05 22 2002 COW Agenda
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA
DATE: WEDNESDAY, MAY 22,2002
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
************************************************************************************************
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
2. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF: - "IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT"
3. RECEIPT OF ACCOUNTS:
4. DEPUTATIONS:
a) 9:00 a.m.
Ms Kim Viney, Head of Sports and Recreation, Lake Country
Board and Mr. Calvin Stone, Co-Chair, Lake Country Board re:
Lake Country
b) 9:15 a.m.
Mr. Keith Sherman, Coordinator, Severn Sound Environmental
Association re: Delisting of Severn Sound as an Area of
Concern. (Printed under separate cover)
5. CORRESPONDENCE:
a) Irena-Wieslawa (Versha) Szczebior, re: Buffering/screening concerns.
Reference Report No. ES2002-32
b) Beth Bashford, re: Community park/playground in Sugarbush.
6. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
a) Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Agreement of Purchase and Sale (for
information ).
..
~
7. PUBLIC WORKS:
a) Recycling Council of Ontario re: Municipal Award
b) Report No. ES2002-32, Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering and
Environmental Services, re: Buffering/Screening of 279 Line 4 South -
Szczebior Property.
c) Report No. ES2002-33, Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering and
Environmental Services, re: Jess-Cor Holdings Inc. - Site Plan Agreement -
Parcel 21-14, Section 51- Oro-5, Being Part 2, 51 R-19930, Being all of PIN
#58550-132 (Lt), Line 4 South.
d) Report PWS2002-05, Jerry Ball, Public Works Superintendent, re: Request
by Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association for "News and Events"
Notice Boards.
8. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
a) Report No. PD2002-24, Andria Leigh, Township Planner, re: Committee of
Adjustment decisions for May 16, 2002.
9. COMMUNITY SERVICE:
1 O. ENVIRONMENTAL TASK FORCE:
11. ADDENDUM:
12. IN-CAMERA:
'"
2
~
ADDENDUM
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
Wednesday, May 22,2002
5. CORRESPONDENCE
c) County of Simcoe reo Municipal Waste Minimization Award -
Recycling Council of Canada (refer to Item 7a)
8. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
b) Report No. BD2002-05, Ron Kolbe, Director of Building/Planning
Development reo request by Erwin Notter, 4 Blue Ridge Cres., B.P.
#92-054 (formerly Orillia Twp.)
".
Severn,.Sound'
LA" ,.' ,
,. ~u~ b -~,
,'.' os 1,0: 71 ',' " .\
~ " ')ci.l.J.l ,/'. .
" I3b . . '!.(~
@~-'J . .of. .;;
'Q-\. , . ~ , ~'y ,~4;~
!C5". . Of"'-' ~~ \.'.... .::~~
~ ,~-:/'<"""",;'" ~
. ,:::- .. .~.;:-::~ \.' '-> ' . ~~
\,,~ ..".. .~.. t -.. " ~,.,
\Ct~ '~::f.. \'.'.~ . r . ~;s
~~\ . ':>>~, .~~\ '~~ ~~ .' .t:~1
'-cl--\, :' .,;, ~" ..- ;J~,",r"
Y(~. -'_ ~;__ .,.;,. A~~..
,~~'.};,. .
Environmental Association
Wye Marsb Wildlife 'Ceatrr P.O. Box 100 Midlaad. Oatario
UR 4K6 (705) 526-7809 - FAX (705) 526-3294
October 9,2001
" .
Dear Public Stakeholder"
, As a past or cUrrent member of the Public Advisory'Committee (P AC);SevernSound
Environmental Association (SSEA) or,other local public stakeholaerI am inviting;,you to
participate in the public review of the delisting documentation for the Severn Sound Area of
Concern. Your comments, strictly from a public perspective, would be greatly appreCiated. We
have included 'a review fooo for your questions and comments as well as a recommendation for
,your signature should you choose to sign it. ,Please send or fax these forms back to the SSEA
office ODor before'~eber 20, 2~1. .
" . ' AJW9.j)./ mL-
. When revlewingthese documents please keep iri mind the 'folloWing principles and comments'
from the International Joint Com.miSsio.a '
Principles: .
1. Delisting criteria (in Stage 2 Report) are developed on a site-specific basis by the.
federal/provincial Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Teams; in conjunction with the PAC. The
achievement of the criteria will be confirmed as being valid through internal and external
peer review, particularly by a federal/provincial Technical Review.Team. All criteria will
have undergone a COA policy review during completion ofthe Stage 2 Report, to ensure
they are technicallysolind and'reasonably consistent across RAP sites.
2. Delisting criteria should be,premised on three fundamental underlying elements:
., .
a) l?cally defined use goals and en~onmental objectives;
. b) applicable federal and provincial object~ves, guidelines, s~andards and/or policies
. .related to the RAP; , '
c) the Principles and Objectives embodied ill the. Great Lakes, Water Quality Agreement.
3. Delisting criteria should be based' on observable and measurable indicators where ever
possible. Use goals and environmental objectives which are adopted in the RAP should
specify measurable targets upon which delisting is assessed. These targets will have been
~
.lfb-J
presented in the Stage 2 Report, along with a surveillance and monitoring plan'to track
, '
progress.
.
4. Delisting of a particular impairment that remains in an Area of Concern can occur if it can '
be demonstrated that the impakment'is not solely oflocal geographic ~xtent, but,is typical
ciflake wide conditions. Such delisting would be contingent on evidence that sources
. within the Area of Concern are controlled.
5. Delisting of a particular impairment can a1so6ccur'Yh~n it can be demonstrated that the
impairment is. due to natural rather than,due to human activity.,
6. The principles ofRAPs~ ~Stainability,ecQsystem approach, pollution prevention and
public involvement .can also be used to assess delisting t~gets. . Operational methods for
making such judgements should be described. ,- -...
DC comments: "...it may not be possible to fully restore some uses, because of natural
factors or social or economic factors. In these special cases, there maybe very logical and
practical reasons why the impaired uses cannot be fully. restored and these reasons and
rationales should be provided in a Stage 3 RAP. The intent here is to explicitly recogniZe"
that there may be someimpaired,uses that maY not be ~ restored for justifiable reasons,
andthat this should not prohIbit the pOSSIble delisting of an Area of Concern following ,
Party/Jurisdiction submission and DC review of a Stage 3 RAP."
. '
, .
There will be a Severn Sound ~ Open House and Public Meeting at the Wye Marsh Wildlife
Centre on Saturday~ October 27,2001 from 1 0:00am to 3:00pm. The Public Meeting, beginning
at 1 0:00am, will include a few guest speakers as well asa question and answer session. There will,
be. a variety of displays of Severo Sound RAP projects and the staff will be on hand throughout'
the day to answer any questions. Everyone is invited so please make planS to attend.
Your participation and comments as well as those from the Public Meeting will be included' in the
:final Stage 3 document. Public response and support have always been an integral part of the
Severn Sound RAP pr.ocess ,and will bedo.cumented 'in this report. '
Thank yo~ for your continuing support and the important role you 'are playing in the delisting
process.
Yours truly,
" ._~./~
Keith She~
Coordinator'
Severn Sound Environmental Association
.,
4b ~3
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impairment:
draft October 1, 2001
xiv) degradation of fish and wildlife habitat
Delisting Objectives:
1. To implement the Severn Sound Fish Habitat Management Plan and other
policies to enhance and prevent the loss of fish and wildlife habitat.
2. To encourage the restoration of fish habitat in target areas by proponents of new
shoreline development.
3. To develop plans for rehabilitation or development of new coastal wetland areas
as opportunities arise.
4. As part of the Matchedash Bay project (NAWMP 1991), to:
i) secure and manage 1715 ha of wildlife habitat
ii) restore and develop 1427 ha of habitat for waterfowl and other wetland
dependant wildlife
m) maintain and enhance 442 ha of habitat for staging waterfowl.
5. To rehabilitate tributaries and riparian areas for fish and wildlife habitats.
6. To maintain existing colonial waterbird nesting sites within and near Severn
Sound.
7. To maintain and increase Osprey nesting sites within Severn Sound.
Rationale:
The Severn Sound RAP Stage 2 Report identified that littoral and tributary habitat was important
to the fish community of Severn Sound and that this habitat was degraded in several areas (SSRAP
Stage 2 1993, SSRAP 1993). The sheltered littoral areas of Severn Sound, especially those with
submerged aquatic plants, are considered essential to maintaining a healthy and productive fish
community (Leslie and Tinnnins 1994 and 1997). Most fish species use the nearshore as
spawning, nursery and feeding habitats, yet this is the area most often affected by filling, shoreline
hardening, dock construction and beach clearing etc. The processes available to protect and
enhance fish and wildlife habitat in the AOC involve providing teclmically defensible management
plans and policies under federal and provincial legislation (Fisheries Act, Plarming Act, Public
Lands Act, etc.) and providing rehabilitation programs to restore and enhance degraded habitat on
a site specific basis.
Since the Stage 2 Report was prepared, a Defensible Methods approach has been developed
which combines a physical habitat inventory with a model to classify most of the littoral zone fish
habitat suitability for different groupings and life stages offish in Severn Sound (Minns, et al.
1999). In addition, the Habitat Framework Guidelines (Environment Canada, OMNR and OMOE.
1
16 -f
1998) were developed and evaluated in AOCs, including Severn Sound (Gartner Lee Ltd. 1997a,
Gartner Lee Ltd. 1997b, Sherman and McPhail 2001, Tate 1998). These Guidelines provi!~' a
series of measures that can be used to evaluate upland, riparian and wetland habitat in ani.
Site specific initiatives within the Severn S01.md area also provide specific indication of
restoration status of habitat of the AOC. The Eastern Habitat Joint Venture is conducting
scale habitat protection and improvement project in Matchedash Bay (Tymoslmk and Ma
Downs 1990, NA WMP 1991). The Severn Sound RAP Tributary Rehabilitation Projer
Penetanguishene Shoreline and Wetland Restoration Projects are examples ofinitiativl"
led to the restoration of habitat.
lrge
,-
Jd the
nathave
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
1.
The fish habitat classification model for the littoral areas of Severn Sound was developed
by.Minns et al. (1999) and replaces an interim classification contained in the Stage 2
Report The model was evaluated using DFO fish community data collected between 1990
and 1995 by Randall et al. (1998). The evaluation found significant correlation between
electrofishing catches and habitat suitability indices.
The Habitat Framework Gui delines (Environment Canada, OMNR and OMOE. 1998)
provide the following restoration guidelines which have been applied to Severn Sound
Sherman and McPhail (2001 in prep.)
