests, and even after an appeal was made to the Privacy Commissioner, suggests that
the township consciously kept this information trom the public.
As mentioned earlier, the manner in which council appraised the properties appears
very problematic. Technicalities appear to be used to lower the value of these properties by
the manner that Block "A" was assessed. Rather than getting an appraisal for all of Block
"1\:', the township commissioned two separate appraisals. The first appraisal was
restricted to the part of Block "A" slated for sale to the trontlot owners. Through isolating
these sections trom the whole block and pointing to the fact that the 5th Line road
allowance was not yet officially open and ignoring the IO-ft right of way from Greenwood
Forest Road and ignoring the possibility of granting access through municipally owned
property those sections could technically be presented as landlocked. When considered to
be broken into small parcels that abut each frontlot property, technically, it can be
presented that each small parcel is landlocked and too small for a building permit. The
CAO indicated at the January 11,2003 meeting that even with these technical appraisal .
approaches, council felt it necessary to fix a value lower than that of the certified appraiser
for the properties offered to the frontlot owners. .
".
,..
t
.
.
_ _r
3
One wonders if those members of council who voted to support this approach
would do the same had they personally owned these lakeftont properties.
When council was legally notified that it was in violation of its own by-law and
could not sell the properties directly without tendering or the use of a Realtor, this being
after the ftontlot owners had already accepted the township's offer, a technical solution
was decided upon. Council simply amended its by-law to give itself the option of selling
the property directly, thereby circumventing the provisions in the former by-law that
guaranteed public access to information and the opportunity for public scrutiny.
Technically, the township does not need the consent of the public or the property
owners to place this two million-dollar lakeftont parkland into private ownership. Hence,
the decision to send out an ultimatum without the promised prior consultation telling the
backlot property owners to select an option by December 9, 2002, or the township would
select one for the~ was technically permissible.
The city of Barrie with its extensive public waternont parkland is the envy of many
municipalities. Barrie's expansive public parkland has resulted ftom the vision and
investment of millions of dollars by successive councils to acquire and develop parkland
for use by all.
Paradoxically, Oro-Medonte with miles oflakeftont has relatively little public
access to the waternont. Instead of following Barrie's example to systematically purchase
waterfront at market value and to remove restrictions, Oro-Medonte appears to be paying
to have publicly accessible valuable lakeftont properties taken off its !lands.
Soon, if the majority vote on this council prevails, 768.5 feet of prime lakeftont
property that the appraiser reported to be worth $2600 a foot resulting in a total value of
more than TWO Mll.LION DOLLARS will be transferred to private ownership. The
taxpayers of Oro-Medonte who own this publicly accessible parkland, having clear title
free from encumbrances, will foot a $22,000.00 bill, plus the legal coststo have this
publicly accessible property go into private ownership. The taxpayers will pay these costs
while receiving no money from the disposal of the properties.
It appears that rather than aspiring to do what is in the best interests of the
residents, who have overwhelmingly stated through a taxpayer funded Secondary Parkland
Study costing thousands of dollars, that all parkland, especially lakefront, must be retained,
the former and this present council, many of the members being the same, are usin2
technicalities to push through the disposal of this unrenewable heritage resource.
In summary, technically, the township can proceed with having the taxpayers pay
thousands of dollars to take 768.5-ft of prime non-renewable public resource values in
excess of two million dollars off its hands. It does not have to wait for the ruling ftom the
Privacy Commissioner that is due in a short time. Technically, this council can reverse the
vision of previous councils maintained over a period of 74 years even if it is contrary to the
overwhelming will of the majority of ratepayers that was solicited through a taxpayer
funded Secondary Parkland Study. Technically, the township could avoid mentioning the
40 year expiry law in its Secondary Parkland Study even when the study was intended to
include all information for making decisions about parklands. Technically, it does not have
to release the appraisal or selling price of the properties unless ordered to do so by the
Privacy Commissioner. Even as late as November 2002 the COA was quoted by a reporter
as saying, "Even though the waterfront land is owned by the township, its 'Use is restricted
to the Oro Lea residentS": Technically, the CAO did not have to reveal that the township
owned the property, without restrictions enabling full public access to these parklands.
" .
~
4
,
The Public needs to know about the facts and have the ability to scrutinize the actions
of elected officials. I believe actions of the majority of this council are contrary to the
wishes of the majority of taxpayers who own this land outright and in direct
opposition to the vision of past councils. .
.
I am asking council to delay all further actions to privatize these, and other municipally
owned parklands, until after the uDcomin2 election,
This includes the 300+-ft lake front park in Block 38, that was once contemplated to be
given away as part of this transaction and any other municipally owned parklands. I fear
that with this council Oro Memorial Park could be the next to go.
Delaying would enable the public to be fully informed and from the election results
council would also be fully informed as to whether the public agrees that it is good
management for the taxpayers to pay thousands of dollars to have private individuals take
publicly owned lakefront property valued at Two Million Dollars off its hands, Not all
members of this council agree that it is and perhaps the majority a newly elected council
will see value in retaining precious lakefront parklands. In addition waiting until after the
next election will enable the Privacy Commissioner to issue a report.
Weare providing a self addressed stamped envelop to each member of this council asking
them to address two questions.
1. When did you know that the Plan 709 Parkland was owned by the township
with clear title free of all encumbrances making it publicly accessible to all
since 1997?
.
2. Now that there is no doubt that you do know, what actions will you personally
be taking?
The information that we have presented is based on a through review of all the public
information that we have been given access to. We trust that if there is any further 7
information orcorrections that would be beneficial it will be provided to us.
---'
.
;
,,:...
Wo~[}u@oon [?(f@noo@]u@@ ..
Deputation by B&'rbara Woluszczuk to Oro-Medonte Council February 5,2003
I have c9me, as a deputation concerning the Plan 709 parklands because we were
told at the meeting of January 11th that those who disagreed with what was taking place
should speak: to council directly. .
~
I have been part of the Oro community since I was a child, My father built a
cottage on land that had deeded access to the waterfront. At this time, there were many
lakefront lots available, which my father could have bought. Instead, he took into
consideration the safety of his children, knowing that he had deeded access to 768.5 feet of
prime lakefront property, for our family's enjoyment. Growing up, he let us know that this
watemont would always be available to us, to our children, and to the community for
generations to come.
This beachftont is where I spent the majority of my time, interacting with countless
other children, who enjoyed the watemont just as much as Idid. It was on this waterfront
that I met people from many walks of life, both from the community and from without. I
recall all kinds of interesting visitors: local farmers and shopkeepers, neighbours from
other lines, cyclists from as far away as Orillia and Barrie, and boaters from all over Lake
Simcoe. It was a great social gathering place, one that enriched my life tremendously.
Although Plan 709 owners had exclusive deeded rights they never excluded the public
from using it.
.
This ideal situation is now being threatened by an expiry law that I had never heard
of before. First of all, I would like to know where this law came from, who instigated it,
and why were never given the chance to renew an agreement that has worked so well for
our community in the past. I know my father would not have built his cottage had he
known this law existed. Please realize, I am not against the public using the watemont,
our community has never been exclusionary, but I don't think that something that we paid
for, and have been using for half a century, should be taken away from us in this manner.
More importantly, I don't think that it is fair that land that has been quietly transferred
from deeded access to public property should then be sold to a few select private cottagers
at the expense of everyone. I am dead set against private ownership of the small amount of
watemont that Oro-Medonte has left
Recreational areas such as this are of paramount importance to a community. I
work with underprivileged and troubled kids. I know how important it is to have parklands
available to them, especially waterfront, which is becoming increasingly rare. We need to
keep exposing kids to water, nature and the outdoors, These elements keep kids healthy
and out of trouble. This plan that has been proposed is not only limiting the backlot
people, but the waterfront people themselves. I am in disbelief that the township would
resort to drastically reducing a prime recreational waterfront area, which has been available
to all.
.
All that we enjoyed was made possible by the vision of the original owner who,
decades ago believed that the lakeftont should be made accessible to all. The layout of the
plan retained a strip of parkland along the lake to be cooperatively shared and cared for by
everyone in the plan. As the depression years were setting in the council of the day rescued
the lands from falling into private hands by being sold for taxes. It took ownership for
$1.00 and gave deeded rights for exclusive use in perpetuity to all the owners in Plan 709.
2
For the most part, residents of plan 709 were like family sharing and caring for
theseparklands. Occasionally, a new owner would purchase a lakerront property and
encroach, on the parklands. There was a feeling that the lack of visible boundaries was
partly to blame. It was recommended to the township that the parkland should be marked
and encroachments removed, At first the township supported these recommendations, but
for unknown reasons, failed to follow through as they had done in similar instances in
other areas of the township.
Next, we were invited to a public meeting where Plan 709 parkland was entitled
"Restrictive Lands" . We were told that something needed to be done because council did
not feel that all taxpayers should be maintaining parkland for the exclusive use of others.
Although it was pointed out that we had always maintained the parklands ourselves, and
we preferred the Status Quo, we were told that the township was divesting itself of
ownership and would no longer honour the agreement as all past councils had done.
Many still supported the vision of the original owners and past councils that
lakefront should not be under private ownership. They felt that if the Status Quo could not
be maintained the next best option was to make it public: Instead the township is insisting
on selling part of the Parkland and giving away what was not being sold. The township
promised that the backlot owners would at least get some of the lakerront parkland back by
being given the publicly owned p"ark called block 38. With this partial return oflakerront
parkland and with the hopes of continued neighbourly relations the majority, although
reluctantly, agreed to sign the letter.
Next, we were surprised that the township changed the terms by removing the one
thing that had resulted in achieving this mutual agreement, that being parkland block 38.
The township withdrew its offer to return the watemont that was to be taken away by the
sale.
However, even though it meant that the water rrontage of the remaining parkland
had been reduced by 86%, the notion of receiving the funds from the sale to upgrade the
small 1 OO-ft Lakeftont Park left and, most importantly, the hope of being able to return to
the amicable neighbourly relations many backlot owners felt resigned to accepting.
Next, the township held a meeting but invited only the rrontlot owners. Backlot owners
who asked to attend were told that they could not, Shortly after the meeting word spread
that the rrontlot owners were.in disbelief that the township was selling them such valuable
property at such a low price. Most rrontlot owners quickly accepted the township's offer.
The few who took some time to seemingly deal with their consciences accepted because
they were told that not accepting would prevent their ftontlot neighbours ftom obtaining
this valuable lakeftont property.
. .
. ,
"
'""
.
.
.
. r
,..
t
.
.
.-v~
,.
3
When backlot representatives approached the township for information, they were
rebuffed. However, a promise was made to meet with all backlot owners before
proceeding further. No one could understand how the township could sell lands where
people have deeded rights without obtaining their consents. Requests for the legal
basis for doing so, the appraisal price and the selling price were soundly rejected even
when council was directly informed. At that time, the township made the appraisals public
for the 100-ft parkland slated to go to the backlot owners while continuing to refuse to
release the appraisal and selling price of the lakerront being sold to the rrontlot owners.
Learning that the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
required the township to release appraisals (as it should on publicly owned land) and
feeling that the backlot owners have similar client rights to those ofthe rrontlot owners, an
appeal was made to the Privacy Commissioner.
Next, the backlot owners received a registered notice telling them to check a box to
elect one of three choices without the meeting that was earlier promised being offerred. If
the form was not returned within a short time, the township would elect a choice for them.
Our executive wrote council to express concerns that they were being asked to make a
decision without being given the information necessary to make an informed choice.
Council agreed to provide written answers to the questions, extend the return date to the
end of January and to offer information meetings.
At the information meetings in January, 2003 we were taken aback when the
township's lawyer told us the legal opinion that the township had been keeping ftom us.
We were shocked to hear that information that should have been given at the onset of
the process that was critical to making a decision had been withheld.. Had this
information been given at the beginning, our neighbourhood would not have experienced
such strife and, equally as important, the residents of Oro-Medonte would have public
access to the parklands instead of losing this. non-renewable resource forever.
Unfortunately, what had been touted as a win-win solution had turned into a
financial windfall for the rrontlot owners, and a tremendous loss and injustice for the
present and future generations of Oro-Medonte. The amicable relations that have existed
for more than 70 years among the residents of Plan 709 will be destroyed for the
foreseeable future.
Here's what the township's intervention has created.
Frontlot Property Owners Property values dramatically will increase
. Will add minimum 5000 square feet to most lots, giving waterfront and enabling
housing expansion
. Township contends that their taxes will not increase as they are already paying taxes
on lakeftont
. Frontlot owners will receive their own 50-foot private beach
. They will still have access to a nearby Publicly Owned Lakerront Park. (Block 38)
. The downside could be facing others after being party.to lining their pockets at the
expense of their neighbours and all of the residents ofOro-Medonte.
One might expect to see a number of for sale signs as soon as the deal is finalized so
that they can immediately cash in.
... .,..,
~
4
Backlot owners Property values will decrease
· More than 650 feet oflakeftont parkland will no longer be accessible.
· All of owners who have been use to sharing this lakeITont with the public will be
confined to a 100 strip oflakefront and cut offfrom beachffont that they had early
paid to make it more useable.
· Their taxes will increase to now pay taxes on the shared properties
· Community relations will suffer when trying to police those who are not entitled to
use the shared property
· Each owner will be required to pay the costs of maintaining and upkeeping the
properties,
· The township will not tell the amount of money to be received ITom the sale.
It is feared that it will be so limited that they will need to dip into their own pockets
to bring the park to a required standard. The minutes of past meeetings show that this
council has recently sold lakefront property for an astonishing $100 a foot in (plan
589)
· Conflict will result ITom owners disagreeing on property matters
There will be no way of knowing who has, and who has not, paid insurance on the
shared properties. This incurs potential litigation and losing everything that they own.
.
The end result will be the forced sale of the remaining lakeITont due to the shortage
of funds to maintain the properties and the three way conflicts with the ftontlot owners .
collectively pitted against the backlot owners and conflicts among the backlot owners
themselves. Thus, the entire 768.5-ft of prime lakefront property will ultimately go into
private hands due to the actions of this council. Ail that would have been needed to
prevent this would have been for the township to have been "upfront" and simplv
told everyone that the residents of Oro-Medonte owned this lakefront property and
that the law now made it accessible to everyone.
Sadly, it is the present and future residents of Oro-Medonte who will suffer the
greatest lose. Successive councils have intervened to keep the precious heritage resource
in public ownership, forgoing the taxes for 74 years. Just as the general public obtained
the rights to access to these parklands this council has chosen to throw all those years of
vision and investment out the window.
We have examined the paperwork and spoken with our neighbours. My sister will
provide you with summary and the conclusions that we have reached based on this.
We ask that you hear her deputation and ask any questions that you may have for either of
us once she has finished.
I will turn it over to her after letting you know that I feel somewhat betrayed, both
as a Plan 709 property owner and a resident ofOro-Medonte, by the five members of this
council and those on the former council that voted in favour. I commend the two
councillors who fulfilled their obligations to the electorate by voting against this waterfront
parkland being taken away from the residents ofOro-Medonte forever.
.
..
.
.
.
"
. .
"
On a personal note, I would like to know why something that has worked so well
in our community, has not been given a chance for renewal or renegotiation. I think there
is something seriously amiss in the way these proposals have come to life. The community
should be given an opportunity to readdress the issues rrom square one. I believe we need
a referendum that offers two options; one would be to renew what the status quo was, the
other would be to make the landspublic.I would also like to have a have a copy of the 40
year expiration by-law.
I can never recall witnessing the fighting and animosity that I see today. I think
that by making the land public, or by going back to the agreement that existed originally,
peace would reign, as would er:yoyment of the waterfront premises by everyone.. Why not
stop trying to reorganize these parklands and spend the taxpayers' money in ways that
would benefit everyone.In my opinion, a piece of landlocked forest or field does not
compare to the joys that can be provided by lakerront property. Surely there must be other
measures that could be implemented to ensure that this beautiful waterfront park remains
for the enjoyment of all. I feel that selling to the private sector is morally and ethically
wrong and does not serve in the best interest of the public.
~ ,
111. ~ ..
~..
.
.
.
HAUlkESTONE ANd AREA COMMUNiTY AssociATioN
'...:RR#3. Comp:i:~t1~4.:..'Ha~k~~~t:::';-';'~:'.'O~t~;~I'~;; LO~L 1TO ,;;; . .::.:::.:
-REC!tVED
Cod}
January 10, 2003
i II ~, 4 " "'nfl3
dH~ , J LtG.
Mayor Neil Craig & Members of Council
The Township of Oro-Medonte
Box 100, Oro, ON. LOL 2XO
ORO"ME!OOtrrE
'roWNSH1P t~
Dear Mayor Craig and Members of Council:
Recently, members of the Hawkestone Hall Board and representatives of the Oro District
Lions Club met to discuss mutual projects to benefit residents of Hawkes tone and area. Of major
interest is the development oflands around the Community Hall which are already owned by the
Township. Although some tentative suggestions have been put forth for the development of this
land, the Hall Board recognizes the importance of long range planning, the implications of funding
and the need for a collaborative effort among interested parties. For this reason, we are anxious to
establish a committee with representatives from the our Hall Board, the Lions Club and the
Township.
At this time, we would like to request Council's support for the development of
additional recreational and leisure facilities in Hawkestone, with an emphasis on the land
surrounding the Community Hall. In addition, we would appreciate having representation, on our
committee, from Council and relevant Township staff. The first meeting of the ad hoc committee
has been scheduled for Wednesday, January 29,2003, at 8:00 P.M., at the Hawkestone
Community Hall.
To further initiate our planning process, it would be most helpful if we could obtain a
survey indicating the actual amount of land, attached to the Hawkestone Community Hall, which
is owned by the Township.
Thank you for your consideration of these requests. We look forward to working together
with the Township and the Oro District Lions Club on this exciting project.
Yours sincerely .
.1 /
~1/3::;11 C;:;
/. /'/ #J,~/./fl-., .{./. /L.r,2/I, r.j;, C;,. ,..
/t?''v Y/, / ./ CLlffv/~
Marily~egory,~r~sfa~!JY
HAACA/Hall Board
Ph: (705) 487-7147
~.
. 'J~~ 1 5 20\13 foe.)-I
3(J: ~_~ ~ ~EOOtt'TE
&..tJr11I,: '-Pat ~~I &. ~ II
~J~
~~~:" &~ 'O~ ~ 'd?
. dflL/~ . .
. ~ "'~
~ A4../.k ..d '~.lx-
~ .#l. ~ ffi-u1. L _ ,
d; . ~ d nc;.A./.,L//V .-c/CL-/
. ~~#-XAU
. ~~!d.a~
/h; ~-
fLW ~ LAv.
~ .dv
~~. ~
~~.I'A/7AJ2. ~~
~-WJ':~ ~ ~
~~~~~~
~ ~~.dd ~. .. _.//~/
g/aA/ .LzJ ~
/W ~ . .--cuY ~ 4-0
~r~ 1;czvio ~dJ><1
~. ~J~~
~ flC A:Z/ '. "7f
~() (J ..aLL ~ .fiIi7oL ~
~ ~ffiV ~
~
.
.
Ge)-)- .
-. ~._......,
(
Ge):J
-
..
~ 0,
Q,gJzu~~~'~~
Ad ~ LhJ Jw.Ll; . ft~~ r
~~~'~~.dw~
~.LiJ .'..z;W ~ .
~.-e.:;to. flY ~ ,Cl/YIcI ~
. ~~~~~.
t(.A-J J ~~ '
. - ~.}U-'.~ ~
,v"
~~~-dv ~
~~ ~ ~~i::.zM
~~..-?U~~.J~
J;/'~ ~ xf~ X3~
~~~~~'
\2 'A-/rld ~
-E..h /ffl~
--aucu:LaLrCU A
~~~ .d.v ~--LU-v
~~~~;
~ ~ ~
~ .
,
#;Z~ (-LV~~' . )
. ~~~.
~tf;/~. d-U/2/~
~ ~ hdu.
& e} -I.
~
cl
.
MIDLAND PUBLIC LIDRARY BOARD MEETING
~ f) - / .
\ DATE: December i2, 2002 LOCATION: Home of David Moore
PRESENT G.A. Walker, K, Stewart, L. LaPlume, D. Moore, J. Swick
ABSENT: B Playter, A. Campbell, A. Wilkes
STAFF: 1. Sainte, Chief Librarian, G. Griffith, Recording Secretary
Page 1 of3 .
WED
! .. -
JAN 1 6 2003
ORO-MEDONTE
,'.~ :r
ITEM
#
ISSUE
ACTION
1. Call to order
In Mr. Playter's absence, Vice Chairman, Mrs. Walker called the meeting to
Order at 7 :05 P.M.
2. Invocation
Mr. Sainte remembered Rev. Lloyd Delaney who passed away on
December 10, 2002.
3. Approval of the agenda
There were no additions. The agenda was approved as submitted.
4. Approval of the minutes of the previous meeting of November 14, 2002.
Moved by : D. Moore
Seconded by : L. LaPlume
That the minutes of the Board meeting held on November 14, 2002
be approved.
CARRIED
5. Business arising from the minutes
5.1 Tiny Township update
Mr. Sainte appeared before Tiny Township Council regarding the
new contract for Library service. Tiny Council agreed to the new
annual non-resident fees for Midland, Penetanguishene and
Springwater Libraries, Mr. Sainte has received the copies of the
Contract from Tiny and will meet with Mr. Playter for signing.
5.2 CEO Selection Committee
A signed contract has been received from the new Chief Librarian
and the process is being finalized. An official announcement will
be made when this has been processed.
'I
MIDLAND PUBLIC LffiRARY BOARD MEETING
t/)-J--
Page 2 of3
DATE: December 12, 2002
LOCATION: Home of David Moore
ITEM
#
ISSUE
ACTION
5. Business arising from the minutes - continued
5.3 Midland Power Utility Corporation update
Mr. Sainte read a letter from Phil Marley of the Midland Power
Utility Corporation that was received in response to a letter of
concern the Board had sent regarding the irregular flow of invoices.
Ms. Marley explained that since de-regulation there have been .
administrative problems to work through during the transitional
period. These problems should disapp~ar now that this difficult
period is over.
6. Approval of the accounts
Moved by : p. Moore
Seconded by : J. Swick
That the accounts for the month of November 2002 totalling $10,684.47 be
approved. CARRIED
7. Reports of Board Committees
7.1 Finance Committee
Mr, Sainte reported on Financial Operations for the 11 months
ended November 30, 2002. The budget is on track.
7.2 Strategic Planning Committee
The December 12, 2002 meeting has been deferred to the New Year.
7.3 Fundraising Committee
The raffle tickets for the gift baskets and the children's book bags
are selling well. The bag supplier is putting her price up therefore
the next shipment will be more expensive.
The Friends are looking for new ideas to attract people to the May
dinner/dance.
MIDLAND PUBLIC LmRARY BOARD MEETING
G j'J- 3
Page3 of 3
DATE: December 12,2002
LOCATION: Home of David Moore
ITEM
#
8.
ISSUE
ACTION
New Business
There was no new business.
9. Information
9.1 Chief Librarian's report
Mr. Sainte spoke of his time at the Library as his retirement draws
near, He expressed his appreciation to the Board, Staff and Municipal
Office for their support and efforts.
9.2 Correspondence
9.2.1 Richard Wright
Mr. Richard Wright had responded in the affirmative to Mr. Sainte's
invitation to attend the 125th anniversary of the Town of Midland
on October 24,2003.
9.3 Other information
No other information.
10. Adjournment
Moved by : D. Moore
That the meeting be adjourned at 7:45 P.M.
~~ ~'1j
-~
~~ /;%?t; :- - ....
Chairman of the B~ d
Chief Libraria
.....7~ ~ /l1 ~f2
4-0 ~ ~ J)-I
~
MINUTES OF A MEETING
of
THE LAKE SIMCOE REGIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION
HELD ON THURSDAY NOVEMBER 21, 2002
AT THE LAKE SIMCOE REGIONAL AIRPORT
TERMINAL BUILDING
In Attendance:
Commissioners:
W. Dickie
G. Fernandes
R.Hough
L. Leach
M. Ramsay
F. Smith
S. Trotter
Staff: W. McArthur, City of Barrie
M. Drumm, APM
Regrets:
W. Gardy
M. Childs
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting came to order at 7:05 p.m. and was chaired by W. Dickie.
1.0 MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 17.2002 COMMISSION MEETING
MOTION: Moved by R. Hough, seconded by L. Leach.
2002-AC-59 "THAT, the minutes of the October 17, 2002 Commission meeting,
be approved."
Carried.
2.0 BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
i) L. Leach commented on the discussion of 'High Profile Marketing Strategies'
stemming from the October 17, 2002 Commission meeting and made note that
the airport has already and is continuing to implement numerous marketing-type
initiatives, of most recent, the Commercial Canada Customs Freight License and
the Land Sale Policy. The general consensus was one of agreement on this
comment and that the purpose of preparing an outline for the development of
marketing strategies is to enhance the exposure and take full advantage of these
initiatives. .
ii) W. Dickie reviewed continued discussions with the Honorable P. DeVillers, MP
Simcoe North, regarding Capital funding for the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport.
A tentative meeting date of December 2, 2002 in Ottawa to meet with the
Honorable D. Collenette, Minister of Transportation along with P. DeVillers and
A. Carroll, to discuss such upgrades was established, Commission members
scheduled for the trip include a delegate of each municipality, namely F, Smith
for Orillia, M, Ramsay of Barrie and W. Dickie of Oro-Medonte accompanied by
M, Drumm, Airport Manager. G. Fernandes inquired as to the presentation
1
format and that a copy of the presentation be forwarded to the comm03 ) ~ ~
members, S. Trotter further suggested that a letter be drafted and sent to the
member municipalities advising them of the Commission's request for Federal,
Capital funding and that any such funding may effect future operating budgets.
3.0 PROPERTIES & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
i) As a result of a confidential property matter, the following motion was passed.
MOTION: Moved by F. Smith, seconded by S. Trotter.
2002-AC-60 "THAT, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission
meeting move into camera at 8:10p.m. to discuss a
confidential property matter."
Carried.
MOTION: Moved by M. Ramsay, seconded by F. Smith.
2002-AC-61 "THAT, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission
meeting move out of camera at 8:50 p.m."
Carried.
4.0 FINANCIAL REPORT
i) The October 2002 & YTD Financial Report was reviewed.
MOTION: Moved byS. Trotter, seconded by L. Leach.
2002-AC-62 "THAT, the October 2002 & YTD Financial Report be
approved, as presented."
Carried.
ii) S. Trotter & M. Drumm presented the first draft of the 2003 Operating and
Capital Budget. Comments were received by staff and incorporated into the
operating budget.
MOTION: Moved by M. Ramsay, seconded by F. Smith.
2002-AC-63 "THAT, pursuant to the Three-year Budget Program as
prepared in August 2002, the 2003 Capital contribution be set
at $85,000.00."
Carried.
iii) Direction was given to staff to prepare the 2003 airport budget with a 5,5%
increase of the 2002 budget.
MOTION: Moved by F. Smith, seconded by M. Ramsay.
2002-AC-64 "THAT, pursuant to the new Lake Simcoe Regional Airport
Agreement, staff forward the first draft of the 2003 Lake
Simcoe Regional Airport Budget to the three Treasurers of
the partnering municipalities, as reviewed by the
Commission."
Carried.
2
5.0
NEW BUSINESS/CORRESPONDENCE
0)<3
i) W, McArthur reviewed the construction update as of November 14, 2002.
ii) The airport manager's report was received as information.
iii) Further to the September 19, 2002 Commission minutes and at the request of
W. Dickie, M. Drumm presented a brief to be distributed to the Township of Oro-
Medonte Council members, that provides fundamental information regarding air
traffic procedures in the vicinity of the Lak~ Simcoe Regional Airport. It was
reviewed that this brief was developed to assist the Township Councilors in any
discussions that may arise within their respective constituencies.
iv) M. Drumm reviewed that after numerous months of negotiation, Environment
Canada and the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport had executed a Memorandum of
Understanding that will see the installation of weather monitoring equipment at
the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport in spring of 2003. The capital costs and
installation of the equipment as well as ongoing maintenance will be covered by
Environment Canada, while the airport will assume responsibility for ongoing
incremental hydro fees and communication/phone lines. The new weather
equipment will replace the existing Mars 2 weather observation station located in
Vespra Township. M. Drumm reviewed that while this Joint Venture forms part of
Environment Canada's public forecast system and does not currently meet
Transport Canada aviation weather observation requirements, it is a movement
in the right direction.
v) All additional correspondence as presented by the airport manager was
reviewed.
vi) M. Drumm & W. McArthur were excused from the meeting as a result of a
confidential personnel matter.
MOTION: Moved by L. Leach, seconded by R. Hough.
2002-AC-65 "THAT, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission
meeting move into camera at 9:25 p.m. to discuss a
confidential personnel matter."
Carried.
MOTION: Moved by L. Leach, seconded by M. Ramsay.
2002-AC-66 "THAT, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission
meeting move out of camera at 9:40 p.m."
Carried.
6.0 MEETING(S)
The next Commission meeting is to be held on Thursday December 19,2002 at 6:00
p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
~tV~- L
. rumm
Recording Secretary, LSRA Commission
~~>
:Dlc Ie
President, LSRA Commission
3
.
Distribution:
Commission Members
W. McArthur
K.Short
J. Tascona, M.P.P.
Clerk's Office, City of Barrie
Mayor & Council, c/o City Clerk, City of Orillia
~j)/<j .
Clerk's Office, Township of Oro-Medonte
P. DeVillers, M.P.
A. Caroll, M.P.
G. Dunlop, M.P.P.
I. Brown, City Manager, City of Orillia
L.S.R.A. Tenants
4
r;~)~1
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.lakesimcoeairport.com
January 9,2003
Mayor, Members of Council and CAO
Corporation of the Township ofOro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South, Box 100
Oro, Ontario
LOL 2XO
RE: Lake Simcoe Regional Airport - Air Traffic Procedures Brief
Mayor, Members of Council and CAO:
Pursuant to the November 21, 2002 Lake Simcoe Regiorial Airport Commission Meeting Minutes,
please find enclosed a document entitled Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Air Traffic Procedures.
The purpose of this brief is to provide Township Councilors and staff with fundamental inf(;>nnation
regarding the operation of aircraft in the vicinity of the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport, as well as the
various rules and regulations by which these aircraft and pilots are mandated.
Should you have any questions regarding the enclosed, please do .not hesitate to contact the
undersigned.
Sincerely,
Lake Simcoe Regional Airport
~~
~~ J
;>>>> -----
Michael J. Drumm
Airport Manager
cc Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Commission
GhJ-r.
Lake SimCoe Regional Airport
Air Traffic procedure~
-
November 1,2002
1
Gh) ~3
Index
Section I - Introduction.. .................................................... ..page 3
Section II - Aerodromes and Airports................. ......................page 4
Section III - Canadian Airspace System.............. ..... .................page 5
Section IV - Minimum Operating Altitudes................................page 6
Section V - Airport Users.. ............................ ............... .........page 7
Section VI - Circuit Pattern Noise Abatements & Special Procedures.........page 8
2
Gh)/Y
Section I
Introduction
The main purpose of this brief is to provide fundamental information regarding the
operation of aircraft in the vicinity of the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport as well as the
various rules and regulations by which these aircraft and pilots are mandated.
Like numerous transportation infrastructures, the aviation industry is controlled on the
Federal level, through Transport Canada. As Transport Canada oversees numerous facets
of transportation, be it land or air, a document known as the Canadian Aviation
Regulations (CARs) was created to clearly identify the rules and regulations by which all
facets of the aviation industry are required to operate by. Transport Canada is the sole
regulatory authority above all others.
The Canadian Aviation Regulations apply to all sectors of the aviation industry including,
aircrew, air carrier operations, airline operations, helicopter operations and of course
aerodromes, to name a few.
This brief provides fundamental information pertaining to certain elements of air traffic
operating at the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport and the immediate surrounding areas. As
the Canadian Aviation Regulations are continuously reviewed and updated, the
information contained within this document may not be accurate.
3
G h) /6
Section II
Aerodromes and Airports
Across the continent, there is an intricate system of aeronautical facilities designed to
facilitate the efficient movement of air traffic. The many aerodromes across the continent
vary widely in the facilities they offer to aircraft. The large metropolitan airports with
several runways, or the regional airport's that constitutes the aerodrome of many
progressive cities and municipalities, seem very complex in comparison to the small,
single grass strips located throughout the country. There are, however, certain standard
features that apply to each and every aerodrome, no matter how large or small.
The term 'aerodrome' is defined as any area of land or water designed for the arrival,
departure, movement and servicing of aircraft.
The term 'airport' is defined as any aerodrome in respect of which a certificate is in
force. Some airports are designated 'international airports' to support international
commercial air transport. An airport certificate testifies that the airport meets airport
certification safety standards, as mandated by Transport Canada.
Aerodromes are classified as (i) certified for public use, (ii) certified for private use, (iii)
registered, or (iv) military.
The Lake Simcoe Regional Airport is certified for public use.
4
GA )/L,-
Section III
Canadian Airspace System
For flight within Canadian airspace, there are many procedures and regulations, which a
pilot must know and which must be followed to ensure separation from other traffic,
persons, properties as well as the safe and efficient operation of his/her own flight.
Procedures and regulations are constantly undergoing change and it is the pilot's
responsibility to keep himself/herself informed of such changes by consulting the
Canadian Aviation Regulations. Canadian airspace has been divided in a number of
different ways. It is necessary for pilots or aircrews to have an understanding of these
divisions. It is also important to understand that despite the distinct differences between
the two primary types of airspace's, both are equally governed by the Canadian Aviation
Regulations.
1) Controlled Airport - A Controlled airport is a facility within which air traffic
control service is provided and within which some or all aircraft may be subjected to
air traffic control. Air Traffic Control Service is provided by airport control towers to
aircraft and vehicles operating on the manoeuvring area of an airport and to aircraft
operating in the vicinity of an airport. This system is implemented at airports with
dense air and ground traffic operations. i.e. Lester B. Pearson International Airport,
Ottawa MacDonald Cartier International Airport
2) Uncontrolled Airport - Within the uncontrolled airspace in Canada, aircraft may
operate free of control of an A TC unit; however all aircraft are required to, at all
times, conduct their activities in accordance with the Canadian Aviation Regulations.
At uncontrolled airports, Mandatory ,Erequencies (MF' s) or Aerodrome Traffic
,Erequencies (ATF's) have been established for the communication between aircraft.
Where an MF or A TF is designated, all pilots are required to call on the published
frequency and provide details of their intentions to land at the airport. In return, the
airport provides the pilote s) with airport advisory information enabling them make
important decisions. The Lake Simcoe Regional Airport is classified as Uncontrolled
Airspace
Despite the differences between these two types of airspace and their respective
directives, pilots have the final authority and responsibility for the safe operation of the
aircraft.
As Lake Simcoe Regional Airport is classified as Uncontrolled Airspace, trained airport
staff provide important advisory service information such as wind speed, direction,
temperature and altimeter settings to pilot's utilizing the airport, enabling them to make
decisions based on real-time information and conditions, through the airport's ATF.
When flying an aircraft, pilots or aircrews file a 'flight itinerary' or a 'flight plan' with a
centralized reporting station known as 'Flight Service Station'. These stations track the
progress of each flight, provides weather information, destination information and in the
unfortunate event, attempts to track missing or overdue aircraft.
5
&A)-1
Section IV
Minimum Operating Altitudes
Similar to speed limits for vehicles on our Municipal roads and Provincial highways,
aircraft have minimum operating altitudes which they must comply to. These operating
altitudes are defined in the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) as noted below:
CAR 602.14 - Minimum Altitudes and Distances
"Except where conducting a take-off, approach or landing to an airport/aerodrome or
where permitted under CAR's 602.15, no person shall operate an aircraft below. . ."
(i) For aeroplanes over a built-up area, 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle...and
(ii) For aeroplanes not over a built-up area, 500 feet above the highest obstacle.
CAR 602.15 - Permissible Low Altitude Flight
"A person may operate an aircraft at altitudes and distances less than those specified in
CAR 602.14..."
(i) For the purpose of a police operation that is conducted in the service of a police
authority. . .;
(ii) F or the purpose of saving human life...;
(iii) For the purpose of fire-fighting or air ambulance operations...;
(iv) For the purpose of the administration of the Fisheries Act of the Coastal Fisheries
Protection Act. . .;
(v) F or the purpose of the administration of the National or Provincial parks. . . ;
(vi) F or the purpose of flight inspection. . .;
(vii) F or the purpose of aerial application or aerial inspection...;
(viii) For the purpose of aerial photography conducted by the holder of an air operator
certificate. . .;
(ix) For the purpose of helicopter external load operations..., and
(x) For the purpose of flight training conducted by or under the supervision of a
qualified flight instructor.
In addition to the above exceptions for permissible low altitude, special permission for
events such as air shows can be obtained from Transport Canada.
As Transport Canada designs, implements and maintains the above noted rules and
regulations, which form only a small part of the Canadian Aviation Regulations, they are
also responsible for the enforcement of such directives. These rules and regulations are
enforced through internal Transport Canada 'Aviation Enforcement Departments' as well
as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Once again. the sole regulatory authority is that
of a Federal level superseded by no other.
6
GJ,)-t.
Section V
Airport Users
The Lake Simcoe Regional Airport has a large variety of users ranging from small single-
engine recreational and flight-training aircraft to corporate/executive jets, cargo planes
for just-in-time freight deliveries as well as life-saving air ambulance flights.
While the airport is home to numerous recreational and flight-training aircraft as well as
helicopters, a majority of the airport's users are in fact aircraft based at airports other than
the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport. Some of these aircraft use the LSRA as a facility for
training and recreational purposes, while others fly to this airport to conduct business
within the Simcoe County area or even vacation.
The Lake Simcoe Regional Airport is a Customs & Immigration port-of-entry to Canada
for both persons and goods (cargo) and as such, the airport's receives a variety of aircraft
arriving from points outside of Canada. In fact, while the airport receives a majority of
its 'International' traffic from the United States, aircraft from Europe have taken
advantage of this facility.
To summarize, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport receives the following, primary types
of traffic:
(i) Corporate/executive charter flights
(ii) Cargo flights - scheduled and just-in-time (expedited)
(iii) Private aircraft dignitaries, celebrities, families, etc.
(iv) Flight departments - company owned aircraft
(v) Air ambulance
(vi) Government - OPP, RCMP, MNR, DND (Military), Search & Rescue and
Transport Canada
(vii) Recreational
(viii) Flight Training
(ix) Utility - hydro patrollservicing, natural gas pipeline patrol, etc.
In fact, the only traffic segment that the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport does not currently
serve is scheduled passenger flights (airline operations).
7
C~), 9
Section VI
Circuit Pattern, Noise Abatement &
Special Procedures
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) terminology for the circuit is
"Aerodrome Traffic Circuit." It is defined as "The specific paths to be flown by aircraft
operating in the vicinity of an aerodrome."
To ensure safety, consistency and efficiency in the vicinity of airports, a pattern for air
traffic movement, referred to as a Traffic Pattern or Circuit Pattern, is established for use
at all airports. Circuit procedures are also fundamental to the execution of good
approaches and landings.
The basic pattern of the circuit remains fixed, but its orientation is determined by the
heading of the runway in use at the time. The runway heading in use is determined by the
predominant direction of the wind. Aircraft, typically, take-off and land into the
dominating wind direction. The numbers seen on runways represent compass orientations.
For an example, the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport has one runway with two possible
directions. Again the runway orientations are fixed; however the direction in which
aircraft land and take-off depends on the predominant direction of the wind. At the
LSRA, Runway 10 represents 100 degrees on a compass or an easterly direction, while
Runway 28 represents 280 degrees on a compass or a westerly direction. A plan view of
the circuit, as attached, shows that it is rectangular in shape and has the following
components.
1) Take-off: First ascending turn to 'cross-wind' leg initiated .1_ 500 feet AGL
(above ground level)
2) Cross-wind: Second ascending turn to 'down-wind' leg initiated " 1.000 feet AGL
(above ground level)
3) Down-wind: First descending turn to 'base' leg initiated . 1.000 feet AGL (above
ground level)
4) Base: Second descending turn to 'final almroach' leg initiated ~, 500 feet AGL
(above ground level)
The circuit pattern at the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport and at all uncontrolled
aerodromes for that fact, are based on set altitudes and aircraft separation distances and
not on ground references. In addition to these set altitudes within the rectangular pattern. it
should be noted that pilots have the final authority and responsibility for the safe
operation of the aircraft and may extend such patterns at their own discretion and as
necessary in the interest of safety. This practice is more predominant when numerous
aircraft are using the airport.
The standard direction of any aerodrome traffic circuit is left-hand; however, exceptions
do occur and necessitate the adoption of right-hand circuits. In those cases, the reverse of
the traffic flow illustrated on the attached diagram would apply. In reviewing the Circuit
8
&A)-/0.
Pattern at the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport, right-hand circuits for Runway 10 (easterly
direction) have been employed at this facility since its inception for two primary reasons.
i) The downwind legs for the left-hand circuit for Runway 28 (westerly direction)
and the right-hand circuit for Runway 10 (easterly direction) coincide
approximately with the alignment of the Highway 11 corridor located south of the
airport, limiting potential noise pollution; and
ii) The right-hand circuit on Runway 10 improves aircraft separation from areas of
higher topography and towers located to the north of the airport.