Upland Habitat
a. percent forest cover >30% of watershed
b. interior forest with 100m buffer >10%
c. interior forest with 200m buffer >5%
d. size oflargest forest patch - at least one patch with a minimum of200 ha, minimum of
500m across
e. shape and proximity considerations for forest patches and corridors
f forest cover should represent full diversity of species composition and age structure
found in ecoregi on
Riparian Habitat
a. percent of stream naturally vegetated - at least 75% of first to third order streams
b. amount of natural vegetation adjacent to streams - at least 75% of a 30m buffer of natural
vegetation on both sides of the streams
c. percent urbanized - >15% imperviousness in an urbanized watershed
d. fish connnunities - based on fish community survey and temperature
Wetland Habitat
a. percent wetlands in watershed and subwatersheds - > 1 0% of each maj or watershed,
>6% of each subwatershed or restore to original % wetlands
b. amount of natural vegetation adjacent - >240m width ofadjacent natural vegetation
(using adjacent forest cover in Severn Sound)
c. wetland type - marshes and swamps are suitable for rehabilitation
d. wetland size and shape - swamps should be as large and regular as possible to maximize
interior forest, marshes should be various sizes with variable shape maximizing
interspersi on
..
2.
2
%/2
3. For specific initiatives within the Severn Sound area additional monitoring methods have
been used to assess habitat in the area and status following restoration or enhancement
projects. The walleye spawning area at Port Severn has been enhanced by MNR (latest
modification fall of2000).
Current Status:
littoral Fish Habitat
Habitat Suitability was classified using physical habitat infonnation collected from 1989 to 1994
for 343 kIn or 70% (11.8 km2 to a depth of 1.5m) of the Severn Sound shoreline (based on a
1:10,000 'scale).
High suitability habitat generally consisted of wide littoral areas with gradual slopes in sheltered
areas with sand and silt substrate and high coverage of submergent vegetation and emergent
vegetation Medium suitability habitat was dominated by sand with some silt and pebble substrate
and little vegetation. Low suitability habitat generally had steeper sloped littoral area, exposure to
wind and wave action, bedrock, cobble and boulder substrate with little vegetation Of the
shoreline classified, 39% was considered to have high suitability, 43% was considered medium
suitability and 18% was considered low suitability. It should be noted that a small proportion of
the shoreline (12 km or 4%) could not be inventoried for physical habitat due to vertical shore
walls and pilings (i.e. lack oflittoral) and was not classified. These areas are considered highly
suitable for rehabilitation and the re-establishment of gradual littoral zones where possible as
development proposals are made.
Wetland Habitat
The wetlands evaluated for adjacent natural vegetation included boundaries of provincially
significant wetlands in the Severn Sound watershed (with upland "islands" removed) were merged
with smaller unclassified wetlands from the OBM wetland layer. The percent wetland area target
of 10% of watershed was general I y not met wi th the excepti on of Sturgeon River and Wye River.
The percent wetland area target of 6% for subwatersheds was generally met with the exception of
Coldwater River. There are ten coastal wetlands that have been classified in Severn Sound, of
which eight of these are provincially significant (Table 2).
There was a general increase in mean width ofvegetation adjacent to wetlands between 1982 and
1998. Significant decreases were noted in Bass Lake and Silver Creek due to increasing
urbanization and, in Purbrook Creek due to an increase of pasttrre area.
Coastal wetland habitat has been rehabilitated in Penetang Bay, Midland Bay and Hog Bay. The
trend in loss of coastal wetland habitat described by Cairns (in Severn Sound RAP 1993) has been
greatly reduced through the 1990s. However, increasing pressure to develop shoreline areas,
especially during current low water levels (1999,2000,2001) have lead to destruction of some
areas of Provincially significant wetlands in Sturgeon Bay.
3
4b/~
Ongoing implementation of the Matchedash Bay Project (NAWMP 1991) is proceeding
(i). Securement - 1847 ha have been secured by purchase or by agreement to date
(ii). Restoration - 50 ha developed as Tiffaux Cell in 1992, 60 ha Brereton Cell
completed in 1993, future cell planned near coldwater of approximately 80 ha. [Other
habitat area restored or enhanced (prairie tall grass areas, oak savana, beaver ponds at
Cowan site) details to be provided by Ducks Unlimited).
(iii). Staging Habitat - [ to be provided by Ducks Unlimited]
Three largest wetland areas in Severn Sound'are Matchedash Bay, Wye Marsh and Tiny Marsh.
Each of these wetlands is predominantly marsh and all are managed under Ministry of Natural
Resources Stewardship Agreements. Matchedash Bay is the only coastal wetland of the three
which is subject to lake level fluctuations. All tlrree have managed water level control on some or
most (Tiny) of the area. Habitat features in these wetlands are being s1udied for future
interpretation, enhancement and protection.
Riparian Habitat
In Severn Sound the riparian habitat guideline of 75% of first to third order streams with natural
vegetation is met in the Upper coldwater, Carley Creek, Bass Lake, Sturgeon River and Copeland
Creek subwatersheds (Table 3). Values of<50% were found in Bear Creek (37%) and Purbrook
Creek (44%). Values in 1998 ranged from 39 to 79% across the area. Riparian vegetation has
increased between 1982 and 1998 with the excepti on of Sil ver Creek (North River) and
McDonald Creek (Wye River). This increase is evidence of improved awareness of the value of
natural vegetation in stabilizing stream banks as well as the direct benefit of the Severn Sound
RAP Tributary Rehabilitation Project and similar programs that predate the RAP Program such as
the MNR CFIP/CWIP.
Upland Habitat
Although there were significant reductions in largest forest patch size between 1982 and 1998,
there has been little net change in forest cover across Severn Sound. The 1998 analysis shows that
Upland Habitat targets are generally being met for Severn Sound watershed (see Table 3) with the
exception of "interior forest" target in Hog Creek, and some subwatersheds on the Wye River and
the North River. These areas will be the subject offurther targeting for remediation where
feasible. It would appear from planned or proposed development in some subwatersheds that the
reduction in percent forest cover will continue in areas close to urban centres. It should also be
recognized that the "net" increase results from forest planting that exceeds forest removal. In order
to sustain forest cover, planting programs should continue to be sustained. Mechanisms to secure
large interior forest patches should also be pursued.
Status of Other Habitat
The colonial waterbird nesting sites (primarily on the Watcher Islands in Georgian Bay) are being
maintained by cWS and:MNR The Georgian Bay Osprey Society continues to support the
construction of osprey nesting platforms in appropriate locations in Severn Sound.
4
Severn Sound ecosystem and delisting Severn Sound as an Area ofConcem Toronto.ISBN: 0-
7778-1168-5
Severn Sound Remedial Action Plan (SSRAP). 1993. An interim fish habitat management plan for
Severn Sound. SSRAP Teclmical Report.
Sherman, RK. and McPhail, A. 2001. Status of habitat conditions and restoration strategies for the
Severn Sound Area ofConcem Severn Sound RAP Tectmical Report in prep.
Tate, D.P. 1998. Assessment of the bilogical integrity of forest bird corrnnunities - a draft
methodology and field test in the Severn Sound Area of Concern. Severn Sound RAP Tectmical
Report. Canadian Wildlife Service, Enviromnental Canada
Tymoshuk, S.J. and Martin-Downs, D. (Gartner Lee Ltd.). 1990. Abiological inventory and
evaluation of the Matchedash Bay Provincial Wildlife Area. OMNR, Huronia Distri~t and Parks
and Recreational Areas Section, Central Region, Aurora. Open File Ecological Report 9003.
117pp.
Wilson, W.G. and Cheskey, E.D. 2001. Wye Marsh Important Bird Area Conservation Plan. Can.
Nature Fed., Bird Studies Can., Fed. OfOnt. Naturalists.
Wilson, W.G. and Cheskey, E.D. 2001. Matchedash Bay Important Bird Area Conservation Plan.
Can. Nature Fed., Bird Studies Can., Fed. OfOnt Naturalists.
Wilson, W.G. and Cheskey, E.D. 2001. Tiny Marsh Important Bird Area Conservation Plan. Can.
Nature Fed., Bird Studies Can., Fed. OfOnt. Naturalists.
6
Actions to be completed:
Jjb~ 1
- Fish Habitat Management Plan should be implemented within local platming doc\.U11ents and by
federal, provincial and IJ:11IDicipal staff reviewing marine construction proposals that affect habitat
- The Eastern Habitat Joint Venture is continuing to implement the Matchedash Bay Project
(NA WMP 2000).
- hnplementation of Nutrient Management Act Regulations including livestock access restrictions.
- Continued implementation of rehabilitation projects through longer term programs to ensure net
gaIn.
- ongoing monitoring as restoration projects mature
References:
Environment Canada, O~ and OMOE. 1998. A rramework for guiding rehabilitaiion in Great
Lakes Areas of Concern. Canada-Ontario Remedial Action Plan Steering Committee. ISBN 0-662-
26577-7.
Gartner Lee Ltd. 1997a. Severn Sound habitat restoration strategy: final report Severn Sound RAP
Technical Report
Gartner Lee Ltd. 1997b. Wetland and riparian targets pilot application - Hogg Creek watershed.
Severn Sound RAP Technical Report.
Leslie, J.K. and Tinnnins, c.A. 1994a. Ecology of young- of- the-year fishes in Severn Sound, Lake
Huron. Can.J.Zool. 72:1887-1897.
Leslie, J.K. and Tinnnins, c.A. 1997. Early life offishes in Penetang Harbour, an Area of Concern
in Severn Sound. Can. Tech. Rept Fish. Aquat Sci. No. 2188.
NA WMP. 1991. Matchedash Bay Provincial Wildlife Area Management Plan. Ministry of Natural
ResoW"ces Huronia District, MNR 3080-1, ISBN 0-7729-6273-1
North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NA WMP). 2000. Expanding the Vision: 1998
Update of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Report prepared for the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, Mexico SEMARNAP, Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service.
Prince, HH., Padding, P.1 and Knapton, R W. 1992. Waterfowl use of the Laurentian Great Lakes.
J. Great Lakes Res. 18(4):673-699.
Randall, RG., Minns, c.K., Cairns, VW., Moore, J.E. and Val ere, B. 1998. Habitat predictors of
fish species occW"rence and abundance in nearshore areas of Severn Sound. Canadian Manuscript
Report of Fi sheri es and Aquati c Sci ences 2440.
Severn Sound Remedial Action Plan (SSRAP). 1993. Stage 2 Report: a strategy for restoring the
5
USE tMfAlftNENTI
ftESTOftATlON~HIEVED?
xlv) oegradation of fish
and wlldHfe habitat.
1. YES/NO in localized areas
2. YES
3. YES/NO in localized areas
TABLE 'I draft october 2001
srA1US Of ()8JEC-nyES 1'01' ""US....." seIlER" sO,,"1) ~ "" ""~. Of ~(!'\
. . .."..... ".,',
DE\..\S11f\1G OBJECTIVE
1. To irr(Jlerr-ent the Se\J6rn
sound Fish Habitat
Management Plan and other
policies to enhance and
prewnt the KISS of fish and
wildlife habllat
2, To encourage the
restoration of fish habilat in
target areas by proponenls of
neW shoreline development.
3. To develop plans for
rehabilitation or development
of neW coastal weiland areas
as opportunities arise.
200'1 STATUS
Habitat suitabiUty rrodel classifies littoral
habitat for fish habitat t1\8nagement plan. Of
the 119 km of shoreline classified, 39",," had
high suitabiity, 430,," had medium suitability and
180,," had iow suitability for the Se\J6rn Sound
fish col1\fl1.lnlty. Walleye spawning habitat was
enhanced during 2000, coastal wetiands are
Included in high suitability habitat (8 are
classified as provincla1Y significant). Large
interior forest patches (:>200ha) are present
throughout the area but are subject to
fragmentalion.
At \east 12 km of degraded habilat have been
targeted In Penetangulshene Bay, Midland Bay,
and Hog Bay for rehabilitation.
Penetang BaY Restoration Project has restored
4 ha of \ltloral habitat. St1\81 coastal wetland
under development In llff\n basin. Restoration
plan for destroyed habitat in sturgeon Bay
pending.
~TRAreGY FOft tJlEFT\NG O~JECTM:
_ Fish Habitat Management Plan needs to
be cOrr(J\eted and implemented.
_ protection of coastal wetland habitat
should be enhanced
_ large forest patches in su\)Watersheds
should be secured to t1\8lntaln integrity .
Ongoing irr(J\err-entation as opportunities
arise.
~NGIMPLEMENTAT\ON
Ongoing Implementation as opportunities
arise.
~NG IMPLEMENTAT\ON
&
\
~
7
TABLE 1 draft October 2001
STATUS OF OBJECTIVES FOR DEUSTlNG SEVERN SOUND ~ AN AREA OF CONCERN
c, c '. ,'..', ",.,
~:, ,,' ,
USE IMPAiRWCNTI. DEUSTlt.iq OBJESCTlVE 2001 STATUS STRATEGY FOF,\ Mi:r::T1NG OI3~!:9T1VES ~CHE[)Uu: F()~ D~!-IS.J!N,G. ' ,
RESTORATION At:IiIEVED? c 'c 'c.': ,: ',',' " " ': '::':..o!
..,
4, YES original targets delayed 4. As part of the Matchedash 4(1), 1847 ha purchased or secured to date EHJV is continuing the Matchedash Bay ONGOING IMPLEMENTATION
but the project is continuing. Bay project. to: (Ii). 50 ha developed as Thiffaull Cel in 1992. Project
i) secure and manage 1715 ha Brereton Cell cOl1l'lleted in 1993. future cell
of 'lAldlife habitat planned near ColdlNater of approximately 80 ha.
iI) restore and develop 427 ha [aher habitat area restored or enhanced
of habitat for INaterfo'IA and (prairie taU grass areas. oak savana. beaver
other \'wiland dependant ponds at Cowan site) details to be pro\oided by
'lAldlife Ducks Unlimited),
Iii) maintain and enhance 442 (Iii), Staging Habitat - [to be pro\oided by Ducks
ha of habitat for staging Unlimited)
waterfo'IA,
xiv) Degradation of fish and 5. To rehabilitate tributaries 5. 128 kms of streams 'lAth fish habitat that 111l'Ilementation of Nutrient Management ONGOING IMPLEMENTATION
'lAldfife habitat continued. and riparian areas for fish and require rehabilitation have been identified. 70 Act Regulations including fivestock
'lAldHe habitats. km cOl1l'lleted to date. First to third order access restrictions. Continued
YES/NO streams have 39 to 79% 'lAth natural vegetation il1l'llementation of rehabilitation projects,
on stream banks across the area. Four Resolve minimum 'lAdth of riparian buffer.
sublNatersheds meet the Habitat Framework
target of 75%. 14 of 16 subwatersheds >50%.
YES 6. To maintain existing 6, Existing nesting sites are secure, No further action. COMPLETE
coloniallNaterbird nesting Management of cormorants under
sites 'lAthln and near Severn consideration.
Sound.
YES 7. To maintain and increase 7. Georgian Bay Osprey Society Is continuing Install additional nesting sites v.11ere ONGOING IMPLEMENTATION
Osprey nesting sites 'lAthln to support new nesting sites In Severn Sound. appropriate as opportunities arise.
Severn Sound. TY.o additional sites Installed on S shore 'lAthin
Severn Sound during 1998.
8
~
\
~
,Table 2 Wetlands in Severn Sound
4b //D
Wetland Name , Significance Class ification: Size* (ha) Watershed(s) . ','
Bass Lake Swamp Provincial Class 1 465,51 North River
C'Opeland Forest Wetlands Provincial Class 1 1603.54 Sturgeon River/ColdwaterRiver/non-SS
East Coulson Swamp Provincial Class 1 135.75 Coldwater River
Matchedash Bay Wetlands (coastal) Provincial Class 1 681.3 North River/MatchedashBay/ColdwaterRiver
air Lake Wetland Provincial Class 1 347.09 Wye River
Purbrook Creek Swamp Provincial Class 1 705.85 North River
Tiny Marsh Provincial Class 1 704.31 Wve River
Wye Marsh Provincial Class 1 820.81 Wye River
Port McNicoll Marsh (coastal) Provincial Class 2 27.66 HOQQ Bay
Sturoeon Bay Marsh (coastal) Provincial Class 2 204.78 Stu~eonRiverlStu~eonBay
HOQ Bay Wetland (coastal) Provincial Class 3 24.7 Hoac Bay
Lalligan Lake Wetland Provincial Class 3 87.17 Copeland Creek
Lanaman Marsh Provincial Class 3 68.76 North River
Marchmont Swamp Provincial Class 3 169.03 North River
Penetang Marsh (coastal) Provincial Class 3 22 Penetano Bay/Copeland Creek
Sucker Creek Wetlands Provincial Class 3 27.62 Midland Harbour -
Vasey DU Swamp West Provincial Class 3 79.37 Hogg Creek
West Coulson Swamp Provincial Class 3 81.5 Coldwater River
T obies Bav (coastal) Provincial Unclassified 102.27 Severn Sound
Potato Island (coastal) Provincial Unclassified 207.6 Severn Sound
Quarry Island (coastal) Provincial Unclassified 48.8 Severn Sound
Midland Park Lake Swamp Local Class 4 23.65 Little Lake
North River Swamp Local Class 4 83.23 North River
Guthrie Swamp Local Class 4 462.19 Sturaeon River
McMahon Creek Swamp Local Class 5 178.3 Wye River/non-SS
Midland Swamp (coastal) Local Class 5 33.77 Midland Harbour
SilverCreek Wetland Local Class 5 25.17 North River
St. Andrews Lake Wetlands Local Class 5 25.82 Midland Harbour
Ebenezer Swamp Local Class 6 29.34 Wye River
Tiny Boa Local Class 6 30.59 Wve River
Vasey Swamp Local Class 6 41.04 Sturaeon River
Victoria Harbour Marsh Wetlands (coastal) Local Class 6 10.62 Sturaeon Bay
Elliot's Comers Local Class 7 204.6 HOQQ Creek
Medonte Bog Local Class 7 24.21 Sturaeon River
OrilliaDump Swamp Local Class 7 29.83 North River
Tay Boa Local Class 7 8.85 SturQeon River/MatchedashBav
Vasey DU Swamp East Local Unclassified 20.78 HOQg Creek
"note: wetland size was calculated using wetlands clipped to the watershed,
thus 'size' only refers to the amount of the wetland within Severn Sound
9
.1 au..:.;1.tt.. nauual. .1'':'' I.UI al.lul.I ..:nl iU':5.7
Summary of Forest, Riparian and Wetland Habitat Targets
for First to Third Order Streams
kb
1982 COLDWATER RIVER
Upper Lower Avon Carley Coldwater
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS Taraet Coldwater Coldwater River Creek River
% Forest Cowr >30% 66% 39% 33% 56% 50%
Size of Lamest Patch (Hal > 100 Ha 1172 632 132 646 1212
% Forest> 100m from Eo > 10% 34% 15% 8% 28% 22%
% Forest> 200 m from Etb! >5% 18% 7% :'1% :;" 13% 11%
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
% first to third order streams with Natural Vea.. ' >75% , 74% -7= 51.. ". 48110 c", "68..,. ' ' '61% ...,
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Yea >75% 62110' " ' 42110 ~' 55% c,. 49%:'
% first to third order streams with Natural Vf>O, pius Wetlands > 75% 76% " 60% 48110 .:; 17% I,: 64%
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Vea. pius Wetlands >75% 64% ", 49% ~,c 58% 53%
WETLAND HABITAT TARGETS
> 10% (sub> 6%1 " I I 5%: I',,' " 6%
% Wetlands in Watershed 4% 7% 0%
Amount of Vegetation Mean Wiclh (m) > 240m 54 143 I 0 I 119 106
1998 -
Upper Lower Avon Carley Coldwater
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS Taraet Goldwater Goldwater River Creek River
% Forest Cowr >30% 65% 43% 39'110 59% 52%
Size of Lamest Patch (Hal > 100 Ha 1142 624 141 642 1181
% Forest> 100m from Eo >10% 35% 17% 10% 29% 24%
% Forest> 200 m from Etb! >5% 20% 8% 2110 14% 12110
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
% first to third order streams with Natural Yea. >75% 78% 57% 65% 76% .'" 68%
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Yea. >75% 64% 45% 37% 60% 53%
% first to third order streams with Natural Vea, oIus Wetlands >75% 79% 65% 65% 17% 71%
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Vf>O, pius Wetlands > 75% 66% 52% 37% 62%' 55%
WETLAND HABITAT TARGETS
% Wetlands in Watershed > 10% (sub> 6%\ 4% I 7% 0% I 5% 6%
Amount of Veaetabon Mean Wiclh (ml > 240m 62 I 187 55 I 186 157
Note: Below Target
Meets Target
Difference Between 1982
and 1998 Results bv Watershed
Upper Lower Avon Carley Coldwater
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS Coldwater Coldwater River Creek RIver
% Forest Cowr -1% 4% 5% 2% 3%
Size of Lamest Patch (Hal -30 -8 9 -5 -30
% Forest> 100 m from Etb! 1% 2% 2% 1% 2%
% Forest> 200 m from Ed::Je 1% 1% 0% 1% 1%
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
% first to third order streams with Natural Yea. 3% 6% 19% 8% 7%
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural VAn 2% 3% 10% 5% 4%
% first to third order streams with Natural Vf>O, oIus Wetlands 3% 5% 19% 0% 7%
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Vea, olus Wetlands 2% 3% 10% 4% 2%
WETLAND HABITAT TARGETS
Amount of Veaetabon Mean Wid:h (m) 9 I 45 I 55 67 I 52
Upper Lower Avon Carley Coldwater
Goldwater Goldwater River Creek RIver
Area CHa) 5082.9 5853.5 3070.2 4774.9 18781.4
Negative value indicates decrease
Positive value indicates increase
Zero value indicates no change
"-00,{," indicates small decrease
10
Ii
/11
Table 3B Habitat Restoration Strategy
Summary of Forest, Riparian and Wetland Habitat Targets
for First to Third Order Streams
1h ,; /(J
1982 NORTH RIVER
..