As pilots are trained to use left-hand circuit patterns at all airports, any deviations from
this, such as right-hand procedures, are published in a document known as the Canada
Flight Supplement (CFS). The CFS is a reference guide used by aircrews that provides
general airport information such as hours of operations, services provided, navigational
procedures and any deviations or special procedures. Please note the attachedUcopy of the
Lake Simcoe Regional Airport's listing in the CFS. As shown under the 'PRO' section of
the listing, it is noted that right-hand circuit procedures are used for Runway 10.
The function of circuit procedures at airports is to ensure safety, consistency and
efficiency in the vicinity of airports for air traffic movement. To temporarily change or
alter a circuit procedure would be contrary to its function. This could be compared to
temporarily changing the direction of the north and southbound lanes on a traffic highway.
For further information, please contact the Airport Manager at (705) 487-0999.
,
9
3000ft. TO SOOOR.
", /ABOVE GROUND LEVEL
V
. '<
~"-
. "-
. ,
~
,
,
,
"
~~J.
....~
{Ph -1/
.
1 000 ft i ...-
~-t<-.,..
, 000 it
'"" /'
ISOMETRIC VIEW
LEFT HAND CIRCUIT
RUNWAY 28
'.
.-.............
....
'.
::",:y500 ft
,.-
. VISUAL TRAFFIC
FROM
SOUTH WEST ~
,;s
............... c)f!
.....-..\.
.....
.....
.....
I
I
I
VISUAL TRAFFIC ~
FROM I.
NORTH EAST I
I
I
I
r--..... v,o~
.... .., '" I .........~o
. . '::., ". .I?UA,/ ..........~~
, ". 'Y~r ...."....
......... VISUAL TRAFFlC
............. FROM EAST
....
....,
. ....
. ...............,><- 1000 ft
. ..-::-.......
. \.
.4~ r~~~
........~ ~UL"NQ CHOIH~
PLAN VIEW
LEFT HAND CIRCUIT
RUNWAY 28
ORO-BARRIE-ORILLlA
AIRPORT
1YPICAL VISUAL CIRCUIT
UNCONTROLLED AIRPORT (;
NOTE: ALL ALTITUDES ARE SHOWN IN FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL.
MAP DATE: MARCH 1991
6
SCALE: N.T.S.
~ ..'!;i!.JF;,"
, I
~~
Ch),: /~
. .
. .
. .
"', .: ',; ..t.......- '''1'>''':..:_~''.;~.~'~:~''.......J:",\:::''::.'1';i~.;i.''~'..';~:' . ,I' .'
B36 'AERODROME/FACILITY. DIRECTORy........ :,,: :.:;,~,.,; '. ,.,.... .
", .' . . ") ... ,', .
. ..... ......". . .........
. ..... .,'.. ~'..
.....
OPR
PF .
" ."
CUST
FL T pLN '
. FSS
SERVICES
FUEL
OIL
S
....
.." ..'.-. .. . . . " . ..
...... "'
'" .1' '. . . ". '"
'. .,'", '".
. :. ::.': .:-.;. . . ~ . ,
.~ .. i .
. . .'
. ,~",
, .,
. .
.,..
. A TF unicorn (AU) Itd hrs 9rr tic 122.7 .5NM 4000 ASL <.' .... .. .'. '....1
NA V '. . .' . . .... .. . ..... . .:: .: : . '; ..., ":'. :':', . ':: .....::":~f~~lJ~
XORlDME .YEE 1.12:~~h:~5N44 3494 W~~'.41.'35'(?'Q~y) J.3~:O:, :.'11.74NM:tc~ ND./ ';!J~~;?1
PRO Rgt hand Circuits rwy,10. .... . , .; y:.', .... . ....',:jiffh
. ~ . . ,', . ~ .' ,- .. '. . '", '; . ,'. ,,', '..." . ': >:~~~~~
CAUTION Twr ~t:lM NW ~I AjD . 429 AGt, ~ 634 .AS~;. Po~sible Wi~IT'.~In.t:~qp~ on rwy outs!d~J;;i~~i:
:::RIE (ROY :~:I~:~:~:;::~50:~ie,;o'w . . . .... '~ :~. ~G~;:>I
t:JT~'4(5) Eley 855' A5.o00 ...... t. ;:',', .t}l~~
OPR Royal Victorh;t'Hosp of Barrie.... .. I Q ...,;:"
FL T PLN FSS ~~;;i,~;g;~i P:,~.. '. Q':':";':'hh~ ; :1
PAD DATA 86' dia concrete/asphalt . 114'.dia . .. .. "'~' .;jj. jJJJ"J"_'~
RCR ~~~enrneter fencing) . ., , . .. . ' .: jjj:Jjj:}j':J:JjJ .";1:1\
olololololol .J..J~_". . Q, DolJJJJJJJJJ .'!,'\:i.
RY(LO). . RF(FL)' DR. JJJ.:JJJ JJJJJJJj.J.J~_.' ; JJJJJJJJJ.JJJ ::'f;\':,
. ARCAl 123.? JJJJJolJJJolJJJJJ.JJ.J:.J.JJ.J.J.J.J.JJJ.J.J.:J.JJJ :.;,i:::
J.JJJ J;J.J.J J J JJ,J,J J,J,J J,J.J.J,JJ J,J.J.J.J.J JJ J J:J ;;::!:';:-
type J JJ;JJjJJJ.J,JJJJolJJ:JJJJJJ.J.J.JJ.J.JJJ.J.J.J.J ::'::;;::~,
JJJ'JJJJ.J JJJJJ .JJJJ,J,JJJJJJJJJ,JJJ,JJJJ ',,~i;';:,
JJJ.J J j.JJ.J.J.JJ J J JJJ.:J ,JJJ,JJ.JJJJ;J J J::J.J;) J ";'::~'~",
Arr/dep.2.6.50 ~o 35..00 fro helL. ;,JJJ..JJJ.JJJ.JJJ.JJJJJJJ,JJJJ.J.JJJJ,JJJJJJ ....!-:!,',
J J J J JJJ JJ JJJJJJJJJolJJJJJ J JJ.J JJ,JJJJ:(:~~
. , , . , I I , , f . I I , , I , , I Iff I I I I I , . I I . I I fl' .,~i:~.'
... ':~~.: ....:i~~:
. LIGHTING
COMM
LIGHTING
PRO
'.,
. .
, :':,I~~
&1-;),/3
It.,
"~
~;
~1.\i 1;1.. ~~ ~,pj~ ~~I~': [:J. jD l;~'"
.. t ~ ,~~, ,\ .ji.~ "
.J U1 ~ ...., .tl '.:
REGIO~\iAL
Lake Simcoe Regional Airport, conveniently'located outside
Toronto's busy airspace, welcomes corporate, commercial,
freight and general aviation aircraft anel businesses,
" 5,000' x '100' Paved and Lighted Runway (ARCAL, Type 1<)
" Esso Aviation Fuel: Jet A-'I (with Single Point) and 'IOOLL
" Instrument Approaches: GPS and VORIDIVIE
o Canada Customs (705-739-50'13)
" Passenger & Freight Chalier Service
" Flight Training
" Modern Public Terminal Building
o Aircraft Parking: Short and Long Term
" Private and Commercial Hangar Development Opportunities
" Professional Line Technicians and Friendly Customer Service
" Quick Turn-Around
" Hotel, Rental Car and Limousine Reservations
o Professional Catering Available
" Complimentary Coffee and Ice
o Pilot's Lounge complete with Flight Planning Area and
Internet Access
" Ground Power Cart Service
" Shower Facility and Snooze Roorn
" 24-Hour On-Call Service
1",.]'
~\
j/~\
~ffi1~m
Runway '10 N44 29.2 W79 34.0
Runway 28 N4429,3 W7932.8
North
~' :; f'" Apron
\1')
~. "}~':ii;'..~~ 5000'
..... . W"'-~'I\'r.; to_ )( 1 00' V~^
Elov: 950 - ~~\~~....~.,.... {'j,
9G6 $.. ....,~~~2... ~~~;~~~,f
( [)" ::. ~ C;, : : re
I ~) ::\
LSRA Unicorn -122.7 MHz southh~ "-
Apron V;>.I 'I'i0"Dowll
Terrninal I\roa
II~
Arriving by car? We're easy to find!
Only 50 Minutes Nmih of Toronto
Located between Barrie and Orillia on Highway 11 North,
Exit at "Fairgrounds Road" (Simcoe Road 27) and follow the
signs North to the airport.
.~:'l11; J1' f ~0'iA"~'~ fri' 'l'.'~:." 6.il-~,;' ~{].'~j
[\j* .! ~I i., j:f ~'. . 'f ti~:/ ;.~, ,.-
f; I!i. _r. "".oj ",,7;' "'i.: .'jf
~..k.t:'~ i. ..~~,. ~:iP ('j::~ l:Z~i
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
vJ {Q)/I.
c.o\ \
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE
ITEM FOR:
SECTION:
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE:
SUBJECT:
Land Ambulance
HS 03-005
January 14, 2002
Land Ambulance - Revised Strategic Deployment Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the revised Strategic Deployment Plan for the Land Ambulance Service be adopted;
AND THAT the revised Strategic Deployment Plan be forwarded to the Ministry of Health and
Long Term Care for approval;
AND THAT the proposed Press Release be distributed prior to implementation of the new policy.
BACKGROUND:
On April of2002, Simcoe County Council passed, by Resolution, the implementation of the Land
Ambulance Emergency and Transfer Deployment Strategies.
The Land Ambulance Manager has completed a statistical analysis to compare the response times of
2002 as compared to 2001. The Deployment Strategies implemented in May of2002 reduced the
number oftransfers by 25% and limited the number of ambulances to be deployed outside of the
County of Simcoe boundaries. However the response times have not improved, in fact over 60% of
the municipalities had an increase in response times. The areas highlighted are the municipalities
with improved response times.
MUNICIPALITY
Midland
Collingwood
Orillia
Barrie
Wasaga Beach
Penetanguishene
Bradford - West Gwillimbury
Tay
Springwater
Innisfil
New Teeumseth
Essa
Adja1a- Tosorontio
Oro-Medonte
C1earview
Ramara
Severn
Tiny
County of Simcoe
2002
Min.: Sec.
8:09
8:47
9:42
9:45
11:58
13:10
14:54
15:06
16:16
16:22
17:28
18:39
19:23
19:50
20:23
21:32
21:38
24:19
15:43
Variance
Min.: See
0:18
0:37
0:56
0:03
2001
Min.: See
7:51
8:10
8:46
9:42
12:51
13:32
14:33
14:54
16:41
16:17
17:06
19:05
21:28
19:42
20:20
20:43
21:54
23:46
15:46
0:21
0:12
0:05
0:22
0:08
0:03
0:49
0:13
0:03
" .
January 14, 2003
Human Services Committee HS 03-005
Page 2
ftt'}J)
The attached revised Strategic Deployment plan will further reduce the number of non-urgent
transfers to be deployed within the County of Simcoe and the Cities of Barrie and Orillia and
increase the number of ambulances that must be available for emergency calls at all times. The
addition ofthe Craighurst base as a mandatory coverage area will improve response times into the
communities of Springwater, Oro-Medonte and Severn.
The following is a summary of changes to the Deployment Plan:
Current Deployment Plan
Revised Deployment Plan
- 9 ambulances available on days
- 10 ambulances available on days
- 6 ambulances available on night
- 9 ambulances available on nights
- Max. 4 transfers from 7 AM to 11 PM
- Max. of 4 transfers from 9 AM to 5 PM
- Max. 2 transfer from 11 PM to 7 AM
- Max. of 2 transfer from 5 PM to 9 AM
The revised Deployment Plan has also included the request to have the ambulance dispatchers refer
non urgent transfer requests to alternate transfer services if the patient is medically stable.
The revised deployment plan may impact patients and institutions that have historically depended on
ambulance service to provide non-urgent transfer. The attached media release will help in educating
the public; physicians and health institutions on how to plan for the transportation of people that are
medically stable and do not require the monitoring of a paramedic during transport.
The following are some highlights of the media release:
· The current funding from the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care does not provide the
necessary resources to meet the demand for non-urgent transfers.
· The Land Ambulance Act does not have provisions for a dedicated transfer system within the
Land Ambulance Program.
· The Health Insurance Act does not permit the municipalities to bill for ambulance services at
the cost $45.00 per call. The Hospitals are deemed the only billings agents.
· The Hospital within the County of Simcoe and the Cities of Barrie and Orillia were asked to
release the ambulance billing to the County to allow for re-investments within the program,
however the hospitals have declined our request.
· The Response Time Framework Funding form does stipulate that the MoHL TC will recover
funds should the response time performance deteriorate for three consecutive months.
· The MoHLTC has hired a consultant to undertake a wide-ranging independent study of how
inter-institutional transfers should be managed, funded and provided. The consultant was to
provide a report in late spring of 2002 however the Ministry has not released the
recommendations publicly.
The Land Ambulance Manager will need to communicate the changes to the institutions within the
County of Simcoe and the cities of Barrie and Orillia.
~
,
.
January 14,2003 Human Services Committee HS 03-005
Page 3
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:
1Q}3
There are no financial implications to this item.
SCHEDULES:
The following schedules are attached and form part of this item.
Schedule 1 - HS Schedule 2 - HS
03-005 -Deployrrent I 03-005 - Media Relea
PREPARED BY: Joanne Graveline, Manager Land Ambulance and Emergency Planning
APPROVALS: Date
Peter Finlay, General Manager of Finance
Helen MacRae, Chief Administrative Officer
January 6, 2003
January 6, 2003
~~ULe- 1- fJ g()B~oo5"
The Corporation of the
County of
Simcoe
Page 1 of5
STRATEGIC DEPLOYMENT PLAN (2003) - COUNTY OF SIMCOE
PURPOSE:
To provide the Communication Officer with guidelines regarding the
establishment and maintenance of emergency coverage within the County of
Simcoe.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF UPPER-TIER MUNICIPALITIES:
Ambulance Act, Part III, clause 6 (1) (b):
Every upper-tier municipality shall,
On and after January 1, 2001, be responsible for ensuring the proper provision of land
ambulance services in the municipality in accordance with the needs of persons in the
municipality.
Definition in the ACT,
"Ambulance" means a conveyance used or intended to be used for the transportation of persons
who,
a) have suffered a trauma or an acute onset of illness either of which could endanger their life,
limb or function, or
b) have been judged by a physician to be in an unstable medical condition andto require,
while being transported, the care of a physician, nurse, other health care provider,
emergency medical attendant or paramedic, and the use of a stretcher
Land Ambulance Certification Standard, Part III Operation Certification Criteria; (b.3):
The response time standard shall not be oflonger time duration than the 90th percentile response
time standard for priority four emergency calls set by the operator who provided land ambulance
and emergency response service in the area in 1996.
CACC RESPONSIBILITIES:
(1) CACC staff will ensure ambulance availability for EMERGENCY RESPONSE within the County
of Simcoe. In order to meet this commitment, the communication officers will be knowledgeable of
Health Trust Pre-hospital Services vehicle staffing, ambulance availability for non-urgent transfers
and the MINIMUM EMERGENCY COVERAGE STATEMENT.
The Corporation of the M'{
County of
Simcoe
Page 2 of 5
STRATEGIC DEPLOYMENT PLAN (2003) - COUNTY OF SIMCOE
LAND AMBULANCE STAFFING
WEEKDAYS (MONDAY to FRIDAY):
BASE DAY SHIFTS # AMBULANCES NIGHT SHIFTS # AMBULANCES
Alliston 0600 - 1800 1 1800 - 0600 1
0700 - 1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
Barrie 0630 - 1830 1 1830 - 0630 1
0700 - 1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
0800 - 2000 1 2000 - 0800 1
0900 - 1700 1
Bradford 0700 - 1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
Collingwood 0700 - 1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
0800 - 2000 1 2000 - 0800 1
0900 - 1700 1
Craighurst 0700 - 1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
Midland 0700 -1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
0800 - 2000 1 2000 - 0800 1
0900 - 1700 1
Orillia 0700 -1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
0800 - 2000 1 2000 - 0800 1
0900 - 1700 1
Stroud 0700 - 1900 1 1900 - 0700 1
Monday-Thursdays 1000 - 2000 1
Fridays 1200 - 2400
Wasaga Beach 0630 - 1830 1 1830 - 0630 1
(Summer Months) 1500 - 0300 Fridays
Washago 0800 - 2000 1
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF AMBULANCE 21- DAYS
15 - NIGHTS
The Corporation of the
County of
Simcoe
1~)t
Page 30f5
STRATEGIC DEPLOYMENT PLAN (2003) - COUNTY OF SIMCOE
LAND AMBULANCE STAFFING
WEEKENDS (SATURDAY and SUNDAY):
BASE DAY SHIFTS # AMBULANCES
Alliston 0600 - 1800 1
0700 - 1900 1
Barrie 0630 - 1830 1
0700 - 1900 1
0800 - 2000 1
Bradford 0700 - 1900 1
Collingwood 0700 - 1900 1
0800 - 2000 1
Craighurst 0700 -1900 1
Midland 0700 - 1900 1
0800 - 2000 1
Orillia 0700 - 1900 1
0800 - 2000 1
Stroud 0700 -1900 1
1200 - 2400 1
Wasaga Beach 0630 - 1830 1
(Summer Months) 1500 - 0300
Washago 0800 - 2000 1
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF AMBULANCE 17 - DAYS
NIGHT SHIFTS # AMBULANCES
1800 - 0600 1
1900 - 0700 1
1830 - 0630 1
1900 - 0700 1
2000 - 0800 1
1900 - 0700 1
1900 - 0700 1
2000 - 0800 1
1900 - 0700 1
1900 - 0700 1
2000 - 0800 1
1900 - 0700 1
2000 - 0800 1
1900 - 0700 1
1830 - 0630
1
15 - NIGHTS
The Corporation of the
County of
Simcoe
{Q);:f- .
Page 4 of5
STRATEGIC DEPLOYMENT PLAN (2003) - COUNTY OF SIMCOE
MINIMUM EMERGENCY COVERAGE STATEMENT FOR THE COUNTY OF SIMCOE:
Monday to Sunday: 0700 hours to 2300 hours 10 AMBULANCE(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE within the
County of Simcoe at the following station locations:
1) Alliston Base
2) Barrie Base - Tiffin Street
3) *RVH or roaming in the north end within the City Limits (East of Bayfield)
4) Stroud Base
5) Bradford Base
6) Collingwood Base
7) Midland Base
8) Orillia Base
9) Wasaga Beach Base
10) Craighurst Base
Monday to Sunday: 2300 hours to 0700 hours 9 AMBULANCE(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE at the following
station locations:
1) Alliston Base
2) Barrie Base - Tiffin Street
3) *RVH or roaming in the north end within the City Limits (East ofBayfield)
4) Stroud Base
5) Collingwood Base
6) Midland Base
7) Orillia Base
8) Wasaga Beach Base
9) Craighurst
10) Bradford Base (if Alliston has 2 available ambulances, otherwise coverage from Queensville Base)
NON-URGENT AMBULANCE TRANSFERS WITHIN THE COUNTY OF SIMCOE ARE NOT TO BE
DEPLOYED IF ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE MANDATORY COVERAGE IS COMPROMISED
The Corporation of the
County of
Simcoe
~)i
Page 5 of5
STRATEGIC DEPLOYMENT PLAN (2003) - COUNTY OF SIMCOE
NON-URGENT AMBULANCE TRANSFER ASSIGNMENT:
The Communication Officer will only deploy ambulances to non-urgent transfer for patients that require the
essential services as defined by the Ambulance Act. Non-urgent transfers requests for patients that are medically
stable and do not require a medical professional to monitor the patient's condition during transport are to be
deferred to use alternate transfer services.
The ambulances scheduled from 0900 to 1700 hours located in Collingwood, Midland, Orillia and Barrie are the
only ambulances to be deployed to non urgent ambulance transfers from Monday to Friday.
MONDAY TO FRIDAY - (0900 - 1700) MAXIMUM of 4 transfers to be assigned where a MAXIMUM of2 of
these transfers can be assigned outside of the County of Simcoe.
ALL OTHER TIMES - MAXIMUM of 2 transfers to be assigned where a MAXIMUM of 1 of these transfers can
be outside of the County of Simcoe. Ambulances are to be deployed to non-urgent ambulance transfers only when
the MINIMUM EMERGENCY COVERAGE has been met.
The Communication Officer will consider ambulance resources available to provide emergency coverage under the
following conditions:
. An available ambulance within the City limits of where the ambulance base is located meets the
requirement of the deployment strategy
For example: An ambulance becomes available at Collingwood General and Marine Hospital can be
considered coverage for the Collingwood base
~0Ge- d--/i.g 03~DO~
MEDIA RELEASE - LAND AMBULANCE
8.
The municipalities of the County of Simcoe, City of Barrie and the City of Orillia
ask the Ontario government to immediately address the needs of the citizens
requiring a safe and cost effective means of transportation for non-urgent medical
transfers.
When the province transferred the responsibility for Land Ambulance service to the
municipalities it failed to put standards in place that address the most cost-effective use of
resources for transferring non-emergency patients who are medically stable.
In many areas in the province, the institutions such as hospitals and nursing homes are
relying on private transfer services to provide patient transportation to and from
appointments, other institutions or their residences. In the County of Simcoe and the
Cities of Barrie and Orillia, however, many institutions still depend on the Land
Ambulance Service to provide this transportation as it does not cost money directly to the
institutions or users. The cost to the community at large of using the Land Ambulance
Service for non-urgent transfers is the unavailability of these ambulances to respond to
emergency calls.
In an effort to provide quick emergency response to all citizens and visitors in our
communities we would ask the citizens, physicians and other Health Care Professionals
only request ambulance transportation when a person has,
· suffered a trauma or an acute onset of illness either of which could endanger their life,
limb or function, or
· been judged by a physician to be in an unstable medical condition and require, while
being transported, the care of a physician, nurse or paramedic.
The County of Simcoe and the Cities of Barrie and Orillia would be willing to review the
possibility of providing a dedicated non-urgent transfer system if the cost is 100%
recoverable, however this cannot be accomplished due to the following barriers:
· The current funding from the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care does not
provide the necessary resources to meet the demand for non-urgent transfers.
· The Land Ambulance Act requires the County to provide emergency health care
response, not to provide non-urgent transfers.
· The Health Insurance Act does not permit the municipalities to bill for ambulance
services at the cost of $45.00 per call. The Hospitals are deemed the only billing
agents.
. The Hospitals within the County of Simcoe and the Cities of Barrie and Orillia were
asked to release the ambulance billing to the County to allow for re-investments
within the program, however the hospitals have declined our request.
· The recently announced Provincial Response Time Framework Funding does
stipulate that the Ministry of Health will recover funds should the ambulance
response times deteriorate for three consecutive months.
· The Ministry has hired a consultant to undertake a wide-ranging independent study of
how inter-institutional transfers should be managed, funded and provided. The
consultant was to provide a report in late spring of 2002 however the Ministry has not
released the recommendations publicly.
-30-
t
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
io.)AO
I ,
ITEM FOR:
SECTION:
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE:
SUBJECT:
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE
Land Ambulance
HS 03-001
January 14, 2002
Land Ambulance Response Time Framework Enhancements
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Item No. HS 03-001 pertaining to the Land Ambulance Response Time Framework
Enhancements, be received for information;
BACKGROUND:
On November 26, 2002, Simcoe County Council passed by Resolution No. 2002-612:
THAT Item No. HS 02-140 pertaining to the 2001/2002 Ministry of Health and Long Term Care
Response Time Accountability Agreement to improve Land Ambulance Response Time, be received
for information;
AND THAT, as part of the Land Ambulance Issues discussion with the Ministry of Health and Long
Term Care, the Minister be requested to reconsider the exclusion of the costs of new ambulance
bases from the new funds announced in August, 2002;
AND THAT staff be authorized to execute Schedule "A" attached to Item HS 02-140 being the sign
back agreement for Upper Tier Municipalities/Designated Delivery Agent."
County of Simcoe staff met with the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, Emergency Health
Service Field Office staff and submitted the funding allocation of RTF in three parts:
1. Effective April 1, 2002 the MoHLTC will add $292,473 to the base funding for the
conversion of call back hours to on site in Alliston.
2. Effective January 1, 2003 the MoHLTC will add $596,148 to the base funding to enhance
paramedic staffing in Collingwood, Midland, Orillia and Barrie (over 28,000 of staffing
hours) as an immediate interim enhancement.
· Midland: Addition of 5,820 hours on nights
.
Collingwood: Addition of 7,490 hours on nights
.
Orillia: Addition of 1,680 hours during the weekday
. Barrie: Addition of 13,200 to provide an additional 24 hours vehicle in the North end
of Barrie
Janu~ry 14,2003
Human Services Committee HS 03-001
Page2 ~ )/1 /.
,
.
,
3. Effective April 1, 2003 the MoHLTC will add $935,545 to the base funding to enhance
paramedic staffing in Angus, Collingwood, Midland, Orillia and Barrie as approved by
County Council.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:
The service provider will require an additional $298,074 to cover the cost of enhancements for the
period of January 1, 2003 to March 31, 2003.
SCHEDULES:
The following schedules are attached and form part of this item.
Schedule 1.pdf
PREPARED BY: Joanne Graveline, Manager Land Ambulance and Emergency Planning
APPROVALS: Date
Peter Finlay, General Manager of Finance
Helen MacRae, Chief Administrative Officer
January 6, 2003
January 6, 2003
1h)/j
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Council Prepared By:
ADM2003-06 Jennifer Zieleniewski
Subject: Department:
Council Warminster Fire Hall Property Administration
C. of W.
Date:
Motion # January 9, 2003
R.M. File No.
Date: L07 -12399
BACKGROUND:
At the regular Council Meeting held on December 4,2002, correspondence from Mr. Walter Balkwill with
regard to the Warminster Fire Hall Property was received by Council and referred to staff for a report.
Mr. Balkwilllives next to the Fire Hall in Warminster and as stated in his correspondence he has safety
concerns with regard to bolts protruding from the cement pad that was left at the former building site.
Mr. Balkwill also requested that Council considers selling him as much property as possible between his lot line
and the new Fire Hall.
Fire Chief, Paul Eenhoorn investigated the property with respect to Mr. Balkwill's safety concerns and it was
discovered that the cement pad had steel pegs sticking out from it. It was also noticed that there is a water
shutoff valve protruding out of the ground on the property.
Subsequent to the Fire Chiefs site visit it was recommended that the steel pegs be cut off to alleviate any safety
, concerns. It was also suggested that a wooden box be built around the water shutoff valve to protect the valve
and prevent any unsafe hazards.
-~iscu:sion OCCliITed with the Fire Chief, Paul Eenhoom, with regard to the sale of the said property ~L / r
the Fire Chiefs opinion that we retain the lands at this time.
RECOMMENDATION (5):
1. THAT this report be received and adopted.
2. THAT the municipality retains all of the Warminster Firehall property at this time.
3. THAT the Fire Chief, Paul Eenhoorn address all safety issues with regard to the Warminster Fire Hall
property.
4. THAT Mr. Balkwill be advised of Council's decision accordingly.
Respectfully submitted
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
C.A.O.
Dept. Head
2
~
1P
~
~
-.
~
\A
......\
{j\
~
'!J
~
0\
f
-..,
q;,
........,
,...,
November 25, 2002
t(.n.P./
1b /'1
Re: Warminster Firehall Property
"
To: Oro-Medonte Mayor and Council
From: Walter Balkwill
1875 Warminster Sideroad
Warminster ON LOK 2GO
Dear Mayor and Council:
I live next to the fire hall in Warminster. When the new fire hall was constructed, the
cement pad, with some bolts protruding from it, was left at the former building site. The
new fire hall is esthetically pleasing and is located on spacious property that is connected
to the park. ~. "
However, the property between my home and the new fire hall still has the cement pad
and is understandably not kept up to the standards of the rest of the fire hall property. .
I am interested in purchasing as much of the property as possible between my lot line and
the new fire hall, at least from my lot line over to the area that includes ~he former cement
pad. This would enable me to "clean up" and improve safety conditions. If would also
provide me the authority to ask youths who sometimes loiter and engage in activities that
create safety concerns to leave the area.
From my perspective, this part of the fire hall property appears to be surplus to the
present and future needs of the Township. By selJing the property to me, as the abutting
homeowner, there would be safety and esthetic advantages for everyone concerned.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. I look forward to hearing ftom you.
;r~tdkJl
Walter BalkwiU /'
C.c. - Mayor Neil Craig V
Deputy Mayor Walter Dickie
Councillor Ralph Hough
TOWNSHIP OF ORO - MEDONTE
REPORT ON TAX ARREARS
AS AT DECEMBER 31,2002
2002 2001
TAXES PENALTY & TOTAL TAXES PENALTY & TOTAL
INTEREST INTEREST
BALANCES OUTSTANDING
Current year 1,250,974 62,747 1,313,721 1,362,143 62,960 1,425,103
Arrears - 1 year 458,635 56,500 515,135 568,224 77,892 646,116
Arrears - 2 years 195,616 37,816 233,432 191,956 41 ,404 233,360
Arrears - 3 years & prior 80,084 15,406 95,490 139,307 42,880 182,187
1,985,309 172,469 2,157,778 2,261,630 225,136 2,486,766
Total current taxes ols as %
of total taxes levied
6.14%
6.90%
Total ols as % of total
taxes levied
10.58%
12.60%
Total taxes levied
20,387,335
19,738,023
Number of properties 2 years
or more in arrears
138
153
prepared January 6,2003
by Paul Gravelle, Treasurer
~
o
1d)-I.
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. FD-2003-1 To: Prepared By:
Members of Council Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief
Subject: Department:
Council
Monthly Fire Report Fire and Emergency
C. of W. {/ December, 2002 Services
Date: January 9, 2003
Motion #
R.M. File No.
Date:
DATE
STATION
TIME
TYPE
LOCATION
DAMAGE
Station #6 Motor Vehicle Between Line 6 & 7,
December 1, 2002 Moonstone 16: 12: 11 Roll Over Mt. S1. louis Ski Hill
Station #3 Medical Horseshoe Valley
December 1, 2002 Horseshoe 10: 13:56 Assist Resort
Station #4 Medical 67 Tamarack Drive
December 2,2002 Ruaby 01:50:39 Assist
Station #1 Medical 22 Line 5 South
December 2,2002 Shanty BaY 11: 14: 10 Assist
Station #2 Medical 8 lakeshore Road
December 3, 2002 Hawkestone 09:54:30 Assist East
Station #3 Carbon 1304 Bass Lake
December 4, 2002 Horseshoe 16:37:40 Monoxide Call Side Road
Station #6 Carbon 4959 Line 8 North
December 4, 2002 Moonstone 00:54:02 Monoxide Call
Station #2 Medical 88 Line 9 North
December 4, 2002 Hawkestone 00:33:26 Assist
Station #4 Medical 10 Jamieson Cres.
December 5, 2002 RugbV 22:37:01 Assist
Station #1 Vehicle 2789 Line 1 North $ 5,500.00 l
December 8,2002 Shanty Bay 20:06:52 Fire .00 S
(0,....
\j~ /
,FD Report 2003 - 01 Con't ...2
ld)/d---
DATE
STATION
TIME
TYPE
LOCATION
DAMAGE
Station #3 Medical 2106 Horseshoe
December 8, 2002 Horseshoe 14:55:51 Assist Vallev Road
Station #1 Chimney Fire I 2235 Shanty Bay $ 250,000.00 l
December 8, 2002 Shanty Bay 20:34:50 Structure Fire Road $ .00 S
Station #2 Multi Vehicle Highway 11 N.B,
December 8, 2002 Hawkestone 09: 14:05 Accident at Line 10
Station #1 Check Call on 2235 Shanty Bay
December 9, 2002 Shanty Bav 02:01:41 Structure Fire Road
Station #1 Medical 557 line 5 South
December 10, 2002 Shanty Bav 06:28:05 Assist
Station #3 Medical 4 Monica Court
December 10,2002 Horseshoe 05:27:04 Assist
Station #3 Medical 3571
December 11, 2002 Horseshoe 20:39:36 Assist Penetam:1uishene Rd.
Station #4 Motor Vehicle Line 15 North @
December 11, 2002 Rugby 19:37:31 Accident Bass lake S.R.
Station #5 Alarm - No Farm S. of Mt. St. Louis
December 14, 2002 Warminster 09:35:04 Malfunction S.R., Line 10 North
Station #2 Motor Vehicle Highway 11, North
December 15, 2002 Hawkestone 19: 10:00 Roll Over of Line 6
Station #2 Motor Vehicle Highway 11 NIB,
December 15, 2002 Hawkestone 18:44:00 Accident at Line 11
Station #2 Chimney 993 lakeshore
December 15, 2002 Hawkestone 11: 46: 46 Overheat Road East
Station #3 Medical 1101 Horseshoe
December 16, 2002 Horseshoe 08:58;23 Assist Vallev Road
Station #5 Smell of Smoke in 1066 Warminster
December 16,2002 Warminster 11: 01: 12 Furnace Room S.R.
Station #6 Medical 15 Mt. St. louis
December 17, 2002 Moonstone 16:27: 19 Assist Road West
Station #6 Medical 4716 Line 3 North
December 17,2002 Moonstone 13;29;55 Assist
Station #2 Chimney 1530 Ridge
December 18, 2002 Hawkestone 13:44: 14 Overheat Road East
Station #1 Structure Fire Oro Centre, 2921 $ 5,000.00 l
December 19, 2002 Shanty Bav 23:33:33 Hiahwav 11 NIB $3,000,000.00 S
Station #5 Motor Vehicle Highway 12, near
December 20,2002 Warminster 22:37:40 Accident Prices Comers
Station #6 Multi Vehicle 62 Moonstone
December 23, 2002 Moonstone 10:38:40 Accident Road East
Station #5 Alarm - No Fire, Notre Dame
December 23, 2002 Warminster 11:08:45 Accidental-Workers School
Station #2 Motor Vehicle Highway 11 NIB,
December 23, 2002 Hawkestone 16:36:58 Roll Over @-Line 8
Station #3 Motor Vehicle Horseshoe Valley
December 23, 2002 Horseshoe 13: 16:25 Roll Over Rd. & Line 3
Station #1 Motor Vehicle 2480 Highway 11
December 23, 2002 Shanty Bav 16:08:58 Roll Over SIB, @ Line 5
Station #5 Alarm - No Fire, 3842 T ownline
December 23, 2002 Warminster 04: 13:25 Faultv Detectors Road
,
7a)3 .
FD Report 2003 - 01 Con't ...3
DATE
STATION
TIME
TYPE
LOCATION
DAMAGE
Station #6 Structure Fire 4996 Line 5 North $ 35,000.00 L
December 24, 2002 Moonstone 08:44:02 $181,000.00 S
Station #1 Motor Vehicle Highway 11 NIB,
December 24, 2002 Shanty Bay 07:33: 18 Accident Between Line 2 & 3
Station #6 Structure Fire 4958 Vasey Road $ 3,000.00 L
December 25, 2002 Moonstone 10:05:02 $ 80,000.00 S
Station #1 Medical 19 Greenwood
December 27, 2002 Shanty Bav 00:58:03 Assist Forest Road
Station #3 Medical Horseshoe Valley
December 27, 2002 Horseshoe 17: 13:44 Assist Resort
Station #3 Unknown Odour 1960 Line 2 North
December 28, 2002 Horseshoe 03:51:50
Station #3 Medical 2160 Line 6 North
December 28, 2002 Horseshoe 10:09:36 Assist
Station #5 Medical 2928 Line 12 North
December 28, 2002 Warminster 08:59:02 Assist
Station #4 Medical 54 Cameron Drive
December 29,2002 Ruabv 19:43: 11 Assist
Station #1 Medical 95 Line 1 North
December 29,2002 Shanty Bav 19: 18: 31 Assist
Station #1 Motor Vehicle Highway 11 SIB
December 30,2002 Shanty Bay 14:27:30 Accident @ Line 4
Station #6 Medical 24 Mt. St. Louis
December 30, 2002 Moonstone 10:33:30 Assist Road West
Station #2 Medical 43 Moon Point
December 30,2002 Hawkestone 01:46: 18 Assist Drive
Station #2 Medical 160 Line 9 South
December 31, 2002 Hawkestone 04:22:06 Assist
Structure and Vehicle Fire
Dollar Value Lost
Dollar Value Saved
$ 298,500.00
$ 3,261,000.00
Ambulance Assist Calls comparison: December calls 2001 - 2, 2002 - 22
.
Monthly Fire Report for December, 2002
Training Sessions
Station #1
Station #2
Station #5
2
2
2
Station #3
Station #4
Station #6
Horseshoe
Rugby
Moonstone
Shanty Bay
Hawkestone
Warminster
Inspection Record for the Month (including Fire Prevention / Public Education)
Commercial
Residential! Bed & Breakfast
Industrial
Schools! Assembly I Church
Woodstove
Daycare ! Camps! Hall Tours
4
Institutional
Comments or Recommendations by Fire Chief and/or Deputy Fire Chief
Extra training I Seminars and Events Attended
Chiefs Meeting
Respectfully submitted,
~
Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief
1d)/~
2
2
2
1
C.A.O. COMMENTS:
DATE:
C.A.O.
DEPT. HEAD
"'''''
te)/J
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. FD-2003-2 To: Prepared By:
Members of Council Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief
Subject: Department:
Council
2002 Fire Report Fire and Emergency
C. of W. Services
Date: January 10, 2003
Motion #
R.M. File No.
Date:
YEAR 2002 FIRE REPORT
fiRE DEPARTMENT RESPONSES
2000 2001 2002
Structure Fires 14 9 12
Chimney Fires 4 6 4
Ambulance Assist Calls 25 30 159
Vehicle Fires 21 24 11
Vehicle Accidents and/or Extrication 54 42 104
Grass and/or Rubbish Fire 28 35 19
Power Lines Down 17 26 22
Propane / Gas Leaks 7 6 6
Burning Complaints 44 55 62
Alarm - No Fire 78 49 34
Chemical Spills 1 2 0
Ice / Water Rescue 1 4 3
Mutual Aid 2 11 1
Furnace, Stove, Chimney Malfunction 40 23 36
Carbon Monoxide 25 20 21
Human-Perceived Emergency / Flooding 2 5 6
Plane Crash 0 1 0
TOTAL: 363 348 500
FD Report 2003 - 2 Con't .....2
TOTAL DOLLAR LOSS FOR FIRES
2000
$ 786,570.00
2001
$ 407,600.00
2002
$ 504,650.00
TOTAL DOLLAR SAVED FOR FIRES
2000
$ 1,069,000.00
2001
$ 715,000.00
2002
$ 3,939,000.00
INSPECTIONS
2000 2001 2002
Woodburning Appliances 58 49 34
Residential (Upon Request) 18 19 24
Commercial & Industrial 38 32 24
Day Care, Camps, Hall Tours 19 9 9
Schools, Assembly, Church 21 17 19
Institutions 2 2 2
TOTAL:
156
128
112
1e'),-;Y
FD Report 2003 - 2 Con't ... ..3
1e}3
fiRE SAfETY I PUBLIC EDUCATION
2000 2001 2002
Beavers/Cubs, Brownies/Girl Guides 7 4 4
Schools 14 14 14
T APP-C (the Arson Prevention Program
for children) 1 3 2
Fire Hall Tours 9 10 4
Other Public Education 6 7 7
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL:
37
38
31
Respectfully Submitted,
;0~
Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
C.A.O.
Dept. Head:
Oro-Medonte Fire Calls, 2002
FD
.
~
~
/'
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
2003-2005 Business Plan
Our Vision:
"Conserving our healthy waters"
Our Mission:
"W orking together to value, protect,
enhance and restore our watershed
resources for a healthy, sustainable
future"
~J\SAG-1 v
I\.~ -1('
6' ~
;;: ...<
January 2003
1. Introduction
This document details the 2003-2005 Business Plan for the Nottawasaga Valley C,anservation
Authority. We developed this watershed management strategy to address a number of watershed
issues (discussed in section 2); it reflects our vision, mission, principles and objectives (discussed in
sections 1.1-1.4), and will be implemented according to our governance and organizational structure
(as detailed in section 1.5). As approved by our Full Authority Board, this document sets the program
strategy and funding priorities for the next three years. It will be reviewed annually as part of the budget
setting process.
1.1. Vision
Our vision is: "Conserving our healthy waters"
1.2. Mission
Our mission is: 'Working together to protect, enhance, restore and value our watershed resources, for
a healthy sustainable future" , '
1.3. Objectives
In order to achieve our mission, the NVCA has four broad objective areas:
1. Protect, enhance and restore water
2. Protect, enhance and restore land
3. Protect life and property from flooding and erosion
4. Provide educational and recreational opportunities for the public
1.4. Principles
This business plan reflects our management principles. As described in our Watershed Management
Plan, these principles include:
· Wise use: balancing socio-economic needs and ecological function within the watershed
· Innovation and use of the best available technologies
· Maintaining proactive, adaptive programs
· Maintaining a fair, open decision making process that balances individual and societal rights,
privileges and responsibilities
· Maintaining strong stakeholder communication, education and consultation
· A streamlined, cooperative approach
· Considering economic implications of all management actions
1.5. Governance and Organization
Our organizational structure (which illustrates reporting relationships of staff and members) is shown in
Figure 1, however our service delivery uses an integrated team approach. The role of the Full Authority
board is overall policy development and approval, and setting level of service through the 3 year
Business Plan and annual budget. Advisory committees provide advice and recommendations to the
Full Authority and Executive in the 3 broad program areas: Communications & Education, Growth &
Development, Land & Water. Through the C.A.O.lSecretary-Treasurer, with direction and support from
the Executive Committee, staff's role is to efficiently deliver approved programs to a high standard of
service.