Upper I Lower Bass Silver Bear Purbrook North
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS Target North North Lake Creek Creek Creek River
'!(, For_ Cover > 30'!10 49'!(, ~ 39'It ~ ~ 45'1' ~
Size d Larg_ Patch (Ha) > 100 Ha 480 1010 288 168 eos 255 1410
'" Forest> 100m from Edoe >10% ~ 24.. 1ft 12'1' 21... 17'JCt 19-.
% For_> 200 mfrom Edge >5% 7'!10 10-. s-. ',',,;,:3'JCt!c), 11... ft 8'JCt
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
'" lirst to third order streams with Natural VfKJ, > 75% ~c, 50-.... c, 35"" 8T'5 " :, eo,r;,; ,. 34%;:;- ,7;c;mc{i~;' H;'?:'_;~i"
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural VeQ, " .. 4O'JCt, .. ';:z:z.i',jc::' 'T 34~'(:'
>75% 38'JCt 30-. 55'JCt "'24%',:
% lirst to third order streams with Natural Vea, olus Wetlands > 75% 51.. 38'!fo 76'111 ' 63'1(, , 35'i. > I"'c c .......:.': 'c."41'!fj\.
% lirst to third order streams with > 30m Natural Veq. plus Wetlands >75% <<I'!I. 3:2'!1. 64'110 42'1' ~',. '37"!I.c, c' '37'i,'
WEn..AND HABITAT TARGETS
% Wetlands in Watershed > 10% 1s<u>>S%) ','.':!Yo I ft I 13% ft I 1...1 17'JCt I e,.:
Amount of VfKJetation Mean Width 1m) > 240m 200 394 I 118 90 I 539 t 141.7 .1 2S6
1998 -
Upper I Lower Bass Silver Bear PUrbfook North
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS Target North North Lake Creek Creek Creek RIver
% For_ Coller > 30'!10 45.. 53 39'It ~ 49'JCt 4ft 45'1'
SizedLarg_Patch(H~ > 100 Ha 470 eoo 290 180 587 2fI3 942
% Forest> 100m lrom EdQe >10% 16'111 25'!1. 14.. 12'1' 19'!f. 1ft 18'JCt
% ForM! > 200 m from Edge >5% 7'!10 13 s-. 3'JCt 8'JCt " 4'ro c,' 7'Ifo
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
% lirst to third order streams with Natural VfKJ. >75% ,c' 53'JCt 4O'lo 69!10 59'JCt 38'IIt 32'JCt, '.. 4ft
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Veg. >75% <<I'!I. 3ft 57'JCt 39'JCt 25'JCt ~'" 38'IIt
% lirst to third order streams with Natural Veq. plus Wetlands > 75% 54.. 64.. 77'!1. 64% 39'JCt 44... " 46'IIa
% lirst to third order streams with > 30m Natural Veq, plus Wedands > 75% 4:!Yo 3&!10 64.. 42'1' 26'!(, 37'!1. 38'JCt
WETI.AND HABITAT TARGETS
% Wetlands in Watershed > 10% lsub> S %1 :!Yo 4.. I 13% I 8'JCt 1% I 17'1fo 6%
Amount of Veqetation Mean Width 1m) > 240m 206 412 I 92 I 85 539 1 100,9 293
Note: Below Target "
Meets Target
Difference Between 1982
and 1998 Results by Watershed
Upper I Lower Bass Silver Bear Purbfook North
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS North North Lake Creek Creek Creek River
% Forest Coller -5% 3 1.. 0% 0% 1'11> -1'"
Size d Larg_ Patch (Ha) 9 -210 2 12 -22 ' 8 -528,
% For_ > 100 m from Edge , -2'1' 3 :' '..: ...Q%:"
0% 0% -1'" -1'"
% Forest> 200 m from Edge -0% 3 0% 0% -3%" -2%','.. ' ..Q%
RIPARIAN HABIT AT TARGETS
% lirst to third order streams with Natural VfKJ, 3'!1. 5'11> :!Yo -1'" 4... 8'JCt 4...
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Veg. :!Yo 4.. :!Yo .1%- ' 1... 4... 1"
% first to third order streams with Natural Vea. plus Wetlands 3'!1. ~ 1" 1% 4% 0% -1'!!;"
% lirst to third order streams with > 30m Natural Vea, plus Wetlands 2% 3'!1. 0% 0% 1% 0% 1..
WETI.ANO HABITAT TARGETS
Amount of Veqetation Mean Width (m) 7 I 18 -26 I -5 I , I -41 .. '''I 7
Upper I Lower I Bass Silver Bear Purbrook North
North North Lake Creek Creek Creek RIver
kea IHa) 8973.7 16724.0 I 4637.1 2501.1 3969.2 4141.9 30947.0
Negative value indicates decrease
Positive value indicates increase
Zero value indicates no change
"-0%" indicates small decrease
11
Table 3C Habitat Restoration Strategy
Summary of Forest, Riparian and Wetland Habitat Targets
for First to Third Order Streams
4b ~/3
1982 WYE RIVER
Sturgeon Hog upper Lower MacDonald Wye Copeland
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS Target River Creek Wye Wye Creek River Creek
~"~'; .--,".,
% Forest CoYer > 30% 51% 32!(, 38'!10 3O!It 31% ~
Size 01 Largest Patch (Hal > 100 Ha 863 163 395 461 208 461 301
% Forest> 100m 1rcm Edae >10% 21% c.. 6'!fo.c,' 13% 13% 8%" ,,'. 12'110 ; 29%
% Forest> 200 m 1rcm Edae > 5% 8% ,1% c ;,: .". c':"", .c. '3., ,.. s-. i 13%
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
% first to third order streams with Natural Vea. >75% 82% ' , I,c .mr.'" :, 3O!It..: 52'110 ~ 4!M'. ~,
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Vea. > 75% 4!M,c 29'11>' ,; 21%'; '37%, 38'IIt 29% i:;'cc..c: 3ft.,;.
% first to third order streams with Naturaf Vea, clus Wetlands > 75% 71% 57% 46'!10' ,~ 59'!(, 5O'IIt 4!M 63'11>;
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Yea, plus Wetlands > 75% 59'!(, 36'!1., , 37'!f, ~ 36'!1. 4O'M. 41"" "
WETLAND HABITAT TARGETS
% Wetlands in Watershed > 10% (sub> 6%1 12'110 .". 13% I 1..... 2'110 12'110 s-.
Amount d Veoetation Mean Width 1m) > 240m 130 71 152 I 90 71 1215 113
1998 .
Sturgeon Hog Upper Lower MacDonald Wye Copeland
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS Tamet River Creek Wve Wve Creek River Creek
% Forest Cover >30% 56'!It 38'!10 3O!It 43'1(, 32!(, 34'110 63'11>
Size 01 Lafllest Patch (Ha) > 100 Ha 1033 199 388 833 ZZT 833 280
% Forest> 100 m 1rcm Edoe >10% 24% 11% 13% 18% 9'Ift 1..... z-".
% Forest > 200 m 1rcm Edge >5% 10% 3% 7% 6'!fo 2'110 6'!fo 11%
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
% first to third order streams with Natural Yea. >75% 70'!10 57% 39'Ift 65'110 81% 52'110 70'!10 "
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Yea. >75% 55% 4O'M. 2..... 45'!1. 38'IIt 34'110 48!!0
% first to third order streams with Natural Yea. olus Wetlands > 75% 77% 64% 54% 71% 62'110 61% 74'11.
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Vea, clus Wetlands > 75% 63'!f. 44% 40% ~ 52'110 38% 4O'M. 5O'IIt
WETLAND HABITAT TARGETS
% Wetlands in Watershed > 10% (sub> 6 %) 12'110 .". 13% 14% I 2'110 I 12'110 s-.
Amount d Vegetation Mean Width (m) > 240m 165 122 184 I 104 I 69 I 137 275
Note: Below Target
Meets Target
Difference Between 1982
and 1998 Results bv Watershed
Sturgeon Hog Upper Lower MacDonald Wye Copeland
FOREST HABITAT TARGETS River Creek Wve Wve Creek River Creek
% Forest CoYer 5% .". 2'110 5% 2'110 3'110 4%
Size 01 Largest Patch (Ha) 170 36 -7 173 19 173 -20
% Forest > 100m 1rcm Edoe 3% s-. 1% 4% 1% 2'110 : -2'110
% Forest> 200 m from Edoe 2'110 2'110 0% 2'110 .O'JIo 1." -2'110
RIPARIAN HABITAT TARGETS
% first to third order streams with Natural Yea. 8." 11% 10% 13% 12'110 11% 12'110
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Veg, 5% 10% 3'!10 8% .O'JIo 5% 10%
% first to third order streams with Natural Yea. olus Wetlands 6'!fo 7% 8% 12'110 12'110 12'110 11%
% first to third order streams with > 30m Natural Voo, olus Wetlands 4% 8% 3% 8% 0% 0% 9'!1.
WETLAND HABITAT TARGETS
Amount d Veaetation Mean Width 1m) 36 51 12 14 -2 11 103
Sturgeon Hog Upper Lower MacDonald Wye Copeland
River Creek Wve Wve Creek River Creek
Area (Ha) 9813.0 6168.0 12130.7 6436.6 2620.9 21188.3 2412.4
Negative value indicates decrease
Positive value indicates increase
Zero value indicates no change
0-0%. indicates small decrease
12
. ,
46 - /1
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impairment:
draft October 1, 2001
x) beach closings
Delisting Objective:
To swim virtually anywhere in Severn Sound (water use goal o/the Severn Sound RAP)
To meet current provincial objectives for water clarity, pH and bacteria indicator
(E. Coli): Geometric mean E. Coli density: <100org./100ml.
Secchi disk visibility: > 1.2m
Algae densities: <5ug/L (mean ice-free period as chlorophyll)
Rationale:
The rationale for assessing the bacteriological quality of of swimming areas has been outlined in
the Beach Management Protocol (Ministry of Health 1992) and in the Provincial Water Quality
Objectives (Ministry of the Environment and Energy 1994). These guidelines and objectives
recognize E.coli as the most suitable and specific bacteriological indicator of fecal contamination.