3
9Q)../
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
DEPT. REPORT NO.: TO: COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARED BY:
EES2003-03 WHOLE Keith Mathieson
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT:
COUNCIL:
Lake Simcoe Region Engineering and
Conservation Authority - Environmental Services
C. OF W.: Request to Enter into a
Memorandum of DATE: January 16, 2003
MOTION #: Understanding to Construct
a Monitoring Well at the
DATE: Township Gravel Pit Located R. M. FILE NO.:
at Line 7 North and Old L04-12453
Barrie Road
In the Fall of 2000, the Ministry of the Environment, in conjunction with local Conservation Authorities
and municipalities, established a provincial groundwater monitoring network, which would incorporate
approximately 400 monitoring wells throughout the Province.
It was identified by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority that a monitoring well should be
located in Oro-Medonte. Working closely with both Lake Simcoe and Nottawasaga Conservation
Authorities, as well as Azimuth Environmental, an existing well could not be found for monitoring
purposes and it was agreed by both Conservation Authorities that a monitoring well be drilled in the
existing Township gravel pit on Line 7 North. Mr. Jerry Ball, Township Public Works Superintendent,
and myself agreed on a location in the pit that wouldn't interfere with the operations of the pit. Lake
Simcoe Region Conservation Authority has provided the Township with a Memorandum of
Understanding for Council's consideration to allow for the drilling of a monitoring well in the Township
gravel pit.
1. THAT this report be received and adopted.
2. THAT the Township of Oro-Medonte enters into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Lake
Simcoe Region Conservation Authority to construct a monitoring well in the Township-owned pit
located at Concession 8, Pt. Lot 11 .
3. THAT the Clerk be authorized to bring forward the appropriate By-law.
~tfUIIY submitted,
Keith Mathieson
C.A.O. COMMENTS:
('-' ty\..0-. J. ^
DATE:~/k. (7 / cG
fie
C.A.O.:
u
DEPT. HEAD:
. J AN. ,15. 2003 1 0 : 0 1 AM
LSRCA
NO.2 4 9
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Agreement made in duplicate this 3rd day of January, 2003.
BETWEEN:
The Township of Oro-Medonte
(Hereinafter referred to as the "Owner")
OF THE FIRST PART
- And -
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
(Hereinafter referred to as "LSRCA")
OF THE SECOND PART
Throughout this Agreement, the term "Parties" mean the Owner, and LSRCA.
WHEREAS the LSRCA is to undertake groundwater monitoring activities (hereinafter
called the 'Works" described in Schedule Aattached) through the Provincial
Groundwater Monitoring Network on lands owned by the Owner, being the Township of
Oro-Medonte, municipal works yard, Con. 8; Pt Lot 11, Township of Oro-Medonte, in the
Province of Ontario (hereinafter called the "Lands").
AND WHEREAS the Owner and the LSRCA agree to the activities as outlined in
Schedule 'W'.
THEREFORE the Owner and the LSRCA further agree as follows:
TERM OF AGREEMENT
The Parties agree:
That this Agreement shall remain in force from the date of signing and may be
discontinued by a Party or the Parties acting under the PROVISIONS FOR
CANCELLATION section of this agreement.
. .'
That this Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual written
agreement of the Parties.
That the equipment purchased and installed on the Lands shall remain in the
ownership of the LSRCA under terms agreed upon by the LSRCA, for the life of.
and after termination of this agreement.
P. 2
9q)0 .
JAN,.15,2003 10:01AM
LSRCA
NO. 249
p, 3
PROVISIONS FOR CANCELLATION
. .
. .
9Ot},<j
The Parties agree:
That this Agreement may be cancelled unilaterally by either Party by providing
three (3) months notice in writing of the intention to cancel to the other Party or
by mutual agreement with any agreed period of notice.
OWNER OBLIGATIONS
1. The Owner grants to the LSRCA, permission to enter upon the Lands for Works
as outlined in Schedule 'A' attached to this agreement.
2. The Owner agrees not to remove or alter, in any way, the Works equipment
without prior consultation and approval of the LSRCA.
3. If there is any noticeable visible damage, accidental or otherwise, to the Works,
the Owner will make reasonable efforts to notify the LSRCA provided the
damage comes to the actual attention of the Owner, but the Owner should not be
obligated to do so and shall not be liable for failure to notify the LSRCA of such
damage. .
4. Upon termination by the LSRCA or Owner and without extension of this
agreement, and upon removal of the monitoring equipment by the LSRCA, the
LSRCA will be responsible for the removal and abandonment of the well in
accordance with the Ontario Water Resources Act and Regulation 903.
LSRCA OBlIGAT10NS
1. The LSRCA shall perform the work as outlined in Schedule A with due diligence
and care.
2. The LSRCA will make a reasonable attempt to notify landowners before entering
the Lands for Works. . . "
, .
3. During the life of the program, th~ lSRCA, shall maintain the installed equipment
in accordance with the Ontario VV?ter;;Resources Act and Regulation 903.
4. Upon termination and without extension of this agreement, the LSRCA agrees to
remove and retain possession of the existing equipment installed through the
Works.
5. Upon request by the Owner, the LSRCA shall deliver to the Owner the water
quantity and/or water quality data collected from the Owner's well by the LSRCA
for the life of this agreement.
6. Should the LSRCA become aware of water quality concerns, such as water
sample analytical results from the program that are above the Ontario Drinking
Water Objectives (ODWO), during the term of the program, the LSRCA agrees to
provide the owner with written notification of the results.
. .'
J A N, .15, 2003 10: 01 AM
LSRCA
NO, 249
p, 4
7. The LSRCA reserves the right to use the information generated by this program
for the management and protection of the province's water resources and human
health. All data shall be subject to disclosure as required under provincial
legislation.
q ~'5 .
INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY
i) During the entire term of this Agreement, the LSRCA agrees to obtain and
keep in force a general public liability insurance policy in at least the amount
of two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) of lawful money of Canada, that
protects the LSRCA and the employees of the LSRCA from all claims,
demands, actions, causes of action that may be taken or made against them
or any of them for any loss, damage or injury, including death, of any nature
or kind whatsoever that may arise through any act or omission or both
including negligent acts or omissions of the LSRCA or any employee or
employees of the LSRCA.
ii) The LSRCA agrees to protect, indemnify, keep indemnified and save
harmless the Owner from and against all claims, demands, costs, actions,
causes of action, expenses, lega! fees whatsoever which may be taken or
made against them or any of them incurred or become payable by them or
any of them for any loss, damage or injury, including death, of any nature or
kind whatsoever arising out of or in consequence of any act, neglect or
omission of the LSRCA or any employee(s) or subcontractors of the LSRCA
in connection with the performance of this Agreement.
iii) The LSRCA agrees to protect, indemnify, keep indemnified and save
harmless its officers, servants and agents from and against all claims,
demands, costs, actions, causes bf action, expenses, legal fees whatsoever
which may be taken or made against them or any of them incurred or become
payable by them or any of them for any loss, damage or injury, including
death, of any nature or kind whatsoever arising out of or in consequence of
any act, neglect or omission df the LSRCA or any employee(s) or
subcontractors of the LSRCA in connection with the performance of this
Agreement.
OCCUPATIONAL HAZARDS
i) The LSRCA shall take special note on site of inherent occupational hazards,
if any, The LSRCA shall be knowledgeable of, and abide by, the provisions of
all legislative enactment, by.1aws and regulations in regard to health and
safety in the Province of Ontario including, without limitation, the Health and
Safety Act of Ontario.
ii) The LSRCA shall at all times have available a competent supervisor who is
authorized to act on the LSRCA's behalf, and who is to ensure that the work
and services are properly and safely carried out.
"
, ,
,',
" . ,(
JAN.-15,200310:01AM
LSRCA
NO. 249
COMPLY WITH THE LAWS
The LSRCA employees and representatives. if any. shall at all times comply with any
and all applicable federal. provincial and municipal laws, ordinances, statutes, rules,
regulations and orders, and all by-laws of all relevant local authorities.
SCHEDULES
The Owner and the LSRCA agree that the provisions of Schedule A to this Agreement
form a part of this Agreement as if fully incorporated herein.
IN WITNESS WHEROF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement
SIGNED. SEALED AND DELIVERED
OWNER
Per: Township of Oro-Medonte
Witness as to execution
Marilyn Pennycook. Clerk
J. Neil Craig, Mayor
LSRCA
./
Per. Lake Sim oe Region Conservation Authority
P. 5
9~f,
JAN,-15,2003 10:01AM
lSRCA
NO, 249
..
SCHEDULE (fA"
To the Agreement between the Owner and the LSRCA, all or some of the following
activities will be conducted as part of the Works by the LSRCA, their employees and
agents through the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network project:
1. Construct and finish a monitoring well(s)'in accordance with the Ontario Water
Resources Act and Regulation 903 and the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring
Network Construction Guidelines.
2. Perform any clean-up works necessary to ensure reasonable access to the
monitoring well and equipment including general well site clean up and removal
of obstructions to wen access and to the well site access road.
3. Monitoring wells to be instrumented within the network require preparation prior
to instrumentation. General requirements for monitoring well refurbishment may
include a clean out, backwash, well head casing preparation and adjustment, and
that a pump test be carried out to determine hydraulic conditions according to
specifications outlined in Regulation 903 of the OWRA.
4. Installation of monitoring equipment including well caps, down well data loggers
and associated cables, and telemetry equipment and enclosure box mounted on
a pole adjacent to. or mounted directly on the well casing, and connected to the
well casing by direct read cables.
t
5. Regular visits (4-12 times/ annum) to'the well site to collect water level
monitoring data and water quality samples. Site inspections and maintenance of
the installed monitoring equipment, and to perform any minor clean-up work
necessary to ensure on-going reasonable access to the well site will be also
done at this time.
6. Regular visits (4-6/ annum) to the well site to operate water well purge equipment
(pumps) prior to the coUection of water quality samples from the well. These visits
will coincide with regular site visits.
7. Training of new LSRCA personnel to ensure that assigned staff is properly
trained in the operation and maintenance of the installed monitoring equipment.
8. An initial site visit to ensure that the Owner is given a briefing and documentation
of the equipment housed at the well site. Additional periodiC visits can be
provided to the owner as required.
p, 6
90-1- .
9 b)~1
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
DEPT. REPORT NO.: TO: COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARED BY:
EES2003-04 WHOLE Keith Mathieson
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT:
COUNCIL:
Request for Resolution of Engineering and
Council to Support Bill 125 Environmental Services
C. OF W.:
DATE: January 15, 2003
MOTION #:
DATE: R. M. FILE NO.:
E07 -10455
By Regulation 101 of the Environmental Protection Act, municipalities within the Province of Ontario
are required to collect glass containers as part of their curbside recycling programs.
In February 2001, the Township received information from our contractor, Mid-Ontario Disposal,
stating that effective March 1, 2001, coloured glass will no longer be included in our revenue share
from recycled products. At the present time, cans, clear and coloured glass, PET containers, and
rigid plastic containers are sold to outside contractors in a mixed state, from which the Township
receives no revenue for coloured glass.
The Township of Oro-Medonte receives approximately sixty (60) tonnes of coloured glass, per year,
in our curbside recycling program and have received no income since March 2001, other than the
County's share of the $5 million paid to municipalities by the L.C.B.O.'s "Environmental Levy".
Mr. Mike Colle, M.P.P. for Eglinton-Lawrence Private Member Bill 125, is requiring that a "deposit and
return" system be established for all liquor containers sold to the public. It is recommended that the
Township should support Bill 125, as it will protect the environment by increasing recovery and the
quality of materials for reuse and recycling.
1. THAT this report be received and adopted.
2. THAT the Township of Oro-Medonte passes a resolution supporting Bill 125 to the Premier, the
Minister of the Environment and the L.C.B.O.
3. THAT Mr. Mike Colle, M.P.P., be copied the resolution of Council.
p J\-. ~.~
~)\~ 0~
2J
.Queen.s Park Office:
Room 345, Legislative Building
,Pueen's Park
Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A4
~
Ontario
L<u Jfr. 9 J) ,3
Constituency Office:
1984 Eglinton Avenue West
Toronto, Ontario
M6E 2J9
..
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
Tel: (416) 325-8707
Fax: (416) 325-8710
E-mail: mike_colle-mpp@ontla.ola.org
MIKE COLLE, M.P.P.
Eglinton-Lawrence
Tel: (416) 781-2395
Fax; (416) 781-4116
The Township ofOro - Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro, ON LOL 2XO
'ECE'VEO
NOV ? 2 2002
ORO-M~
TOWNSlflP
November 22, 2002
To the Chair and Members of Council:
This summer I introduced a Private Member's Bill, The LCBO Deposit and Return Act, to require the Liquor
Control Board of Ontario to implement and administer a deposit and return system for all liquor containers sold in
Ontario. Enclosed is a copy of Bill 125 and a backgrounder.
I took this action because municipalities such as yours have been directed under Regulation 101 of the
Environmental Protection Act to collect and process in their curbside recycling programs glass containers for
which economically viable end markets do not exist. Collecting and processing glass containers is costing
municipalities millions of dollars, yet there is no environmental benefit since the bulk of the material is ending up
in landfills.
A recent report from the Product and Packaging Stewardship Review, entitled ''Wine and Liquor Container
Recovery: The 2002 Perspective" highlights the municipal concerns in detail. It also details how a deposit and
return system would better protect the environment by increasing recovery and the quality of materials for reuse
and recycling. A copy of the Executive Summary is attached and the remainder of the report can be found at
www.vroductstewardship.org.
Municipalities in the past have overwhelmingingly endorsed the concept of a deposit and return system for LCBO
containers. The current Minister of the Environment, Chris Stockwell, also supported this concept and said so
during the PC leadership campaign earlier this year. I would ask that your Council give further consideration to
this matter by:
1) Verifying with your Public Works Department what is currently happening to the colored glass collected in
your blue box program;
2) Affmning your Council's support for a deposit and return system for LCBO containers; and
3) Sending a resolution in support of my Private Member's Bill to The Premier, The Minister of the Environment
and the LCBO, with a copy to my office.
I firmly believe that this Bill has a reasonable chance of success because it seeks to do the right thing for the right
reasons.
Thanks you for your consideration of this request.
?21'~
Mike Colle, MPP
Eglinton-Lawrence
end: (2)
LCBO Deposit Return Act, 2002 Backgrounder
Mike Colle M.P.P. - Eglinton-Lawrence
June 24, 2002
q b) <Y .
Purpaseaf the Bill
To require the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) to implement and administer a deposit
and return system for all liquor containers sold in Ontario by July 1, 2003.
How?
. The Act amends the Liquor Control Act which governs the LCBO. The amendment
mandates the establishment of programs to ensure that all liquor sold to the public by
government stores and stores owned and operated by wineries to charge a deposit on
containers, which are refundable upon return.
. Rules and details governing the establishment and operation of the deposit return system are
to be established by regulation.
Why a Deposit Return System far the LCBO?
. The LCBO generates 74,000 tonnes of container packages per year;
. 7 other Provinces in Canada have a deposit return system on wine and spirits;
. LCBO Deposit refund system is supported by 268 Municipal Councils representing 84% of
Ontario's population;
. Glass is expensive to recycle. It has few markets and generates no scrap revenue when
broken and colour mixed;
. Most LCBO glass collected is stockpiled or sent to landfill;
. The cost of disposing/recycling this waste is borne solely by municipalities costing them over
$10 million a year';
. The LCBO collects an . environmental levy' of $40 million a year from consumers - 10 cents
on every container sold - but only contributes $5 million of this per year to municipalities2.
. Where does the other $35 million go?
-
----:;:-.
Other numbers
. The LCBO made a record profit of $905 million in 2001-20023;
. The LCBO has spent over $100 million on upgrading its stores in the last 5 years4;
. Estimated capital cost of implementing a deposit refund system - $5 million~;
. Estimated net revenue of an LCBO deposit return program $2.9milli~n6;
. Estimated recovery rate of LCBO container waste - 85%.7
I Comments and recommendations regarding Bill 90, Brewers of Ontario, Ontario General Government Committee, May 27,
2002
2 Ontario Ministry of the Environment.
3 Booze Binge, Canadian Business Magazine, June 10, 2002
4 ibid.
5 Comments and recommendations regarding Bill 90, Brewers of Ontario, Ontario General Government Committee. May 27.
2002.
6 Ibid.
7 ibid.
..
9b),!f
3RD SESSION, 37TH LEGISLATURE, ONTARIO
. 51 ELIZABETH 11,2002
3" SESSION, 37" LEGlSLA TURE, ONT ARlO
51 ELIZABETH II, 2002 .
Bill 125.
Projet de loi 125'
An Act to amend
. the Liquor Control Act to require
the Liquor Control Board to establish
a deposit and return system
Loi modifiant la
Loi sur les alcools
pour exiger que la Regie des alcools
cree un systeme de consigne
et de remise
..~ ---::
Mr. Colle
M. Colle
Private Member's Bill
Projet de loi de depute
1st Reading
2nd Reading
3rd Reading
Royal Assent
June 24, 2002
I r. lecture
24 juin 2002
2" lecture
3< lecture
Sanction royale
Printed by the Legislative Assembly
of Ontario
Imprime par \' Assemblee legislative
de l'Ontario
*~
BnI 125
2002
An Act to amend
the Liquor Control Act to require
the Liquor Control Board to establish
. a deposit and return system
Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the
Legislative Assembly of the Province of Ontario, enacts
as follows: .
1. Section 3 of the Liquor Control Act, as amended
by the Statutes of Ontario, 1994, chapter 9, section 2
and 1996, chapter 26, section 2, is amended by adding
the following subsection:
Deposit and return program
(3) The Board shall establish programs to ensure that
all liquor sold to the public on or after July I, 2003 by
government stores and stores owned and operated by
wineries or manufacturers of beer or spirits is in contain-
ers for which a deposit is charged at the time of sale and
refunded on the return of the container.
2. Subsection 8 (1) of the Act, as re-enacted by the
Statutes of Ontario, 1994, chapter 9, section 4 and
amended by 1996, chapter 26, section 2, is amended by
adding the following clause:
(c. I) governing the establishment and operation of pro-
grams required under subsection 3 (3);
Commencement
3. This Act comes into force on the day it receives
Royal Assent.
Short title
4. The short title of this Act is the LCBO Deposit
and Return Act, 2002.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
The Bill amends the Liquor lontrol Act to require the Liq-
uor Control Board to establish programs to ensure that all liquor
sold to the public on or after July I. 2003 is in containers for
which a deposit is charged at the time of sale and refunded on
the return of the container. The Lieutenant Governor in Council
is authorized to make regulations governing the establishment
and operation of the programs.
.;
. M
9 6)~ :
Projet de loi 125
2002
Loi modifiant la
Loi sur les alcools
pour exiger que la Regie des alcools
cree un systeme de consigne
et de remise
Sa Majeste, sur l'avis et avec Ie consentement de
l' Assemblee legislative de la province de I'Ontario,
edicte :
1. L'article 3 de la Loi sur les alcools, tel qu'iI est
modifie par I'article 2 du chapitre 9 des Lois de
l'Ontario de 1994 et par I'article 2 du chapitre 26 des
Lois de 1'0ntario de 1996, est modifie par adjonction
du paragraphe suivant :
Programme de consignc ct dc remisc
(3) La Regie cree des programmes pour que toute
boisson alcoolique vendue au public Ie I er juillet 2003 ou
apres cette date par des magasins du gouvernement et par
des magasins qu' exploitent et dont sont proprietaires des
vineries ou des fabricants de biere ou de spiritueux Ie soit
dans des contenants pour lesquels une consigne est exigee
au moment de la vente et remboursee it la remise du
contenant.
2. Le paragraphe 8 (1) de la Loi, tel qu'iI est rHdic-
te par I'article 4 du chapitre 9 des Lois de l'Ontario de
1994 et tel qu'il est modifie par I'article 2 du chapitre
26 des Lois de rOntario de 1996, est modifie par ad-
jonction de I'alinea suivant :
c.l) regir la creation et Ie fonctionnement des pro-
grammes exiges en application du paragraphe
3 (3);
-. -.--;;
Entnc en vigucur
3. La presente loi entre en vigueur Ie jour 00 elle
re~oit la sanction royale.
Titrc abrtgt
4. Le titre abrege de la presente loi est Loi de 2002
sur les consignes et remises e.xigees par la RAO.
NOTE EXPLICATIVE
Le projet de loi modi lie la Lo; sur /es a/cools pour exiger
que la Regie des alcools cree des programmes alin que toute
boisson alcoolique vendue au public it compter du I"' juillet
2003 soit dans un contenant pour lequel une consigne est exigee
au moment de la vente et remboursee it la remise du contenant.
Le lieutenant-gouverneur en conseil peut prendre des reglements
regissant la creation et Ie fonctionnement des programmes.
4 .
.