The Beach Management Protocol recognizes that recreational quality of swimming areas may also
be adversely affected by several other factors:
· the presence of potential sources of contamination such as discharges of streams
urban stonnwater, sewage treatment bypasses, combined sewer overflows,
waterfowl or bather load
· the presence of hazardous or infectious materials or conditions that may produce
abnormal physiological responses in humans (high temperatures, pH outside the
range of 6.5-8.5)
· the presence of nuisance algae, especially blooms of blue-green algae
· poor water clarity that results in inability to see to the bottom in the swimming
area in a depth ofless than 1.2 m
Monitoring has been carried out by the Parks Canada, Health Unit, municipal and SSRAP staff
since 1987. Aesthetic conditions were monitored as part of the SSRAP open water monitoring
program and in response to complaints over nuisance algae.
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
1. Geometric mean ofE.coli samples taken according to Health Unit Protocol
2. Aesthetic conditions due to algae densities> 5ugIL chlorophyll - leading to
matting of hair, bad odour and poor water clarity for safety (<1.2 m SDV)
1
4b " 16
3. Consideration of sources of bacterial contamination (urban storm discharges, non-
point sources in streams discharging near swimming areas, pleasure craft
discharges) impinging on swimming areas
Current Status:
The quality for swimming has met the Provincial Objectives at the majority of swimming areas
monitored in Severn Sound over the past twelve years (Mayrand et al. 2001 see map of swimming
areas in Stage 2 Report). Aesthetic conditions due to nuisance algae growths have improved in
Penetanguishene Bay and other areas so that impairment due to nuisance algae and poor clarity
has been restored. Attached algae and zebra mussels have recently (since 1994) made wading
aesthetically undesirable along some shorelines of Severn Sound. ,
The relationships between factors influencing bacteria counts in embayments at more remote areas
such as Beausoleil Island and Honey Harbour swimming areas were investigated by Bilyea and
Sherman (1990). The degree of shelter from the wind (or fetch) was inversely related to the
geometric mean bacteria count. Since some of the sheltered embayments receive significant
pleasure boat use, and little other use, pleasure boat discharges may be adversely influencing the
quality of these bays in the north shore of the Area of Concern (Beak 1989, Seyfried, et al. 1997;
Schieffer 1999). Monitoring of four poor exchange bays by Parks Canada staff from 1997 to
2000 has shown less than 2% of sampling days exceeded a geometric mean of 100 orgs.ll00ml
(Mayrand et al. 2001).
The Coldwater River wharf is not considered a typical swimming area in Severn Sound as it is
downstream of the community of Cold water in a slow moving portion of the Coldwater River.
Despite postings by the Township of Severn and repeated warnings by samplers, children continue
to use the wharf as a "swimming hole". It is unlikely that the site will ever meet the Provincial
Objectives even with pristine upstream conditions in the River. Monitoring at the wharf from
1998 to 2000 has shown 91 % of sampling days exceeded a geometric mean of 100 orgs.ll00ml
(Mayrand et al. 2001).
The subwatershed draining to the vicinity of Pete Peterson Park was investigated as part of the
SSRAP Urban Stormwater Strategy (Mattso~ et al. 2000). Urban stormwater was shown to
impinge on the beach during a rain event. Modelling indicated that a storm of greater than 20 mm
would result in high counts impinging on the beach within two hours following the onset of rain.
The urban stonnwater discharge could have also been augmented by the effect of the sailing club
mooring basin that receives the discharge prior to the beach. Routine beach monitoring of this
swimming area from 1997 to 2000 has shown 9% of sampling occasions exceeded a geometric
mean of 100 orgs./l00 ml (Mayrand et al. 2001).
The GFC campground beach will occasionally be impinged by the discharge of Hogg Creek
which contains rural runoff and elevated bacteria counts (Cayley 1996). Source control within the
2
1b -' jb
watershed is ongoing. However, even a fully naturalized stream discharges could carry elevated
E.coli counts to adjacent swimming areas on occasion (Riedel et al. 1997). Monitoring :ITom
1997 to 2000 has shown 22% of sampling occasions exceeded a geometric mean of} 00 orgs.!} 00
ml at this swimming area (Mayrand et al. 2001).
The following recent po stings have been made:
- All swimming areas in Georgian Bay Islands National Park (Beausoleil Island) are posted
"swim at own risk". Monitoring of the most sheltered embayments continues to have
results that meet the Provincial Objectives. Swimming is encouraged at ThfCA Camps
on the Island.
- The wharf downstream of Coldwater is posted ''No Swimming Contaminated Water" by
Township ofSevem.
- Pete Peterson Park beach was posted on two occasions during the summer of2000 at
the request of the Health Unit. This means that the routine, weekly geometric mean E.coli
for 5 stations, and subsequent re-sampling within 24 hours, exceeded 100 orgs.!lOO ml for
the area.
Riedel et al. (1997) point out that bacterial quality due to a combination of the above mentioned
factors can result in occasional exceedances of the geometric mean E.coli at swimming areas. In
Severn Sound, the weekly monitoring can result in occasional exceedances at about 5 to lO% of
the sampling dates. The quality of the swimming areas within Severn Sound was generally
satisfactory with respect to the Provincial Protocol. Exceptions are sheltered swimming areas
receiving occasional discharges of urban storm water or areas influenced by stream discharges
that may have elevated levels of fecal contamination.
Actions to be completed:
- Public wharf downstream of Coldwater
- continued non-point source control in Coldwater River watershed
- continued urban storm water and sewage bypass control in community of Coldwater
- Pete Petterson Park
- storm pond at the Vindon Street Outfall (called for as part of the SSRAP Urban
Stormwater Strategy) to aid in protecting the Pete Petterson Park swimming area
- repair and maintenance of the reservoir area (an area upstream ofthe Park that retains
flow in a small watershed.
- GFC Campground
- continued non-point source control in Hogg Creek watershed - subwatershed planning
- Georgian Bay Islands National Park swimming areas
- information on the effect of pleasure craft discharges for education of boaters using
sheltered, poor exchange Bays,
- inspections of pleasure craft sewage systems by MOE
3
4b /17
References:
Bilyea, R.W. and Sherman, R.K. 1990. A review of Georgian Bay Islands National Park
bacteriological sampling program. Technical Report prepared by the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment for Severn Sound RAP.
Cayley, J. 1996. Severn Sound RAP Clean Up Rural Beaches (CURB) Program Annual Report
(April 1, 1995 to March 31, 1996). Severn Sound RAP Technical Report.
Mattso~ A., Li, J., Shennan, K. 2000. Urban stonnwater management strategy for the Severn
Sound Remedial Action Plan. Water Qual. Res. J. Cana~ 35(3):475-488.
Mayrand, K., Mayrand, A., and Cayley, J. 2000. Severn Sound Swimming Water Quality
Summary, 1999-2000. Severn Sound Remedial Action Plan, Technical Report, in prep.
Ontario Ministry of Health. 1992. Beach Management Protocol. Public Health Branch report.
Riedel, D., Tremblay, N. and Tompkins, E. (eds.). 1997. State of knowledge Report on
Environmental Conmtaminants and Human Health in the Great Lakes Basin. Chapter 12 Great
Lakes water quality health effects associated with microbial contaminants. pp. 227-255. Health
Canada Report ISBN 0-662-26-169-0.
Seyfiied, P.L., Choi, C.K. and Zhou, R.H. 1997. Factors affecting fecal coliform concentrations in
water and in sediment at various geographical locations on Georgian Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Ecosystem Healt~ 3(2):107-114.
Schieffer, K. 2001. Water Quality Monitoring Report 2000 - Township of Georgian Bay.
Unpublished Technical Report.
4
.
\ A.BLE. 1 drafl. october 2001
51 A IUS Of oeJECll\1ES fOR OELlSilt<G SE\lERt< SOUt<O AS At< AREA Of COt<CERt<
2.00'\ S11\\US S1RI\1EGY fOR MEE1\NG scttEOU\..E fOR OE\..\S1\NG
USE \MPI\\RMEN11 OE\..\S1\NG 08JEC1\\1E 08JEC1\\1E
RES10RI\ "ON
I\CH\EVEO? WI\h the continued Implemen\a\IOn ot
Mart trom the tormal. \emporal1 posting ot . con\lnued oon-poln\ source con\rol
Beach closings i 0 meet current provincial _ continued ul'ban storm we\er con\rol programs tOf f\,\ra\ non-poln\ source and
x) the beach a\ pete peterson par\(. during urban s\OrrnwaW swimming quality shOuld
objec\W6S tor waW c\arIW. pH 2000. the qualiW ot the swimming areas especiallY aMP Implemen\a\IOn conllnue \0 meel ob\ec\\ves. minimizing the
'{ES and baclerla Indicator {E,CoII): wl\hin Severn Sound was sa\isfaclOI1 and . ongoing seWage bypasS and CSO oA,monllorlng days exceeding objecllves.
Geomelric mean E. coli densiW', me\ the provlncia\ Objectives tor bacteria. conlrol
<100 Of9.l100ml. organlz.ed swimming areas monitored . education of boaters on eftec\ ot
secchi dis\(. vlsibllilY: :> 1.2.m exceeded lhe E.coll ob\6c\ive on 2 10 22 oA, ot pleasure crail discharges in shellered
Algae densities: <5uglL {mean Ihe mon\\oring da'J& tram 1997 102000. bays and pleasure boal Inspecllons
ice-free period as chlorophyll Moniloring shoWed Use impairmenl due 10 . conllnued moollorlng
open water algae blool'l\S and poor clarllY
have improved and noW meel lhe Beach
protection prolOCol. Allached algae and
z.ebra mussels have recen\lY {since 1994)
made wading aeslhelicallY undesirable along
some shOrelines of Severn Sound.