Wine and Liquor
Container Recovery
in Ontario
- The 2002 Perspective
SPECIAL RE~ORT
Executive Summary
Wine, liquor and cooler bottles make up a
significant portion of the Ontario waste stream-
a little less than half of all glass and a small part
of the plastic containers generated by
householders.1
From a recycling point of view,. the cost to
collect and sort containers, except aluminum
. cans, is considerably higher than the revenue
which comes from the sale of the material.
Once regarded as a staple in the blue box,
glass containers have become a pariah. As more
and more programs commingle their glass with
other containers, the problem with contamination
of other materials and wear and tear on
equipment and belts has been steadily growing.
The value of clear glass containers has halved in
the past 10 years and most programs now have
to pay to move coloured glass to its secondary
markets.
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic
containers are very . light and thus their collection
and processing cost is very high. Prices paid for
recovered PET containers are extremely volatile.
In the past 12 months, they have halved.
In. British Columbia, wine and liquor
containers were added. to the province's deposit
legislation four years ago. They had previously
been collected in the blue box. BC's recycling
program is now primarily concerned with
collecting fibre materials and food containers.
Very little coloured glass is now seen in blue
boxes in BC.
Removing Liquor Control Board of Ontario
(LCBO) containers from the municipal recycling
program in Ontario would mean shorter stops. at
the curb, and thus less time required for
collection. While there may be short-term issues
96 ),:j
with existing contracts, reducing the amount of
material collected would. provide the opportunity .
to have fewer trucks or to add other materials to
. the diversion stream.
By its very nature, glass is a potential hazard
and reducing its volume by up to half would
mean fewer injuries for sorters and reduced
maintenance and replacement of sorting
equipment.
The current payments by the LCBO, at $4
million, cover less than half of the estimated $11
million cosf. With the proposed Waste Diversion
Act funding model based on sharing recycling
costs, municipalities would still save half the cost .
of collecting the LCBO containers ($5.5 million) if
they were collected via another system. .
There would be no inconvenience to
residents. Those who chose not to take back
their empty containers when. buying more
product could support community bottle drives,
as they used to do with empty soft drink
containers.
Once collected via a take-back system,
whoever may be operating it, the recovered
containers would be already sorted, for the most
part, and intact. With a cleaner, deposit-grade
material, marketing the glass would be far less of
a problem than the low-grade secondary material
currently being produced by the blue box
system.
By having them returned intact,. there would
be an opportunity to clean and refill the. empty
bottles. This would be a better use of the
embedded energy and would provide the smaller
wineries and the lJ. Vint outlets with the option of
buying their containers at reduced prices. A
refillable bottle would not be subject to the 10-
cent Environmental Levy and this would reduce
prices for the consumer.
- --
PAGEii
it
..
~
'j
..
.
..
Wine and Liquor
Container Recovery
in Ontario
- The 2002 Perspective
SPECIAL REPORT
As mentioned above, the LCBO currently spends
$4 million annually to support recycling. A 1998
study suggested a deposit-retum system with an
85% return rate, would generate a net profit of $2
million for the LCBO. It would be funded by
unredeemed deposits. In addition, the LCBO
would not be obliged to support curbside
recycling.
Environmentally, increasing recovery rates for
recyclable containers is a clear benefit and
assists the Province in its diversion goals.
Secondly, the opportunity to refillscme. of the
empty LCBO containers will save energy and
resources, and is . more in line with the 3Rs
hierarchy.
Publisher's Note
_.. -.-:--:::=
This report is designed to provide some background and analysis on an issue that
never seems to go away. As the readers of Product & Packaging Stewardship
Review will know, recent developments have heightened awareness of, and interest
in, the deposit-retum system, particularly as it pertains to the Liquor Control Board of
Ontario.
With the appointment of Chris Stockwell as environment minister and the recent
announcement of Waste Diversion Ontario, there is an opportunity to step back and
take a close look at how we manage containers in Ontario.
It is hoped that these pages will assist that discussion.
Copies of this report, as well as back issues of Product & Packaging Stewardship
Review, are available from our website (www.productstewardship.org).
To be added to the list to receive PPSReview electronically, please send us an email
(bbc@albedo.net).
Ben Bennett, Publisher, Product & Packaging Stewardship Review
@ Ben Bennett Communications, 2002. All rights reserved.
PAGE iii
/Oo.}/I
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
PD 2003-01 Committee of the Whole Andria Leigh
Subject: Department:
Council
Development Application Planning
C. of W.
Status Report for January -
December 2002
Date: January 14, 2003
Motion #
R.M. File No.
Date: C1112450
OUND/ANAL YSIS:
Each year a report is presented to Council as a review of all active development applications that are
currently being processed by the Planning Department or were being processed in the previous year
and are now complete.
The attached report has been completed with all information available until December 31,2002 and
is presented to Council each January for their information.
RECOMMENDATION (S):
1. THAT this report be received for information purposes only.
Respectfully submitted,
fa.~\\q \0'3
---1 ~ '-t-oL
Andria Leigh, MCIP,RPP
Senior Planner
1
/Oq)-';J
STATUS ~EPORT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT ACTIVE FILES
JANUARY 1.2003
Official Plan Amendment (OPA)
Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA)
Plan of Subdivision (SUB)
Planning Advisory Committee (PAC)
Ontario Municipal Board (OMB)
Terms:
DEVELOPMENT APPUCA TIONS
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
John Johnson Construction Ltd. (Prices Corners)
P 13/87
Part of Lot 1, Concession 14 (Oro)
From Holding and Inherent Hazard Lands to General
Residential and Recreation & Open Space for a 19 lot
single unit plan of s\Jbdivision
ZBA and SUB
SUB Comments sent 'to MMA on draft plan, revisions to
draft plan being completed by applicant
A wait draft plan approval prior to consideration of zoning
Woodland Estates
P13/88
Part Lots 35 & 36, Con. 1 (Oro)
From Rural to Estate designation for a single unit
subdivision
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
OPA & SUB draft plan approved, zoning in place
Subdivision Agreement adopted and plan registered, ensure
compliance with subdivision agreement
Dallas Bolyea (Fairway Forest)
P20/88 .
East 1/2 Lot 14, Cone. 1 (Oro)
From Agricultural to Estate Residential for a subdivision
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
OPA approved, SUB draft approved, ZBA approved
Subdivision agreement to be completed
Louis Kovacs
P21/88
Part Lot 11, Con. 2 (000)
From Agricultural, Inherent Hazard Lands to Country
Residential for a subdivision
ZBA, OP A, and SUB
OP A, ZBA approved, SUB draft approved
Awaiting developer to proceed with subdivision
I
NAMB:
FILB NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
/OOt);3
Buffalo Springs (Schumacher)
P 13/89
Lot! 2 & 3, Concession 9 (Oro)
From Recreation & Open Space and Inherent Hazard Lands
to Recreation & Open Space and General Residential for a
recreational/residential community
ZBA, OPA, and SUB
OPA, ZBA & SUB OMB approved, Environmental
Committee established by OMB to monitor subdivision
progress prior to actual development
Awaiting developer to begin to satisfy the draft plan
conditions
Bravakis (Edgar)
PI4I89
West Part of Lot 10, Concession 5 (Oro)
OP A from Agricultural to Hamlet Area and ZBA from
Agricultural to Country Residential for a subdivision
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
SUB draft plan approved, ZBA approved
Subdivision registered, subdivision agreement executed,
ensure compliance with subdivision agreement
MSL Properties
P16/89
Part Lot 27, Concession 3 (Oro)
OP A from Agricultural to Village Community Residential
and ZBA from Agricultural to General Residential for a
residential subdivision
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
OP A approved
Township comments on draft conditions to be considered
once additional information on servicing submitted
John Johnson Construction (Hawkestone)
P21189
Pt. West 1/2, Lot 22, Concession 12 (Oro)
From Holding to Country Residential for subdivision
ZBA and SUB
Subject to preparation of Secondary Plan
None at this time
Gordon Mackie
P31189
West 1/2 Lot I, Concession 11 (Oro)
OP A from Agricultural to Hamlet and ZBA from Holding
to General Residential to support residential development
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
OPA and ZBA approved and SUB draft plan approved
Draft plan being rescinded, applicant proceeding with
completion of conditions of provisional consent
2
NAME:
FILE NO,:
LBOAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
PBBSPAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRJPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO.:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
/ Oq) ~c.j
8~0892 Ontario Ltd, (Capobianco)
P'2I89
Part But and West Half Lot 3, Concession 7 (Oro)
OPA from Rural to Rcson Area and ZBA from Rural to
General Residential and Recreation and Opcn Space for a
subdivision
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
OP A and ZBA OMB approved and SUB draft plan OMB
approved, Environmental Committee established by OMB
to monitor subdivision progress prior to actual development
Awaiting completion of subdivision agreement for
registration of subdivision
767987 Ontario Ltd. (James Sabiston)
P4/90
Pt. of Lot I, Pt. of West 112 Lot 2, Concession 7 (Oro)
From Rural to General Residential and Open Space to
allow for a subdivision and related parkland
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
OP A and ZBA OMB approved and Draft Plan OMB
approved, Environmental Committee established by OMB
to monitor subdivision progress prior to actual development
Developer to complete conditions of draft plan approval
including initiation of subdivision agreement and
completion of environmental monitoring process
Houben
P1I91
W 1/2 ofW 1/2 Lot 10, Concession 10 (Oro)
From Agricultural to Estate Residential for a subdivision
OPA, ZBA, and SUB
SUB draft plan approved
A waiting applicant to proceed with zoning approval and
satisfaction of draft plan conditions
1391191 Ontario Ltd.
P4193
Part Lot 15, Concession 2 (Oro)
Proposed 19 lot Country Residential subdivision
SUB
SUB registered
Subdivision to be monitored for compliance with
Subdivision Agreement
NAME: Ross Manzone
FILE NO.: P6/93
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part Lot 2, Range 2 (Oro)
PROPOSAL: OPA from Agricultural to Village Community Residential
and ZBA from Agricultural to General Residential for an 8 lot plan of subdivision
FEES PAID: OPA, ZBA, and SUB
STATUS: SUB draft plan approved
ACTION REQUIRED: Applicant to proceed with zoning by-law amendment and
satisfaction of draft plan conditions
3
NAME:
FILE NO:
LBOAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
104) ,((
Ed Uoyd
PI 1193
East 1/2 Lot 22, Concession II (Oro)
ZBA from Hold, Inherent Hazard Lands. and Agricultural
Zones to the General Residential, lnherentHazard Lands,
and Agricultural Zones for a 12 lot subdivision
ZBA and SUB
Subject to the preparation of a secondary plan
None at this time
George Ochrym
PII94
Part Lot 21, Concession 12 (Oro)
OPA for a 34 lot subdivision north of existing Hamlet of
Hawkestone
OPA, SUB
Subject to the preparation of a secondary plan
None at this time
Horseshoe Timberidge (Medonte)
P5/94 (also P-47/95 Which rezoned additional property as
part of Timberidge proposal)
Lot I, Concession 4 (Medonte)
Draft plan and plan of condominium for 250 townhouses
SUB
SUB draft plan approved Sept 15, 1995, application
defeJTed by applicant
none at this time
fun at Hardwood Hills
P67/97
Concession 6, Part Lot 11 (Oro)
Site specific ZBA for a 25 unit inn
ZBA
ZBA approved by Council, appealed by County
Await OMB Hearing in January 2003
Hillway Equipment
P75/98
Concession 13, Part Lot 9 (Om)
ZBA from Mineral Aggregate Resource Two to Mineral
Aggregate Resource One
ZBA
Application denied by Council, Applicant appealed
decision to Ontario Municipal Board
A wait notification for OMB regarding pre-hearing
conferences
638230 Ontario Ltd.
P-77/98
Concession 13, Part of Lot 5 (Medonte)
Plan of Subdivision
SUB
SUB draft plan approved
Awaiting applicant to proceed with satisfaction of draft
plan conditions and execution of subdivision agreement
4
NAME:
Pn.t:S NO:
DBSCRIPTION:
FImS PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
AcrION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
AcrION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
HanninenlDodson
P-83/99
Concession 2, Part Lot 10 and D (Oro)
OPA - from Agricultural and Environmental Protection
Two Overlay to Rural
ZBA - from AgriculturallRural to Private Recreational to
permit golf course and accessory uses
OPAlZBA
Zoning By-law Amendment approved
Planning File to be closed
/Oo)l
Susan Hollingshead
P-99/OO
Concession 8, West Part Lot 2 (Oro)
ZBA for Garden Suite
ZBA
Temporary Use By-law for Granny Flat adopted by Council
May 3, 2000, now in force and effect
Review By-law in May 2010
Horseshoe Resort Corporation
P-loo/oo
Concession 4, Part Lot 3 and 4 (Oro)
ZBA - Site Specific Residential One Zone for Adult
Lifestyle Community, Plan of Subdivision for 590
residential units
ZBA and SUB
SUB draft plan approved, ZBA approved
A waiting applicant to complete draft plan conditions and
subdivision agreement
Eric Bowes and Dawn Braden
P-105/OO
Concession 3, Part of Lot 8 (Oro)
ZBA - to Rural Industrial to permit pallet business
ZBA
Zoning By-law Amendments denied by Council, decision
appealed to Ontario Municipal Board
Scheduled for OMB hearing January 7-9, 2003
Tamer's Management
P-I09/oo
Concession 4, Part Lot 21 (Oro)
OPA from Agricultural to Recreational to permit sports
dome, ZBA from Agricultural to Private Recreational to
permit sports dome
Pre-consult OP AfZ13A
Awaiting application materials including site plan and
background studies
None
Horseshoe Resort Corporation
P-llO/oo
Concession 4, Part Lots 1 and 2 (Oro)
OPA from Medium Density Residential to Low Density
Residential, ZBA from AgriculturallRural Exception to Site
Specific Residential One, Plan of Subdivision for 13 estate
5
f113.BS PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
/Oq);J-
size residential lots
OPAlZBA/SUB
Subdivision registered. Zoning By-law Adopted
Ensure compliance with subdivision agreement, Close
Planning File
Ucci Consolidated Companies Inc.
P-1I5/01
Concession 5, Part Lot 27 (Oro)
OPA from Rural and Environmental Protection Two
Overlay to Recreational, ZBA from Agricultura1lRural
(AlRU) to Site Specific Private Recreational
OPA, ZBA
Application to proceed to PubHc Meeting for County and
Township Official Plan Amendments in February 2003
Schedule PubHc Meeting date for early 2003 once
County confirms date acceptable for joint meeting
FSP Holdings Inc.
P-116/01
Concession 2, Lot 41 ~d Part of Lot 42 (Medonte)
ZBA from AgriculturaJ/Rural to Private Recreation to
permit golf course
ZBA
Zoning By-law Amendment adopted by Council, appealed
by neighbouring landowner
A waiting scheduling of Ontario Municipal Board hearing in
2003
Uoyd Squire
P-121101
Concession 7, East Half Lot 7 (Oro)
OP A -Rural to Mineral Aggregate Resources,
ZBA - AgriculturallRural & Mineral Aggregate Resources
Two to Mineral Aggregate Resources One
OPAlZBA
OP A adopted by Council Dec2002, submitted to County
for final approval
Proceed with Zoning By-law Amendment once OPA
approved by County, provide comments to MNR once
licensing application when circulated
Horseshoe Valley Lands Ltd.
P-125101
Concession 3, Part Lot 2 (Oro)
ZBA to Residential Two Exception to permit Carriage Hills
Phase IV timeshare establishment
ZBA
ZBA approved, Site Plan approved
Close Planning File
Laurel View Homes Inc.
P-126/01
Concession 4, Part of Lots 3 and 4 (Oro)
SUB - redline revision to existing draft approved plan
(Application P-l00/(0)
6
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
/ OOc) ~ i
SUB
Applicant to proceed with satisfaction of draft plan
conditions for subdivision and subdivision agreement
None at this time
Jonothan Palter
P-127/01
Concession 5, North Part Lot 3 (Oro)
OPA from Rural to Site Specific to pennit 5 residential lots
by Consent
OPA
Application recommended to be denied by PAC,
application withdrawn by applicant
Planning File closed
John StrimaS
P-129/01
Concession 8, North Part Lot 12 (Medonte)
ZBA to permit two residential dwellings on one property
ZBA
Application deferred, until consent application was
considered, applicant to proceed with zoning by-law
amendment in 2003
None at this time
Bonnie Hamilton
P-130/02
Concession 8, Part Lot 16 (Medonte)
ZBA - Temporary Use to permit Granny Suite for 10 year
time frame
ZBA
Temporary Use By-law approved by Council through
By-law 2002-43 on April 17, 2002
Monitor Agreement and review in April 2012
Jeff Howard
P-131/02
Concession 8, East Part Lot 7 (000)
ZBA - Temporary Use to permit Granny Suite for 10 year
time frame
ZBA
Temporary Use By-law approved by Council through
By-law 2002-45 on April 17, 2002, now in force and effect
Monitor Agreement and review in April 2012
1500494 Ontario Inc.
P-132102
Concession 1, South Half Lot 1 (Orillia)
ZBA - Residential One Zone to General Commercial and
General Commercial to General Commercial Exception to
permit Self Storage Establishment
ZBA
ZBA to be considered at January 2003 PAC meeting
Await recommendation emanating from Planner's report at
PAC meeting
7
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
Fll..E NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
Fll..E NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
Fll..E NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
Fll..E NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
lod) , /
Paul Miller
P-133102
Concession to. Part of Lot 20 (Oro)
OPA - from Agricultural to CommerciallIndustrial to
permit small business park
OPA
A waiting additional reports from applicant in accordance
with Official Plan requirements and Planning Report from
March 19,2002
None at this time, review additional materials when
received and prepare supplemental report to Planning
Advisory Committee
Markus Schneider
P-134/02
Concession 7, East Part Lot I (Oro)
ZBA from AgriculturallRural to Site Specific
AgriculturallRural to permit outdoor storage, repairs and
sales of jeeps/military equipment
ZBA
Awaiting applicant to provide concept plan for proposed
use in order to proceed, to public meeting
None at this time
Horseshoe Resort Corporation
P-135/02
Concession 4, Part Lots I and 2 (Oro)
ZBA for Site Specific Zone to permit construction of
condolhotel facility as expansion to existing hotel
ZBA
Proceeded to Public Meeting in December 2002,
application to reviewed at January 2003 Pac meeting for
further recommendation to Council
Await recommendation emanating from Planner's report at
PAC meeting
Horseshoe Resort Corporation (Carriage Hills Phase IV)
P-136/02
Concession 3, Part Lot 2 (Oro)
ZBA for removal of Holding provision
ZBA
Removal of Holding Provision By-law adopted at Council
on December 4, 2002 at same time as execution of Site
Plan Control Agreement
Close Planning File
Selri Investments
P-137/02
Concession 3, Part of Lot 27 (Oro)
ZBA from No Zoning to Residential One
ZBA
Application previously denied by Council, application to be
withdrawn by applicant
None at this time
8
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
NAME:
FILE NO:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSAL:
FEES PAID:
STATUS:
ACTION REQUIRED:
lOa-) ,10
Greg and Judi Thatcher
P.138102
Concession 9, North Part of Lot IS (Mcdonte)
ZBA - AgriculturallRural Exception to Residential One as
requirement of Consent Application
ZBA '
ZBA to proceed to Public Meeting on February S, 2002
with subsequent meeting at PAC to provide further
recommendation to Council
None at this time
Mark Porter/Greg Bell
P.139/02
Concession 2, Part Lot 2 (Oro)
ZBA - Site Specific to recognize amendments to
boundaries and Environmental Protection area
ZBA
Proceeded to Public Meeting in December 2002, Scheduled
for January 2003 PAC meeting
Await further recommendation from Planner's report at
PAC meeting
HorseshoelSalvil (Oro) Ltd.
P-I40/02
Concession 4, Plan M-447, Lot 18 (Oro)
ZBA - Correction of zoning from Private Recreational to
Residential One
ZBA
Zoning By-law adopted in December 2002, Appeal period
ended January 9, 2003, By-law now in force and effect,
Zoning By-law schedules amended
Close File
Barbara Muscat
P-141102
Concession 11, Plan M-157, Lot 1 (Oro)
ZBA to permit Bed and Breakfast establishment on
property
ZBAlSite Plan
Zoning By-law approved in December 2002
Close Planning File
1391088 Ontario Ltd. (Standfast Holdings)
P-142102
Concession 14, Part Lot 16 (Medonte)
ZBA - from General Commercial Exception to permit
additional use of self storage units within existing building
ZBA
Application to proceed to PAC meeting in January 2003 for
initial consideration
Await recommendation emanating from Planner's report at
PAC meeting
9
/Ob)~/
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
PD 2003-02 Committee of the Whole Andria Leigh
Subject: Department:
Council
Planning
C. of W. Committee of Adjustment
Decisions from January 16,
2003
Date: January 17, 2003
Motion #
R.M. File No.
Date: C11 12450
KGROUND/ANAL YSIS:
Attached are the Planning Reports and Committee of Adjustment Decisions for the Consent and
Minor Variance applications that had decisions at the Committee of Adjustment meeting.held on
January 16, 2003. The last date for receiving an appeal to the above noted decisions is Wednesday
February 5, 2003.
Consent Applications
B-45/02
J. Neil Craig &
Marilyn Bidgood
Cone 1, Lot 44 (Flos)
3618 Penetanguishene Road
B-42/02
Doris E. Haehie
Cone. 9, Plan 882, Lots 7-9
(Oro)
1053 Lakeshore Rd East
B-47/02
Allan Langman
Cone. 12,E Half Lot 13 & 14
(Oro)
B-44/02
CP Railway
Cone. 1, Lot 42 & 43 (Flos)
Minor Variance Applications
/06)-(;" .
A -41/02
Linda & Harry Vandervoort
Plan 546, Lot 4 (Orillia)
21 Bards Beaeh Road
A-43/02
Hastings & Margaret Ryan
Cone. 7, Plan M-368,
Lot 21 (Oro)
21 Sugarbush Road
RECOMMENDATION (S):
1. THAT this report and the Committee of Adjustment Decisions for January 16, 2003 be
received.
Respectfully submitted,
~~---to-t
Andria Leigh, MCIP,RPP
Senior Planner
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
C.A.O.
IJf;Jf~
Dept. Head /
...)
it
e
loiJ-3
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMl'ITEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
1
REPORT NO.: COF A2002-B45 ~~
PREPARED BY: Andria Leigh
DATE: January 9, 2003
APPLICANT: J. Neil Craig and Marilyn Bidgood
APPUCATION NO.: B-45/02 .-
ROLL NUMBER: 4346050001 01900
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 1, East ?art of Lot 44 (FIos)
, PROPOSAL
I
The applicant is proposing to create a new residential lot. The new lot is proposing to have a lot
frontage of 121.92 metres (400 feet), a lot depth' of 66.45 metres (218 feet), and a lot area of 0.81
hectares (2 acres): The land proposed to be retained would ,have a . lot frontage of 280.4 metres
(920 feet), a lot depth of approximately 1005.84 metres (3300 feet), and a lot area of
approximately 39.66 hectares (98 acres) to continue t be used for agricultural purposes.
'AGENCY COMMENTS
I
Building Department: The department has reviewed the application and the proposal appears to
meet the minimum standards
Roads Department: ~c cz..OA-Q C. 0.... <...6~N$.
J OFFICIAL PLAN
I
Official Plan
The subject property is designated Rural in the Township's Official Plan and would therefore be
subject to the policies of Section D3. The specific policies related to the creation of new lots for
residential purposes are found in Section D3.3.1.
Section D3.3.2 specifically indicates that only one new lot can be severed from a lot in the Rural
designation that has an area of at least 36 hectares provided a lot has not been severed from the
parcel after March 26, 1973.
The application indicates that the original parcel is 40.47 hectares in size and has not had a
residential severance since March 26, 1973.
The Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the proposed lot:
a) Will have a minimum lot area of 0.4 hectares;
... ,
It
e'
/ob);.}
b) Is of an appropriate size forresidential uses, with such a residential use generally
not requiring a lot size that exceeds 2.0 hectares;
The application indicates a proposed , lot area of 0.81 hectares which would satisfy
the requirements of sections a) and b) above.
c) the proposed lot fronts onto an existing public road that is maintained year round
by the Township, County or Province;
The proposed lot fronts onto County Road 93 which is a year round maintained
County Road and would therefore satisfy section c).
d) the proposed lot will not cause a traffic hazard. as a result of its location on a
curve or a hill;
Favorable comments are required from the County of Simcoe Engineering
Department to ensure section d) is satisfied; however the site inspection co~ducted
did not indicate any potential traffic hazards ~tthe loc;ition of the propOsed lot. ' ,
e) ,the proposed lot can be serv.ced with an appropriate water. supply and an
appropriate means of sewage disposal.
The Building Department has indicated that the proposed lot size would permit the
appropriate servicing of the lot; however this would be confirmed at the time of a
building permit and septic system application being received and reviewed in the
future.
The application appears to conform with the policies of the Official Plan, subject to
the
receipt of favourable comments from the County of Simcoe Engineering Department.
J ZONING BY -LAW
,
The subject property is zoned Agriculturall Rural (AlRU) in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-
95, as amended. Both the proposed and retained lots would appear to comply with the Zoning.
By-law provisions as they relate to lot frontage and lot area requirements.
I RECOMMENDATION
,
It is recommended that Consent Application B-45/02 be GRANTED once favorable comments
are received from the County of Simcoe Engineering Department and subj~t to the following
conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan. of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario
Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate registerable
description.
I-
tit
e
I Ob) /5
2.' That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped' . , '
using Form 1 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one
year from the date of giving of this notice.
5. That a Development Charges Fee be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte in the
amount deteimined by Council as of the date the fee is received by the Township.
6. That the applicant pay to the Municipality the sum of $500.00 for each lot to be
created as cash-in-lieu of parkland pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P.13.
Submitted by,
--1~ --t.ul ..
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
SENIOR PLANNER COMMENTS:
-;
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
Date
... ..
e
e
PAGE # 2
APPLICATION B-45/02
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, David Edwards, second by Joe Charles
"That Consent Application B-45/02 be GRANTED subject to the following list of conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario
Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate registerable
description.
2. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 1 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year
from the date of giving of this notice.
5. That a Developmental Charges Fee be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte in the
amount determined by Council as of the date the fee is received by the Township.
6. That the applicant pay to the Municipality the sum of $500.00 for each lot to be
created as cash-in-lieuofparkland pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 C.P.13.
7. That the County of Simcoe Engineering Department approve of the application, in .
writing.
. ....Carried"
Note: The County of Simcoe has a by-law that includes setbacks for structures and buildings
from County Roads
Additional information regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Centre, 148 County Road 27 South in Oro Station,
Ontario, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
"JSW
130)\-1'
...\~
L.-- () 1 "" ~ ((-
\
to'"
~
. '\ 7 \
~ v "'~ ,,0"'"
'J /O;iP",.P' . /
.. ~... ,,/ <1-v'7l( ,. / 1f;r:~~
~~o V I
~;~~ ~of '
. / {;{/l1 f'l1" I
f- 1-- 0 -( ... L\ f' (l-!
\ vJ ~
to"" 1
(-~ (l-f\
~t~t-D
!
~
1":.. 0 t:. ~.
,~. J
{]'. .'. .
. I
i
"
~
\
~,,(LY^
f \ (t-D
\
..."'......"
1..)) l' "\ 3, vi r f1-.
[o.J t \
__ <>'~!;....~"'..-,..._~~~.....-!?'>';t.~.....""'-~ .......~~~i);O,'::':-
"_.....""'''''.'''...,.,..... ,,_.C!!?-E.- EK.
~-,........,-,.." ,..~.....,-- ""~
\.
/'
//
/
I
YJ0~\~
.....
- -
N
r
e ./ 4~
~o \ /' rR-
GD,J' v
/Gt}-
~ J J 1-1
//
/~ -Ll-\ - -
,,' ."~' lrb 1 ~. f R-
.l \
Cf>f'#
/::::;:;
/'
""--"-,.,~ .
.....-.
v/~
\?
",. "" '<
.
e
/ Db ) / i
TOWNSIUP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
I
REPORT NO.: COFA2002-B44
PREPARED BY: Andria Leigh
DATE: . January 9, 2003
APPLICANT: Canadian Pacific Rallway .
APPLICATION NO.: B-44/02
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 050 001 01208
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 1, Lot 42 & 43 (Flos)
t PROPOSAL
,
The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment (lot addition). The land to be conveyed has a lot
frontage of 0 metres (Ofeet), a lot depth of approximately 502.92 metres (1650feet), and a lot area of
approximately 32.38 hectares (80 acres). The land to be retained has a lot frontage of61.46 metres
(201.64 feet), and a lot area of approximately 6.23 luctares (15.4 acres).
I AGENCY COMMENTS
I
. .
Building Department: The department has reviewed the application and the proposal appears to meet the
minimum standards
Roads Department: County Road
I OFFICIAL PLAN
,
. The subject property is designated Rural in the Township's Official Plan. The intent of these policies is to
preserve and promote the rural character of the Township and to maintain the open countryside. The
proposed consent would not create any additional parcels of land as there are currently two parcels (the railway
corridor and the other rural lands ) and there would continue to be the same two parcels however the area of
these parcels is proposed to be amended by this application.
As no new lot is being created, the application appears to conform with the policies of the Official Plan.
I WNING BY-LAW
,
The subject property is zoned AgriculturallRural (AIRU), Rural Industrial (IR), and Environmental
Protection (EP) in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. Both the proposed and retained lots
would appear to comply with the Zoning By-law provisions. The lot frontage of the retained lands does not
meet the minimum 30 metre (981.4 feet) requirement however this is not being altered by this application.
On this basis, the application is deemed to generally conform with the requirements of the Zoning By-law.
tv'
e
e
Jo6J9
I
I RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Consent Application B-44102 be GRANTED subject to the following list of
conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land
Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate registerable description.
2. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped using Form
3 as prescribed in the Planning ACL '
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of giving of this notice. .
Submitted by,
~. -IrL
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
,.
TOWNSHIP PLANNER coMMENtS:
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
Date
"
e
e
lOb
-'
PAGE #2
APPLICATION B-44/02
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
4
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Albert Pross, second by Joe Charles
"That Consent Application B-44/02 be GRANTED subject to the following list of conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario
Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate registerable
description.
2. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 3 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year
from the date of giving of this notice.
5. County Engineer Letter dated March 6,2002 be satisfied.
... ..Carried"
Additional information regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Centre, 148 County Road 27 South in Oro Station,
Ontario, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
'PltrPetvCol\ E~se~~l\f
I.:':'::~.J
I~
; ....v
o
\'j
'j
"fVJ P
plllJ.l<.
t-ol" 43
PI N ""
~
.
Li Cflf\$e.. ~~f.>nlE!'^t ......' \(E&.&..ol.al
-
~
~
~
)
)
G;..,
~
L b .., ",. 1- W t P. ~.
1"'0 Be Se\!en:'~
+ go b-C rf>$
N
I
c
c:,
IJ
N
1'"
Y
~N
~
~
\t\
.I
It
~
~
~
'13
~
:\
l
e
tit
/06)/1;1-
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
, REPORT TO COMMITIEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
I
REPORT NO.:
COFA2002-B-42
PREPARED BY: Andria Leigh
DATE: January 7, 2003
APPLICANT: Doris E. Hachie
APPLICA TION NO.: B-42102
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 010 010 064
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 10, Plan 882, Lot 7 (Oro)
I PROPOSAL
I
The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment (lot addition). The land to be
conveyed has a lot frontage of 30.48 metres (100 feet), a lot depth of approximately 67
metres (220 feet), and a lot area of approximately 0.204 hectares (0.505 acres). The land
to be retained has afrontage of22.86 metres (75 feet), a lot depth of67 metres (220 feet),
and a lot area of approximately 0.153 hectares (0.38 acres).
I AGENCY COMMENTS
I
Building Department: Existing non-conforming sewage system located on west property
is within the required setbacks. No sewage system on east property. Permits for new
sewage systems would be required for both properties for any upgrades or replacements
of existing structures.
Roads Department: No road concerns, possible future driveway will require department
approval
'OFFICIAL PLAN
I
The subject property is designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan.
The intent of the Official Plan policies is to protect the natural features of the shoreline area
and to maintain the existing character of the residential area. As no new lot is being created.
-
e
10/;;)-13
and the 2 lots will have a frontage of 75 feet each which will add to the character of the
shoreline, the application appears to conform to the policies of the Official Plan.
'ZONING BY -LAW
I
The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) in the Township's Zoning By-
law 97-95, as amended. The proposed lot addition would increase the size of the lot;
therefore this application would appear to conform to the policies of the Zoning By-law.
The applicant has completed the work with required to satisfy the requirements of the
Building Department with respect to the existing septic system. The application can now
be considered favorably with a condition requiring approval under Part 8 of the Building
Code for both the proposed and retained lots for any upgrades or replacements of existing
structures.
J RECOMMENDATION
I
It is recommended that Consent Application B-42/02 be Granted subject to the following
conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an
Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or
appropriate registerable description.
2. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be
stamped using Form 3 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of giving of this notice.
s. That the applicant obtain approval for a Part 8 Sewage Application from the
Township of Oro-Medonte.
Submitted by,
.-A~ -e~_
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
e
e
I Ob )..j(j-
PAGE#2
APPLICATION B-42102
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Albert Pross second by Allan Johnson
"That Consent Application B-42/02 be GRANTED subject to the following list of conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario
Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate registerable
description.
2. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 3 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year
from the date of giving of this notice.
5. That the applicant obtain approval for a Part 8 Sewage Application from the
Township of Oro-Medonte.
. .. .. Carried"
Additional information regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Centre, 148 County Road 27 South in Oro Station,
Ontario, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
fro~6SJ b.~\{
J.."'!: \,u\JAI;<-\ 'h., k 1
\.c 11'. l.t ~.(o.~
~ "11' 0.\.9>>
e
....
.,.~_.--' ..-....
. ~
--
~
~)
..9'''''''\.9)
fP.r;iJ
\
\
\
1.0
\ '
\
~ \
~ \
\
\
\
.'
, ~
e
lob},/'9-
.....:ft
'i<
r
t
_ \:)..... ":J'1.
,?'\~' ":J'C~f(:,'\)
\\o~t,
\. ). 1. t. '3 ~.
~..~~---
......
.~
.\
\
\"!
~
\ tD
\ ~~~
\ f~;
w.... ,..'
~'O'3 ~
_9\'. .....
!"....." q.
\,... ~...r;. ~'jJ
1 ~.(,~ '9.'S
~ \~2 ~..., "{l
~ ~ 0 ~~
\\ ~
~~~~<:)
~~O'<$ \ .
;.
.cG
;.
';t.
u
o
,.J
tn
0+00 t'1t"1"""
~)
~r;fJ~9) '"
\..,,\
~
,j/f.lt9.9-(~)
fP.-
'!o ~
~ ::/
cJ)
~
V
\
~
~ e-~ ...-."
\() ~~~
"'" 'f,.'ij
~ t'~
t-cP
~
~':l>
S""
-
~
...
o
..!-
Q ,.....
~
~
i s.\).O
\ ~\,~'1\
\_'1
\
'"
\\6\\\ \
_.-~
.~~
NOlES: _,nRf
r;I ~ SO'J~~ 1.11.&11 t;Ii \.~E.""""'-
,,~ ... ...."""" ,,-~ ..:~ "" "...- ".. .... .
~... ' ...... or ..,.,' ~ - .
, - - ,. ".......,.:'" ... .
f~') _ ~1t.5 e~ p!t~oetC 0.5
y,.\.~\ : ~~ ~. t, t.~ 0.5
__ _ ....~,.e ~
("1
\
.~
..
\
\
\
~~\
\~$
~~\o.
\ 0 \ ~
. \I ~ i;2
~\~ \ "".
~. i \~
~ 0.- ,..
\
\
s
\..~~~
LEGENO
SI9 _ottlO1t.5 51~~.~.!":0tI el'>R
SS19 _ottlOTES ~1...:,;"""_v
Ie _otN01t.S \ROI'I ....... __..m
16- _otN01t.S 1R0tI e~:';
58 _ottlo1t.5 soeol"!"'"'' e-
",I" _otN01t.S ",oor. t:i
11 _otN01t.S ~ UNt.~
\~) :~~; IAE.~~
e
\'
.
/otJ/G
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMlITEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
I
REPORT NO.: COFA2002-B47
PREPARED BY: Andria Leigh
DATE: January 7,2003
APPLICANT: Allan Langman
APPLICA nON NO.: B-47102
ROLL NUMBER: 4346010 005 090
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 12, East Half of Lot 13 and 14 (Oro)
I PROPOSAL
I
The applicant is proposing a technical severance to convey parcels, which had merged on title. The land
to be conveyed has a lot area of 17.8 hectares (44.11 acres). The land to be retained has a lot area of 40.0
hectares (99 acres).
'AGENCY COMMENTS
t
Building Department: Proposal appear to meet minimum standards.
Roads Department ~<:. ((),.:Il.'::';;C_
I OFFICIAL PLAN I
The subject property is designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan. The proposed consent
would permit the creation of a lot where two lots had merged on title and is subject to the policies contained
within Section D2.3.1O.
D2.3.10 The creation of new lots to correct situations where two or more lots have
merged on title.
The creation of a new lots to correct a situation where two or more lots have merged on title
may be permitted, provided the Committee of Adjustment is satisfied that the new lot:
a) was once separate conveyable lot in accordance with the Planning Act;
b) is of the same shape and size as the lot-which once existed as a separate conveyable lot;
c) can be adequately serviced by on-site sewage and water systems;
d) fronts on a public road that is maintained year-round by a public authority; and
e) an entrance permit is available for the new driveway accessing the severed lot from the
appropriate authority, if required.
f) the severed and retained parcels wi]] continue to be viable for agricultural use after the
severance has been granted. To assist the Committee of Adjustment in determining the
viability of the severed and retained parcels, an agricultural viability report shall be
prepared by a qualified agrologist. The report shaH review:
- the quality of the soils;
- the nature of the existing farm operation, if one exists;
- the potential uses of the severed and retained parcels. (Official Plan
Amendment #4
e
e
lob)
The application appears to generally confonn with the policies of the Official Plan.
, ZONING BY -LA W
I
The subject property is zoned AgricuJtural/Rural (AlRU) in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as
amended. Both the proposed and retained lots would appear to comply with the Zoning By-law provisions
related to lot frontage and lot area requirements.
I RECOMMENDATION
I
It is recommended that Consent Application B-47/02 be GRANTED subject to the following list of
conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land
Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate registerable description.
2. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped using Fonn
1 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of giving of this notice.
Submitted by,
.--/1--^- -t-a-e-
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
SENIOR PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
Date
.
e
e
PAGE # 2
APPLICATION B-47102
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
!Ob),;( ,
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Joe Charles, second by Allan Johnson
"That Consent Application B-47/02 be GRANTED subject to the following list of conditions: .
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario
Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate registerable
description.
2. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 1 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
3. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year
from the date of giving of this notice.
.. . .. Carried"
Additional information regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Centre, 148 County Road 27 South in Oro Station,
Ontario, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
.
e
e
lob)-I
E ~:>-t ~ L-=- -\- t 4 <:"'o'^--. \ 1-
~
E ~~-t ~ ~ t:CI....-t ~ i 10 -t 13
c..O'^-I~
(0'......-
l A \ \,"" e",. ~ c.o L Cb... ~" "'-
1>1"" 0 I
0.. ~ pt, I
Pf~",
~( R-I~"'2.
J 2.. L', '"' ~
o ~ "'" 04t.- t!L c \ ... 4 .... \J.. Q..""''' \. l- ell.
II
e
ob)-Jo .
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMITI'EE OF
ADJUSTMENT.
I
REPORT NO.: COF A2002-A4l
PREPARED BY: Andria Leigh
DATE: January 7, 2003
APPLICANT: Harry and Linda Vandervoort
APPLICATION NO.: A-41102
ROLL NUMBER: 4346030010030
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 1, Plan 546, Lot 4 (Orillia)
I PROPOSAL
I
The applicant is requesting relief from the minimum required setbackfrom Bass Lake from 15 metres (49.2
feet) to 14.32 metres (47 feet) to allow for construction of a dwelling. Relief is also requested to permit deck
with stairs to be attached to the dwelling with a setbackfrom Bass Lakefrom 15 metres (49.2feet)to 10.06
metres (33 feet). The applicant is also requesting relieffrom the front yard setback for the dwelling from 7.5
metres (24.6 feet) to 3.66 metres (12 feet). The applicant is also requesting relief from the maximum height of
a boathouse from 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to 6.6 metres (21.7 feet) andfrom the minimum interior side yard
setbackfor a boathouse from 1.5 metres (4.9 feet) to 0.91 metres (3 feet).
I AGENCY COMMENTS
I
Building Department: No record of existing septic system on file. New Septic system approval
would be required for a new dwelling. System would be required to maintain proper setbacks to
wells, property lines, and structures.
Roads Department: Private Road
DOES THE VARIANCE CONFORM WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE
OFFICIAL PLAN?
-...~..:)
The subject property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. The intent of the
Shoreline designation is to maintain the existing character of this residential area and to
protect the natural features of the shoreline area. The proposed variance would move the
dwelling away from the shoreline, which would appear to create less detrimental effects on the
shoreline. On this basis, the application would appear to conform with the general intent of the
policies of the Official Plan.
DOES THE VARIANCE CONFORM WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE
ZONING BY-LAW PROVISIONS?
----.i--.