~
,
c:Xj
5
46 //1
Table 2: Status of Index Swirrming;Areas in Severn Sound
1987:'2000'
I~ River GawleyPark " 0/8 0/7 0/5 013 016 NO 0/5 0/12 0/13 NO 1/9 0/10 1/11 0/11
"
Petterson Park. -, NO NO NO NO 0/4 0/2 017 2/12 1/13 3/14 1/10 0/10 0/11 3/13
Patterson Park' , 1/9 116 0/5 1/4 1/3 0/1 317 2/12 0/13 0/2 0/9 1/10 0/11 0/11
II HogRiYBr GFC Trailer Park 517 1/6 1/4 0/5 013 NO 1n 2/12 0/13 NO 3/10 3/11 1/11 3/14
M::KenziePark 6/8 3/7 1/4 1/4 1/3 1/2 4/8 2/12 1/13 0/2 0/9 0/10 0/11 0/11
Sturgeon River Waubaushene
I CoIdv.e#er River I CoIdwater Town Dock
I Penetang Bay Wa1MfrontPark 1/3 NO NO 1/3 2/7 1/5 1/6 NO 0/6 1/3 0/5 0/4 1/8 0/4
HuroniaPark 013 NO NO 0/3 0/7 0/5 0/6 NO 0/6 0/2 0/5 0/4 0/8 0/3
BayfieldParlt 0/3 NO NO 1/3 0/7 0/5 2/6 NO 0/6 0/2 0/5 0/4 0/8 013
I Beausoleil Ojibwa Bay 4/4 1/4 6/9 14/30 15/37 4126 1/29 1130 1/27 1/19 0/21 1/19 0/20 0/9
/ S/lInd
Chimney Bay 0/4 0/4 1/8 0/3 0/4 0/21 0/29 0/30 0/27 0/19 0/21 0/19 0/20 0/9
Frying Pan Bay (nol1h) 0/4 0/0 4/6 11/30 15/37 1/26 1/29 0/30 0/27 1/18 0/21 0/19 1/20 0/9
Frying Pan Bay (sooth) 1/3 1/4 7/9 13/30 16/37 0126 0/29 0/30 1/27 0/17 0/21 1/19 0/19 0/9
Lost Bay 1/4 0/3 4/8 6/30 14/36 2/26 0/29 0/30 1/27 0/19 0/21 0/18 0/19 0/9
Severn Sound Inland Public Swimming Areas
I Bass Lake Bass Lake Public NO NO NO NO NO 2/4 NO 0/5 0/5 1/3 0/13 1/3 0/11 0/11
(North River) Beach
Bass Lake Boat NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 0/2 0/8 0/10
Launch
Bass Lake Provincial NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 0/9 0/12 0/10 0/11 2/11 NO 0/9
Park
Utile Lake UttIe Lake Park NO NO NO 1/13 0/10 0/6 1/4 0/4 0/5 0/10 0/9 3/10
The indicator organism tested for by the Ontario ProvinciaJ HeaJth laboratory changed trom Faecal coliform to Escherichia coli as part of the
Ontario Ministry of Health 1992 Beach Mamgement Protocol. The irnpaiITIJ:nt level ofirxiicator organism remained 100 coUlts per l00rnL of
sample. Prior to 1993, Faecal colifonn bacteria was used as the indicator organism
ND = No data available
6
-'
-.....
-
-
-..
-'
-
-
~
-
-...
-
-
Severn Sound RAP -
/<1
LEGEND C:J Wetland
(!) Beach Monitoring Station IV Drainage System
N Road Network '.; Lake
1
o
2 Kilometers
I- -. J
",.".
...
-
-
~
..
,~
.II
~"',1,-'
~t
~, '<~
~
.-
GEOf\GWt O~'i
\ 1<.11'" ooacn
'l 50",100 1'0101
3 c,..eo"'.,ood Ooten
4 e'.......'" O.lICh
~
-
-~ ,--'
Ct!'o
tfC/
-1*
!l4}-
HOG n.a. 'i
'2& GFC 1'101'01 pa!ll
21 tkl<o"tI.po.ll
28 CI'/".IOeaeh
'29 Su,,"\ Ooten
Ov,USOlE'l'S\Jo.tI(
34 wo,.,,,I,,. a..d'
:IS C."IO""'" "'o,,d
, 1
38 e,u""
31 1'oby
38 Thumb po''''
39 touch $oil'"
40 WO.,ol<o'o
4 \ S o.,dplP"
4'2 ~.Ca\>b4 Oed<.
43 O\I'>""Y 90y
H 00'" eom\l9tOU'"
4S Chlm"oy 8.Y
411 eloboll'{ Pol."
41 Lhl'o 000
48 Godo""
49 ChoIr{ 1'01"1
50 fr{lno PI" e.y So
SI fl'1\no POll O.y No
52 \-Io.,.yRlOO" eoY E
53 \\o".YRlOO" eoY VO
OEJI<USOLEIL ISV.NO \
54 lO'\ O.y
ss eo" f\oc"
s& 60"0 blond
51 cedI! 51"'''9' COm!
u.A.S S If',KE
58 Plovlnel,1 I' ,!II 90'
59 2nd co"e, lIolICh 3
0f\1' If',KE
80 FIo..t.ledo.,\t
comRlunllY p,!II
S1\.lRGEoN6^'(
30 eat",.\\,OttCh
3\ S,u~tO" O.,ch
'32 Cai1\P tl..",u,,"
33 w,ubou.hO"o
. .",r- ,,7 5w\mm\ng areas \n
r".,....., .nn
..:s;
G
\
~
4-0 ~ /Jd-.
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impairment:
draft October 1,2001
viii) eutrophication
Delisting Objectives:
OPEN WATER QUALITY
1. The ice-free mean total phosphorus concentration in the open waters of Severn
Sound should be less than 15 uglL and 20 uglL in Penetang Bay.
2. The ice-free euphotic zone phytoplankton density, as indicated by chlorophyll q ,
should be less than 5 ug/L and 7 uglL.
3. Water clarity as indicated by mean ice-free Secchi disc should be greater than
3m.
4. Rooted aquatic plant distribution in Penetang Bay should increase by 30%.
Other areas of Severn Sound should maintain the same coverage.
5. Minimum bottom water dissolved oxygen concentration should be greater than 5
mglL unless the shape of the lake bed results in a natural localized oxygen
depletion (eg. North Bay).
SOURCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
Sewage plants in the Severn Sound AOe to meet effluent total phosphorus
concentrations and loading objectives outlined in the Severn Sound RAP Stage 2
Report (Table 4.1).
Sewage bypassing and combined sewer overflows to be virtually eliminated
Urban stormwater discharges to be decreased by 20%.
Watershed inputs to Severn Sound should have total phosphorus concentrations of
less than 0.030 ug.L and loadings decreased by 20%.
Private sewage systems to be upgraded where faulty of substandard.
5.
Rationale:
.
OPEN WATER
Cultural eutrophication has affected Severn Sound, including Penetang Bay, since the 19605 (Veal
and Michalski 1971). Problems associated with eutrophication such as nuisance algal growths
and changing fish communities have adversely affected recreational uses of the Sound despite
efforts at improvement oftreated sewage effluents (Nicholls et al. 1988, Severn Sound RAP
1993).
1
40/)3
Phosphorus, especially from high concentration sources such as sewage plants, has been identified
as a key nutrient controlling the growth ofphytopIankton in Penetang Bay as in many areas of the
Great Lakes and inland waters (Nicholls and Heintsch., 1992; Nicholls et al. 1977). Relationships
have been described between phytoplankton biomass and total phosphorus concentration in
nearshore areas of the Great Lakes (Nicholls et al. 1986; 1988). Reductions in open water
phosphorus concentrations through source control can be expected to reduce phytoplankton
biomass and reduce nuisance algae conditions and to change trophic status of open water
(Nicholls et al. 1988, Dillon et al. 1996).
The open water quality objectives are based on trophic state indicators associated with a
mesotrophic or moderately enriched water body. The improved clarity expected in Penetang Bay,
a relatively shallow Bay, would result in a 30% increase in the area of the lake bed exposed to
sufficient light penetration. Trophic state infonnation from other ecosystem components such as
phytoplankto~ zooplankton and benthos should be integrated with nutrient and c.la1:ity
measurements (see use impainnent sections vi and xiii).
Phosphorus in the watersheds draining to Severn Sound represents both a source of nutrient to
the Sound and a measure of enrichment of the stream itself. Control of phosphorus concentration
in the streams flowing to Severn Sound is aimed at improvement in the quality of the stream
during low flow or base flow periods (approximately 90% of the time). During the higher flow
events such as spring freshet and other stonn events it is expected that total phosphorus
concentration will increase with erosional runoff and will represent a major portion of the load
from watersheds. The watershed remedial actions in Severn Sound were aimed at both control of
discharges that influence the stream quality during low flow and also control of sources
of phosphorus caused by erosion to improve low flow quality and to reduce loadings. The
Provincial Water Quality Objectives (MOE 1994) indicate that to eliminate excessive plant
growth in rivers and streams total phosphorus should be below 30 ug/L.
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
OPEN WATER
A long-tenn open water monitoring program has been used in Severn Sound since 1973 to collect
samples at a series of open water stations representing various bays within Severn Sound (Severn
Sound RAP 1993). Euphotic zone composite water samples are collected for chemistry including
total phosphorus and Chlorophyll g as well as phytoplankton. Profiles of temperature and
dissolved oxygen are also taken using a YSI meter. The sampling program collects samples on a
bi-weekly basis through the ice-free period of the year at approximately 10 stations.
.
TRIBUTARIES
A flow weighted sampling program (more samples during higher flows with a minimum ofbi-
weekly) for long-tenn stations in the Severn Sound watershed selected to represent river mouth
quality and in-stream quality. Samples are collected as grab samples for chemistry including total
phosphorus. Flow stations operated by Environment Canada are use to estimate loads and to
2
4b ~Ji
determine low flow sample dates.
Current Status:
Phosphorus control actions are substantially complete with continuing action on watershed
sources and urban stonnwater. Major reductions in phosphorus sources from sewage plants took
effect starting in 1994. Loading targets for nine sewage treatment plant effluents are being met.
Phosphorus loading based on at-project estimates for rural non-point source projects and stream.
fencing projects has been substantially reduced. Load reductions at stream mouth monitoring
stations have not taken effect in most cases. Estimated urban stonnwater loading reductions have
reached half of the 20 percent target called for in the RAP urban stonnwater management strategy
(Mattson et al. 2000). Shoreline private sewage systems, originally inspected through the
RAPIMOE Project have been upgraded where required. There remain other systems that have
been previously found faulty, that will require ongoing remedial action. Older, more densely
developed sections of shoreline on private sewage systems are presently under review by
municipalities for ongoing remedial action.
Open water trophic indicators total phosphorus, chlorophyll ~ and Secchi disc are being met
(Figures 1,2,3) following substantial completion of source controL Stream low flow total
phosphorus concentration objective is being met in streams with the exception of the Wye River
and Hog Creek. Possible confounding of improvements due to phosphorus control because of
zebra mussel infestation (peaking in 1994-95) has been investigated using a regression model
(Todd and Shennan in prep., Figure 4).
Strategy for Meeting Objective:
Continuation of annual monitoring program is proposed to confirm improvements. Continued
source control in watersheds and in urban areas. Stream monitoring should continue to determine
trends.
References
Dillon, P.l., K.H. Nicholls, W.A. Scheider, N.D. Yan and D.S. Jeffries. 1986. Lakeshore capacity
study: Trophic status. Ontario Ministry of the EnvironmentlMinistry of Municipal Affairs Report.