The subject property is zoned Residential Limited Service Exception 2 Hold (RLS*2(H)) in
Zoning By-law 97-95 as amended. The proposed variance would allow construction of a
e
.
fO/:;)'di
dwelling with an attached garage to be permitted within the required setbacks but it would be
setback further then the existing dwelling and detached garage. The boathouse would conform to
the policies of the Zoning By-law as it is a pennitted use, and the height is based on the height
from the average high water mark not at its proposed location at the top of the slope. The
proposed variances appear to conform with the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
IS THE VARIANCE DESIRABLE FOR THE APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT OR USE
OF THE LAND?
Upon site inspection it is evident that the dwelling would not appear to affect any of the
surrounding neighbours as a tree line buffers the neighbours, therefore the variances would be
desirable on the lot. The boathouse would be desirable as it would be located off the shoreline to
reduce any impact on the natural features of the shoreline.
---.....n
-t IS THE VARIANCE MINOR IN NATURE?
I
The proposed variance is considered minor in nature on the basis that the variance would not
appear to affect any surrounding neighbours and maintains the character of this shoreline
residential area.
I RECOMMENDATION
I
It is recommended that Minor Variance Application A-41102 be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. 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.
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application, as
submitted;
3. That the appropriate building pennit 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;
4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte.
5. That the applicant obtains approval for a Part 8 Sewage Application from the Township of
Oro-Medonte.
4
e
.'
/ Gb)~)Y
Submitted by,
.:j~ '-t.~
a LeIgh, Senior Planner
-
~
SENIOR PLANNER CO
MMENTS:
-
-
Andria Leigh S .
, emorPlanner
Date
e
e
/ Ob ),)3
PAGE # 2
APPLICATION A-41102
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Allan Johnson, second by Albert Pross
"That Minor Variance Application A-41102 be GRANTED subject to the following list of
conditions;
1. 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.
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application, as
submitted;
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;
4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte.
5. That the applicant obtains approval for a Part 8 Sewage Application from the Township
of Oro-Medonte.
" ...Carried."
Note: The County of Simcoe has a by-law that includes setbacks for structures and buildings
from County Roads.
Additional infonnation regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Centre, 148 County Road 27 South in Oro Station,
Ontario, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
..
---~-~----t---;-~--t-~---1--+--~-- L~+---t--i I . i : ~-~ ; I',......... -;---i- H -----
,," : I:', 'e' I: I I',:: 1 'i: 1 I ::' I
~~~T~~~~-;i+;,tt~~J-~~:R~~I-~~~~
--1---,-----'---'--: ; -t-----T -;- --+-"'7--t--T~ 'i' I ~~L~.e_; :!>-!lfL-J.---t---l----t-:--~-1J~~tl-y~__;z--
, . , , . < 'l,,-.__L, -i-, ~___J,,__ _+.J,,____L,.,: ____J,..--_-1-,: _.J,___J...___.J;---.L,' __._J,_G\ .:,'.,----1!,--- ~, Cf.j,' ___.__1,__~.',- _l;___,_~,~,'.____._l..-._-!,...--_!,'.'- -
-i----T--.i------'k---;--j-----\--r- . 8' 0" ! , , 1 ,: I " , , , ,---, - i --- ,
---i-----;---., ~ 1,:,---+---~~,. --~-+:, -~--l. ! ~:~-~~--+-+i~i5, - .tJ,.,==j;..=l...=~~J,-~--J'i..j' --j",~.
I--r-- ! ----1 I \V
--;---i---T-- ___~_-L _' , ,'-------. . ... - I '-\ ,1-_____2-__.1..____"-- -J------1---
++-1- ~-+--~~ Ll=L=i=i--r:-i-=T~-r=! -~=1-\j-(;tJ. --i,.--...-----------
i i i I ! , , , ' I i I I ! . : ' \, : . 1_\ I i,
---+-+--t- ,.,. I ' .' " ,., I ,
- j-~ I ~- r~=-1-i- (- Ttt +-J -P11~! 1 ~ .---:-----~-
; , . , i I I I '-t--~ -'-R--c-' ! ; I ;. .,!!' \ , I'
, -4 ---l.- j I -l-' 1 ' ' , .l... . l' I _J,.-~-nj;~.-..-....l;--
---j--;- i ---r-T i ----r---T -;----r-' . ,---, -1---....,----- c.--+- .---T-- -.,--T---.,--', .-.-i----T---~---..-t-
" , I j J j if. 1 ! I ! 1 i ~.I! ;! ! i i
=J.. i~-t--j j 'I lilt"., --\.' -]..,-t~-i,.-~ i,'_ 1,1 ~\'=-". --~,- -~~=~,',==~,i---I~;--: ___~=_ \, -:~~~~-_--;-----:---t
, ....1.--.._.1---~--
--1-1--+-++ t-ttf;~;<: i! : +H-T : --i---~ +--"-:--,--f--t-
, , "W""itQ. no. ,1 ' ~,.- __ _ I,. _____._1,. __.__J,..- _1',
, '''1---' I' H, '---"-""--- t-.l....--.J------i------i----.J.--..---+ -- --- -. -
~j-;=r- i i=! i !! I i- i. \ · i;1I ; .. -
· ! ! ! +-l ; i l~Cll it_HJ +J~t t: H ++~+J E!-;=~
:-- tt ~r,-+,-=~=I~ J~:~ :-j!~.t. ,\ 1-~I-rTf4;.~q=~~-__._:_-..\_-.=t-.-~J-;-~=~.-.-_-.r
,', .!', -::-'I',.,---ll,,---j,',--~:;--t-:. -- ----+---~--+--. -: .:U$':U-n-IL~----lt - - -. --
i '. ;!! I! i 1 J 1 1 !: : ,~
! i i ! ! . 1 I ! ,! j . ,i 1 I il ;, I \, ,';
! ,-,- ;-+--t--'-rfl'--
_~T'I'-:.cLJ_ __l, _J.~,_-lL-J-l.-I. __J.L~_I..: l___~_:______' --~-------': --; j
--~-; -:,-1,., __JI.._~~I.---- il,_....JII I ; ~ I ii' ... ! I .. :! ii' I ,.. ; -
--T------ J--++--- ___~--Je?;\---~; ~---+!l J-l-~"~---i \ --1~1+~---~-~---~-----~\-~--- ;
-L-+-~----+----~----1---_+--J. ~ ! : +i-~:.J1~.~~ -niO.Y.l~--~r.------ --- -:----'-- --r-----t -- !-
----'----'__J__J_--L-~__.L !..!fJ 'i: : : : :.: I : i : 3" ,; :
, ! ; , ! . . ! ! ,- .......: 1" ---~ .,j. n I -"'----r--'--~-
I . !.' ~L.__ u ~...;.__.i..-...J.m~n-~' i ,\- i ,
. r~T~=j! -I-l-=~j-~--~I~ '-: ; -' 1:.~'iZ~E~t:s~jJ~iBo1;j~L'-c=~-~\
i It:' i .~" I Ii: I 1 ; I 'L'! i i : i !! I' no\\'.rc!' ,,: \,
, ~jll 'Ln.Q -::i:- -i-, : , " I; ,,---- --7'" - I--or';' .ill. ~.J I '-\ ;
! . t J! I -r- ---:----1- ~-- 1-1- --;---tl-- -t--- --~---~- -! 1""- -~ --I ~--t --i ---, __n____+_
1---iEr~~6bC--:-fT i-I. : : ',1,1 I ::, ::: 0;:: i \! '
r--l - i ,--,--,-----r---t---T- 'I - ---- "--':
! i . j L..) ~ _.-L .. J. \ 1 i . , ' . \' ,!", , .
'___~j)~~--r I ' i i i l{~ ! .~~+-----~~-+-;--+---t---~+----1 j__:_ 1___:_ ..i__ ;____\
~,', :,..:,----J"---L,,,.. _ 1,1:______:,' _ \".. ~~,I" .J'I'.- ----1,.- #'o~1ie. i'5\-i\I....~~~J i Iii 1 rL++~c.~ ; : : ': i
-i l~--: :---t---1----i-l--1---~-r;f-T-~-~--- - -:-- _J__ - - t - -i
~-~-+---4--___i-+-~.-J..-+---+-, : i! ---------L.-L---;~--L-_:i---L-L....;--------'----~ _L..l _!
L-T~-~-=:~- : __t=:~~u_K !J -:~-~J.~_j-::=t'--~Jti-:,=tliJJ,,~
+--~~__~___~_-:+~~ ; : - :~~~ -r~--t---~~_l~-+::-' '----.:--.-!--------
T-TT!-r-...;.:+-+--'-~;--i-+-'-+r~-u;--lui--;L -;-~..;- ;- -----:
+--J--~~L ,e a,...4 r ~_c:h..l&d.._l----.-i-.--l..__L__;___-----1_"';~__,_""'; - ---__~ --..:.----..:.-- _-,-_J__-L_~__.;___: ____..L__ ~ ---
j ; iii, j , i f1. I ; ; I I' l ~:: j , 1 J t ~ ~: I
, , ' ,J' I ,-: J/.: . , 'i "I I Ii;,,'
+--1----1---.t-"~----._+_:_-~ : -4---~--. : .~ ~ . I .J_J__._.J____L_J._n_J_.; : ! _~-_-L-_-(-._-_
t-~- ~- -~l~i' 'If If..LJn~--i--i-+_;--l~F-c::~L J -+-~- i__~-~-~j-----='= _+_J:___
t-T--i--~ m--+~-----T_-+--+----+----+-,-;----1__t_-T-.J--;-- _~-----.i---J ..--j ----~---;--H--:---"---i----c---i -- !
-+-1\:, -- :,.:! .-_ +-_~-~i: - _,;,"__-__ ;-- : -i---+------1--+ __,___--"_____J_ -- . : . ' 1 I , ,.-;--~ --- --~- - ;.
_ _~-+_'-___+ ___~__=L:~~l~~==r.i~~~tJ~~ i -1_LL
i . Jtr-d'l\\ Ihc:.r! ,nfd2-: : '
II
e
101:)/16
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
'REPORT TO COMMITI'EE OF
ADJUSTMENT
,
REPORT NO.: COF A2002-A43
PREPARED BY: Andria Leigh
DATE: January 9, 2003
APPLICANT: Hastings Robert Ryan and Margaret Elizabeth Ryan
APPLICATION NO.: A-43/02
. ROLL NUMBER: 4346 010 003 27321
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 7, Plan M-368, Lot 21 (Oro)
I PROPOSAL
I
The applicant is requesting relief from the minimum required rear yard setback from 7.5 metres
(34.6feet) to 6.72 metres (22feet) to recognize the location of an existing single detached dwelling
constructed in 1989.
~ AGENCY COMMENTS
I
Building Department: The department has reviewed the application and the proposal appears to
meet minimum standards
Roads Department: 1'-1 \.) (O~( (: '~:>js.
DOES THE VARIANCE CONFORM WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE
OFFICIAL PLAN?
The subject property is designated Residential within the Sugarbush development node in the
Official Plan. The intent of the Residential designation is to maintain the existing character of
this
residential area. The proposed variance would recognize an existing dwelling constructed in
1989
that does not maintain the rear yard setback. On this basis, the application would appear to
conform with the general intent of the policies of the Official Plan.
DOES THE VARIANCE CONFORM WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE
ZONING BY -LAW PROVISIONS?
The subject property is zoned Residential One (RI) in the Township's Zoning By-law 97.-95 as
amended. The proposed variance would recognize an existing dwelling which does not meet the
rear yard setback; however does meet all other setbacks within this zone. The proposed variance
appears to conform with the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
0&
-.... :J
It
.
!Ob}t& .
IS THE VARIANCE DESIRABLE FOR THE APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT OR USE
OF THE LAND?
Upon site inspection it is evident that the existing dwelling would not appear to affect any of the
surrounding neighbours due to the vegetation and topography of the property. The existing
dwelling is consistent with the neighbouring properties and the residential community and the
variance would therefore be desirable on the lot.
I IS THE VARIANCE MINOR IN NATURE?
I
The proposed variance is considered minor in nature on the basis that the variance would not
appear to affect any surrounding neighbours, maintains the character of this residential area, and
. .
only recognizes the existing dwelling.
'.RECOMMENDATION
I
It is recommended that Minor Variance Application A-43/02 be GRANTED subject to the
following list of conditions:
1; That the setbacks be in conforrirlty with dimensions as set out in the application;
2. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and
3. That.the Township Building Department approve of the application, in wiiting.
Submitted by,
~~ ~_J
Andria Leigh, SeniU P~er
SENIOR PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner .
Date
e
e
I 06) / H
PAGE # 2
APPLICATION A-43/02
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, David Edwards second by Albert Pross
"That Minor V arianc~ Application A-43/02 be GRANTED subject to the following list of
conditions;
1. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application, as
submitted;
2. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte.
3. That the Township Building Department approve of the application, in writing.
.. ...Canied."
Note: The County of Simcoe has a by-law that includes setbacks for structures and buildings
from County Roads.
Additional infonnation regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Centre, 148 County Road 27 South in Oro Station,
Ontario, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
'"
i.,,~
I
I., I' I' f\ '. r t
t.' ".....'.1 . ,
r
/ ~ /::'- ~
c.....u /("'
',,,, ")-..
. / ,... r
I , :r../:' r
'<.)
I /
It I
IY)
<....")
-,
I
(y)
'1)
I '-
-
(J
.........
\....J
.J
J
.I.t
".
'"
~. ,,,1.,,,.
.'. ";.'
.'
'II
~ l .., fl" .. .. .,:. r
. ,
) ^ f I ( . f
t \ 1 " . . I
-
/tS"~J
NOTE S
'of) 1\' \11 I H '.r t \
N.I''''.:' .'IJ'"
() ()I;~)
'"
.
<:)
CO'
<:)
"'I
<)
'"
) I
I
58533
(' '\ I ~ 1 (! .,.-1 )
...., J I '-
1"\'
L..I
, )
~, SECT ION
v
/
------------,
Deck :
2 Storey
Wood clad Dwelling
Mun. no. I
I" ..-
I
1
f
I
I Garage
,
I
I
)
Roof Overhan9 :
/ --..--_____..J
I
I
1 Patia
I
,
,
..
~ ....
~ "-
rrC1me '0 .0
';h"d
\
"
(Nn Fence)
t:: t::
~ ,.
. ..
-. ... ".I)
...
'w ... ... '!>
"1' 0(: 1< '.
.. t, .,
~ J. t , ... ..
to', '"
, . "
~
:! ..
"
.'
INflMW III IIIVI II filtH," 1111 ',(lIflltt 1'1' i ''-'" 1)1 ',\.I,"HII"'.I> 11'..~:'
11 14',11"',.1'.11(, N. ',flOWN "N I:t 1.,',ffl:l (, "!""/ ','~' It!!
. ,III
'. '.'"
III
H,.rrr rltl ,-
I 1'1'_
.. .
II '"
loh ), ~i
e
<:)
t,\I
"'I
It)
}'.26
},.2/
Frame
Shed
45'973
, I
) I ,
-,-,-.- -'_...-~-_.- -p ,-
LTGE:ND
C\I\;)
I'-\;)
O'!\;)
O'I\;)
V If)
J
, )
I { )
Of
..
C
Of
II.
,...,
C-
o
Z
('<)
J"{:
u }
CO
L{')
,0/
, ~:J, 1/
5~~~ - 368
''I
L_
3t
:
o
C\I
1.0
o
o
I'/")
Z
IS
--
,
I
.
.- -~. ..--.-.--
111 t./IIII', ',tAt-4I1AI/f) III( IN itA!.' .~
lit '11111', ',lfllll! ',t^~I!IAI:f1 ".',HJ
(II II! It I '. II1IIN It'''ll
it. I" tli It. ." II/( )~~ It"''' f,"11I ./JI ,
".11 III ~IOII', ',\111111",',11 ;t~ II,.."
'\.
/Oe)-/
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. BD2003-01 To: Council
Subject: Department:
Council
Building Report - December Building
C. of W.
& Year End Summary Date: January 6, 2003
Motion #
R.M. File No.
Date:
Building Permit Update
December To Date
Number of Permits 17 805
Number of Permits Previous Year 14 487
Construction Value $ 722,000 $36,262,554
Construction Value Previous Year $1,267,800 $30,950,416
Permit Fees $ 9,027 $ 364,407
Permit Fees Previous Year $ 9,883 $ 247,648
Part 8 Permit Fees $ 92,961
Recommendation
1. THAT this report be received and adopted.
Respectfully submitted
I~ /11~ .
Ronald M. Kolbe, CBCO, AscT, MAATO
Director of Building/Planning Development
Oe),;L ·
'"
C.A.O. Comments:
C.A.O.
Date:/
,~~.
Dept. Head /
iC())llUJ'--
~t;
2
o~
10 C)-3
Permit Summary Township of Oro-Medont
. Totals
Construction Type Outstanding Complete Deficient Canceled Permits Value Fees
ACCBLDG 1 0 0 0 1 $156,000.00 $0.00
ACCDEM 1 0 0 0 1 $0.00 $0.00
AGR 1 0 0 0 1 $0.00 $0.00
COM 2 0 0 0 2 $40,000.00 $0.00
COMREN 0 0 0 1 $3,000.00 $0.00
PUBREN 0 1 0 0 1 $0.00 $0.00
SEPTIC 3 0 0 0 3 $0,00 $0.00
SFD 2 0 0 0 2 $520,000.00 $0.00
SFDADD 2 0 0 0 2 $53,000.00 $0.00
SFDDEM 3 0 0 0 3 $0.00 $0.00
16 0 0 17 $772,000.00 $0.00
..
..
Monday, January 06, 2003
For Period from Sunday, December 01,2002 to Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Page 1 of1
lOW -cf
Permit Summary Township of Oro-Med . ,_
Totals .,
Construction Type Outstanding Complete Deficient Canceled Permits Value Fees
ACCADD 5 2 0 0 7 $75,500.00 $0.00
ACCBLDG 54 26 3 2 85 $1,396,175.00 $0.00
ACCDEM 3 0 0 0 3 $0.00 $0.00
ACCREN 3 2 0 0 5 $15,000.00 $0.00
ADDITION 5 0 0 0 5 $306,500.00 $0.00
AGR 24 12 1 0 37 $464,700.00 $0.00
AGRADD 3 0 0 0 3 $41,200.00 $0.00
ChangeD se 29 7 0 1 37 $0.00 $0.00
COM 9 1 0 0 10 $1,084,000.00 $0.00
COMADD 3 1 0 0 4 $728,950.00 $0.00
COMDEM 1 0 0 0 $0.00 $0.00
COMREN 5 0 0 0 5 $50,800.00 $0.00
DECK 36 18 3 0 57 $133,525.00 $0.00
DEMOLITIO 2 1 0 0 3 $0.00 $0.00
FIREPLACE 1 0 0 0 1 $0.00 $0.00
GARAGE 6 2 O. 0 8 $69,000.00 $0.00
IND 1 0 0 0 1 $205,000.00 $0.00
INDREN 0 1 0 0 1 $0.00 $0.00
MISC 18 7 0 0 25 $555,000.00 $0.00
MRES 0 0 1 0 1 $850,000.00 $0.00
POOL 10 8 1 0 19 $34,000.00 $0.00
PORCH CO V 1 0 0 0 1 $10,000.00 $0.00
PUB 2 1 0 0 3 $1,600,000.00 $0.00
PUBADD 1 0 1 0 2 $1,255,000.00 $0.00
PUBREN 2 1 0 0 3 $11,000.00 $0.00
SEPTIC 195 17 1 1 214 $2,750.00 $0.00
SFD 102 1 45 0 148 $24,583,924.00 $0.00
SFDADD 50 9 1 0 60 $2,056,030.00 $0.00
SFDDEM 11 3 0 1 15 $0.00 $0.00
SFDREN 27 5 1 0 33 $714,500.00 $0.00
SHED 1 0 0 0 1 $10,000.00 $0.00
SIGNS 3 2 0 0 5 $0.00 $0.00
SUNROOM 0 1 1 0 2 $10,000.00 $0,00
-
613 128 59 5 805 $36,262,554.00 $0.00
For Period from Tuesday, January 01, 2002 to Wednesday, December 31,2003 Page 1 of1 ...
Monday, January 06, 2003
a,.Jj
/ Oc ) ~5'
Building Definitions
Accessory Building Addition
Accessory Building
Accessory Building Demolition
Agricultural Building
Agricultural Building Addition
Agricultural Building Renovation
Septic - Change of Use
Commercial Building
Commercial Building Addition
Commercial Building Demolition
Commercial Building Renovation
ACCADD
ACCBLDG
ACCDEM
AGR
AGRADD
AGRREN
Change Use
COM
COMADD
COMDEM
COMREN
DECK
DEMOLITION
FIREPLACE
GARAGE
INDADD
MISC
MRES
POOL
PORCHCOV Covered Porch
PUB Public Building
SEPTIC New Septic System
SFD Single Family Dwelling
SFDADD Single Family Dwelling Addition
SFDDEM Single Family Dwelling Demolition
SFDREN Single Family Dwelling Renovation
SHED
SIGNS
SUNROOM
..
""
Industrial Addition
Miscellaneous
Multi-Residential