Dillon, P.l., R.A. Reid and H.E. Evans. 1993. The relative magnitude of phosphorus sources for
small, oligotrophic lakes in Ontario, Canada. Verh. Internat. Verein. Lirnnol. 25:355-358.
Gernza, A.F. 1995. Spatial and temporal water quality trends in Severn Sound, Georgian Bay
since the introduction of phosphorus control guidelines: Nutrients and phytoplankton 1973-1991.
Water Quality Res. J. Canada. 30(4):565-591.
MOEE. 1994. Provincial Water Quality Objectives. Ontario Ministry of the Environment and
"
:J
./
*b-J-j
Energy ISBN 0-7778-3494-4.
Nicholls, K.H., E.C. Carney and G.W. Robinson. 1977. Phytoplankton of an inshore area of
Georgian Bay, Lake Huron, prior to reductions in phosphorus loading. J. Great Lakes Res. 3:79-
92.
Nicholls, K.H. and E.C. Carney. 1986. Nitrogen and phosphorus limitation to phytoplankton in
the Bay of Quinte and implications for phosphorus loading controls, pp 139-144 in C.K. Minns et
al. [Ed.] Project Quinte: point-source phosphorus control and ecosystem response in the By of
Quinte, Lake Ontario. Can. Spec. Pub!. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 86: 27Op.
Nicholls, K.H., G.W. Robinson, R. Taylor and E.C. Carney. 1988. Phytoplankton and phosphorus
in southern Georgian Bay, 1973-1982, and implications for phosphorus loading controls.
Hydrobiologia 163:85-93.
Nicholls, K.H. and L. Heintsch. 1992. Short-tenn changes in "caged" phytoplankton at three
locations in Severn Sound, Georgian Bay, Lake Huron. J. Great Lakes Res. 18(1):3-10.
Todd and Shennan 2001in prep. Recent changes in phytoplankton corresponding with nutrient
load reductions and zebra mussel establishment, Penetang Bay, Severn Sound, Georgian Bay.
Technical Report in prep.
4
. .
l' ABLE. 1 draft october 20M
51A1U5 Of OBJECINES fOR DELI511NG SEVERN SOUND AS AN AREA Of CONCERN
OEUST\NG OBJECT"'E 200'\ ST~1'US STR~ TEG'l fOR MEET'NG SCHEDU\..E fOR DE\..\S1\NG
USE \MP~\RN\ENTI OBJEC1",E
RES10R~ T\ON
~CH\EVEO?
OPEN WATER OPEN WATER . coollouallOO of aooual moollorlog REMEDIAL ACTION COMPLETE..
viii) E.ulrophlcalloO, Trophic iodicalors are beiog mel (see program Is proposed 10 cool\rm
~. TP coocenlrallOf\ <~ 5 ug/L in allacned lable aod figures) iollowiog improvemeols. ONGOING MONITORING
'(ES opeo walers and <20 uglL 10
penelang 8ay subslan\lal complelloo of source conlro\.
2, Chlorophyll !!. concenlralion However. possible confoundlf\9 of
.c.5u9/L In open walerS and < 7U91L Improvemef\lS wilh zebra mussel Infeslafloo.
In penelang Bay
3. water clari\y 10 be SO\} >3m
(or 01' bOtlOm) if\ open walers af\d
>2m in penelang Bay
4. Roo\ed aquallC planl
dls\rlbU\IOn In penelang Bay fOLLOW UP SOURCE CONTROL IN
shOuld Increase by 30010. other
areas of Severn souod shOuld WA.TERSHEOS
main\aln the same coverage.
5, Minimum \)O\IOm waler
dissolved o)('jgen concef\lra\lon
>5mglL
,- '\,,----
-\-"'.-
(~,.
'---.....
\
~
5
1 "slE \ dra1\ OdO~ ;~~NO ,,5 /'.II "REI>> Or CONCERN
51" iUS or OSJEciI'JES 1'01'. OE\.ISilNG sE\lER
S1R" "n:.G'(fOR t/lEE1'NG SC\\EOU\.E rOR OaJSillIG
OE\..\S1\NG oaJEC1\\1E 7.00'\ S1" 1US oaJEC1\\1E
usE \W\p,.,\RW\EN1'1
RES10R" 1,oN REMEOI"\.. "Ci\Ot-l COMP\..EiE.
"Ct4\E"EO'1 Ot-lG01t-lG MOt-l\iOR\t-IG
'iES SOllRCES \..oadlng targets are f1\e\ fOf nil'le sewage
'\ seWage plal'l\S il'l \\\6 Sevef1\
soul'ld "OC \0 f1\eet etlluent \o\al p\al'lt eflluen\s.
p\'\osp\'lOrus concen\ra~IOI'IS. and
loadil'lg obiectl..,es out\lned \1'1 \\\6
se\lern sound RM) stage 2
Repon tiable 4.'\)'
2. sewage b'lpasslng and
COf1\blned sewer overl\OWS to be . con\lnued soutce con\rol in
\/iMall'l e\if1\ina\ed. loadings targets ate 1'0\ f1\e\ tot sof1\e watershedS and ",onl\oting ot sttea",s
'3 urban stot",wa\et dlscnatges soutces Il'Icludlng urban s\or~wa\et . t
t~ be decreased b'l200,o, wa\ers\'\ed sources and locallz.ed ateas 0
.4 wa\ers\\6d Inpu\.s \0 se\lern shoreline prl\la\e sewage sf.>\e",s.
Sound s\'lOuld na\16 \o\al
pnosp\'lOtUS concen\ra\iO~S ot less
\\'\31'10.0'30 Ugt and loadIngs
decreased b'l20%.
\) private seWage s'ls\e",s \0 be
~pgtaded w\,\ete taul\"1 ot l
substandard, I I
, \
.
-6
,
~
6
(/)(/)::1
:JC-
\.-00)
O".:;::i ~
~C\1-../
O-~
(/)C
o Q)
~o
Q..C
__0
-C\10
- ~ ......
,.:..-0
L.-r--
-z-~
oct
0...
c 0
, ...-:- 0
\ I'....-.r -
~
\ \..,-,-
\~
\ \~
\ " ....-:-
\\ \::--"~ a;
\ "",."."a:-
--
\ -\~
\ .....-:-
, \ .....-:-
\ ~ -::-
\ \_ c - (',\
\\ \\ .:t, -I: ~
----~
~~
\ \ ~~
~~ ~
\t) 0 \t) 0
ocr c') ~
or-
0...
\ ~ ~
- ~
_' ---r-
~
~ ~,
-< ..-...--
~'. ~
I - ' ----::-:::
- :-:: ~
~ :,=' en
-- \ ~--
-, .-::.:
-- -::::
::." :::::
..., -:::::
~ ~
-...t>- ~ C'I
_ " ~ cfJ
-\ ' ~ ',-::::
-', ' :::
- F " ~
,::;:
~ --: \2
\t) 0 \t) 0
<t c') ~
(f)
CO
\
\
\
\
\
\
N
~
c..
\
L-{fJ '
\
\
0-0
!?
, ~
~en
~
\~
J -~~
\ \\ -=-- --\ -
\ ".J.... ~,-
\ \ i-2f~
~~
\t) 0 \t) 0
<r::t c') ~
_~o
\ -- !?
- '
-
r-;=
\ ......-,-
'r--- ~\-
..........- ~
1......-- ........;\--
! _"""'I:
_~cn
......- ...........,-
, --------
~
~ --
- -
~ ------
- - - ~
..::- -- cO
- -
-- ---
-- ~
~ ......-.-
~ ~-
.......... ~
\ ' -
~\
\t) 0 \t) 0
ocr c') ~
("")
t-
o or-
o ~
o
\ \?f 0
\ ~
\~
\ r-~
\ . ~ f~
\ \\ ~
- "'\-
\ \ 1- -i::;;j
, ~ 5,=
\ \ - -
\ \' ~ ~,-=-
\ -;:", j-::.
\ \ -, -'-
\ --,~
\ I~- ~
~ \ ..
\t) 0 \t) 0
<t c') ~
......
co
Q)
r
p4
~5
~O-l.
50-:;,';, ~,~\\I\\\\\~'
73 82 91 '00
'\5
~f\f\ua\ C\I\oro?\I'1\\ a
COf\cef\trat\Of\S
(iIg/L)
p'\
. BS
::S
C
5 -I\\~\~\r\\~\ 5J\,\,\\\\\\\\\\i~'~;'\\ 50~\~\~~
o -W~,,-m~@'~'''' 82 91 '00 73 82 91
73 82 91 '00 73
pM2 ~5
~ 5 ---- _ '\0
'\5 ----- __ '\0-
'\0
iear
. '
~ ,.-.....
~E
'- ..............
~..c
UQ.
'-0)
20
ro
S~
roU
:::JO)
cCf)
c
<(
(f)
co
~:?f!
I I I '
o
9
~
Q')
I N
!~': I co
, I
, I
, I 1=
1- ~
I
N ..... 0
L.(")
-q-
("")
N
~
CL
o
9
~
Q')
"'I
J 1
11 .."IiIi
~-- N
R.~ CO
II
C"J
r-
L.(") -q- ("") N ..... 0
0 0
0 ~ 9
..q- 0 ~ 0 ~
CL 0-
I
1= ..... .....
..... Q')
Q') Q') ~
~
t= CO
I ill
I >-
1= I
N N 1= N
I
I CO CO CO
I 1=
I
:
C"J ("") C"J
r- r- I I r-
eD L.() -q- C"J N ~ 0 L.(") -q- C"J N ..... 0 L.(") -q- ("") N ..... 0
-
..J
-
'"
E
.s 4
(J)
E
::J
"0
>
Ji 3
c:
o
~
c:
~ 2
.9
>.
..c:
a..
6
5
1
- Measured
-+- Modeled
. .. -e... Predicted
lfb - 3/
!
'., I I
. I ' I
..................j.... .......
j
o
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
4
Figure 1;:
Phytoplankton biovolume in Penetang Bay from the 1986 to present.
Predicted values are generated from a linear regression of phytoplankton
biovolume with sewage treatplant plant phosphorus loading (R2 = 0.103).
Error bars represent the standard error of the estimate from the regression
equation.
:::: ~., '4dll~~~llM~ll
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
0.20 I 0.20
Ml IPM2
0.15 0.15
0.10 . II 111111,11111111 ::::
0.05
0.00 1.1 ..T....T....T....T----T----T. 0.00 1.1 ..T....T.~..T..~.T....T----T. 0.00
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year
0.20
P4
I
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
I I I I I I I
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
0.20
PI
I
0.15
0A:;:Uual Total Nitrate
(mg/L)
Midland
0.20
BS
0.15
0.10
~
\
~
~
0.05
100 --, Il (7,~ ",,1'1:- (;
P4 u.
Annual TN :TP
80 -'
60
40
20
0
I I
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
70
60 I PI
50
40
30
20 1111111111 ~ Midland
10
0
I I
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
70 70 70
60 Ml 60 PM2 60 J BS
50 50 50
40 40 40
30 30 30
20 20 20 , ~'
10 10 10
0 0 \
0 G-J
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 ~
Year
~
4b~Yf
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impairment:
draft October 1, 2001
vii) Restrictions on Dredging activities
Delisting Objective:
To meet biological and chemical guidelines/or sediment quality such that there are no
restrictions on dredging or disposal activities attributable to polluted sediments.
Rationale:
The Provincial Sediment Quality Guidelines (1997) provide a rational for assessing.an area that
may be contaminated prior to dredging proposals being carried out. The first phase of the
assessment is to detennine sediment quality of bulk sediments to be dredged and compare the
levels found to the Sediment Quality Guidelines. If sediment bulk quality exceeds the Severe
Effect Level then additional assessment of the sediment in that location is required including
assessing potential for uptake into biota and toxicity of the sediment to appropriate sensitive
indicators. The open water deposition areas of Severn Sound were sampled and bioassessment
was carried out on the "worst-case" locations - those with fine organically rich "IIUJd"(Krantzberg
and Shennan 1995). Many of the same concerns for uptake by sport fish and other indicators of
contaminants have been considered for the use impairment i) "Restrictions on fish and wildlife
consumption" (see above).
Contaminant levels at some locations may exceed Guidelines due to the fine-grained,
nutrient-enriched nature of sediments in ernbayrnents. However, no significant toxicity effects were
noted even at "worst-case" sites. The normal disposal practice for dredged material continues to
be dry land disposal with the applicant responsible for assessing the waste quality prior to
disposal. Localized conditions of sediment contamination could exist in nearshore areas not
covered in the open water sampling (eg. Outfall off the former Mitzubi shi plant site). If dredging
is proposed, these areas should be assessed for sediment quality prior to the work.
Restrictions on dredging for the protection offish habitat have also been put in place by the DFO
and MNR Mitigation of adverse effects involves timing of the work to avoid fish spawning and
nursery periods and measures to control of the release of sediment to the surrounding waters.
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
1. Provincial Sediment Quality Guidelines (persaud et aI. 1992) were used to assess bulk
sediment quality of surficial sediment trom the deposition areas of Severn Sound.
1
tj6/Zfj
2. Bioassessment protocols of Bedard et al. (1992) were used as outlined in Krantzberg and
Sherman (1995).
3. Benthic invertebrate cOImm.m.ity structure was also determined as part of the assessment of
sediment toxicity. (Reynoldson and Day 1998, Ciborowski et al. 2001).
4. The presence of active sources contaminants was addressed under Restrictions on
Consumption (see above).
Current Status:
In general, contaminant levels in Severn Sound open water deposition sediments were near or
below the Lowest Effect Level (LEL) of the guidelines (see Table 3 of Section i). At some
locations especially in Penetang Bay the Severe Effect Level was ,exceeded due to the
fine-grained, nutrient-enriched nature of sediments in Bay and due to historical industrial sources.
However, no significant toxicity effects were noted even at "worst-case" sites. The normal
disposal practice for dredged material continues to be dry land disposal with the applicant
responsible for assessing the waste quality prior to dredging.
Actions to be completed:
- continued review of dredging projects
2
USE IMPAIRMeNTI
RESTORATION ACHIEVED?
\Iii)
TABLE 1 DRAFT OCTOBER 1 2001
STATUS OBJECTiVes FOR DELISTING SEVERN SOUIIID ~ AN AREA OF CONCeRN
2001 STATUS
. ....'.:...... '.'
\"":":',,' ::-'..
STRATEGY FORMEIITIN~ OBJ!;gTIVE
Restrictions on dredging I To meet biological and
chemical guidelines br
YES sediment quality such that
there are no restrictions on
dredging or disposal actMties
attributable to polluted
sediments,
Open water bulk chemistI)' of sediments has
been assessed against the Sediment Quality
Guidelines. Even In br. IMJI'St case' sites,
where the Severe Effect Level ie exceeded,
further bloassessment showed that the
sediments were non-toxic and were not
available for uptake in test organisms.
- continued assessment 0' localized areas
proposed br dredging should Include bulk
chemistl)' and bloassessment If the
chemlstl)' Indicates the need.
4
REMEDIAL ACll0N COMPLETE,
ONGOING ASSESSMENT
~
,
~
~
4b~?)2
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impairment:
draft October 1,2001
vi} degradation of benthos
Delisting Objective:
1. To reach appropriate benthic community targets and ecosystem objectives for
Severn Sound
2. For the interim, to have benthos characteristic of mesotrophic conditions
throughout Severn Sound
a. to maintain and enhance presence of the mayfly" Hexagenia as an indicator of
ecosystem health. -
b. to have a sludge worm density, especially Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri, less than
3,OOO/rrt in all locations.
3. Absence of acute and chronic toxic effects on benthos attributable to trace metals
or organic chemicals in sediments throughout Severn Sound
Rationale:
OPEN WATER
Developing models and multivariate techniques for assessing impairment of Great Lakes benthos
community structure is an ongoing process. In the Great Lakes nearshore deposition areas the
model of Reynoldson et al. (1995) has been applied to Georgian Bay and to Severn Sound in
particular (Reynoldson and Day 1998).
Hexagenia is used as a sensitive test organism for sediment bioassays (Bedard et al. 1992,
Persaud, et al. 1992). The presence of healthy populations in appropriate sediment conditions in
the Great Lakes has been used as an indicator of ecosystem health and recovery from nutrient
enriched conditions (Schloesser et al. 2001).
High densities of pollution tolerant tubificid wonns (eg. 1. hoffmeisteri) indicate nutrient enriched
conditions. The presence oftubificid worms in the absence of other biota may indicate the
presence of toxic concentrations of metals or other contaminants in the sediments.
Sediment bioassessment protocols call for multiple lines of evidence, with both acute and
sublethal test organisms and bioavailability testing of sediment to assess sediment toxicity
(Krantzberg and Sherman } 995). Sediment in enriched waters can also be toxic to benthos
through accumulation of products of anaerobic decomposition in the interstitial water such as
ammonia and hydrogen sulphide following depletion of dissolved oxygen concentration (Charlton
in prep.).
1
Jfb ~ 31
TRIBUTARIES
Stream benthic connnunity composition has long been used to assess stream quality and recovery
following remediation (Hynes 1960; Cairns 1974, Hilsenhoff1977, 1988). More recent
assessment of benthic community structure in streams has made use of more powerful statistical
methods of comparison (Hilsenhoff 1988; Rosenberg and Resh 1993; Resh 1995; Yoder and
Rankin 1995; Kilgour et al. 1998; and David et al. 1998). The approach taken in Severn Sound
has been to rely most on qualitative collection methods to determine presence/absence of benthic
macro invertebrates (identified to as Iowa taxonomic level as practical) at a number of sites across
the watershed and to collect quantitative samples using aT-sampler at selected sites that would
provide indication of year to year changes due to natural fluctuations and to remedial efforts
(Madill et al. 2001 in prep).
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
OPEN WATER
1. Reynoldson and Day (1998) have completed assessment of a method of
detennining impairment of benthic corrununity structure in the open waters ofthe
Great Lakes. Severn Sound area was used as a test case for 1994 data.
2. Ciborowski et al. (2001) compared benthos in 1998 and 1994 using multivariate
analysis (including Reynoldson et aI. 1995 BEAST) and distribution of indicator
species Hexagenia and tubificids.
3. Distribution of Hexagenia spp in Severn Sound recent sediments.
4. Distribution and density oftubificid worms, especially pollution tolerant species
such as Limnodrillus and Tubifex in recent sediments.
5. Other factors such as the presence of zebra mussels, low bottom water oxygen
conditions, texture or organic content of the sediments, exposure to currents and
the presence of rooted aquatic plants were also taken into account when
interpreting impai.nnent.
TRIBUTARIES
1. Qualitative and quantitative samples of stream benthic corrununity structure at
selected sites in Severn Sound have been carried out by the RAP Office since
1996. Qualitative collections are made by two people conducting 20 minute
searches of habitats in a 20m stream reach using seives and forceps. Quantitative
samples were collected using a "T'-sarnpler with an inside diameter of25 cm
(Mackey?). Various indices of species richness, similarity and proportion of
selected taxa such as Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT) were
calculated for each stream station sampled.
2. The Stream Assessment Protocol for Ontario (1998) with modification for more
detailed benthos collection has been used since 1998.
2
ifb -46
Current Status:
Benthic community structure was further investigated using multivariate techniques (Baillargeon
and Ciborowski 2000 and Ciborowski et al. In press). A comparison of the 1994 pre-zebra
mussel, pre-phosphorus control community with the 1998 post-zebra mussel infestation, post-
phosphorus control community was also made (Ciborowski et al. In press). The BEAST model
suggested that the benthic community found at stations off the Main Street sewage treatment
plant outfall was stressed in 1994 but was much improved in 1998. Four of25 sites had benthic
communities significantly different than expected of Great Lakes nearshore locations. But all
locations were shallow and had rich communities typical of shoreline invertebrate fauna. A
comparison between 1994 and 1998 was made using the BEAST model. A11locations in 1998
were similar to the reference sites. Hexagenia were found at virtually every location where
appropriate habitat conditions existed. Tubificid wonns were found in reduced numbers in 1998.
Twenty-two of25 locations had significantly fewer than 3,000 wormslm2.
The 13 long-term stream benthos stations from Severn Sound watershed showed variation in
species richness from year to year (Coldwater River (C1,C2,C3,C4), Sturgeon River (SO,Sl,S2),
Hog Creek (HI,H2,H3), Wye River (WI,W2,W3)). Some sites continue to indicate degraded
benthos community structure due to were considered
References:
Baillargeon, J. and Ciborowski, J.J.H. 2000. Benthic Macroinvertebrates in streams flowing to
Severn Sound in relation to benthic community structure and nutrient enrichment: identification of
specimens in samples and reference collection. Technical Report from Great Lakes Institute for
Environmental Research and Department of Biological Sciences, University ofWmdsor.
Cairns, J., Jr. 1974. Indicator species vs. the concept of community structure as an index of
pollution. Water Resources Bulletin 10:338-347.
Ciborowski et al. 2001? Benthic invertebrates as an indicator of improved ecosystem health in
Severn Sound, a Great Lakes Area of Concern. Report prepared by the Dept. of Biological
Sciences and Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research, University ofWmdsor.
David, S.M., Somers, K.M., Reid, R.A., Hall, RJ. and Girard, RE. 1998. Asmpling protocols for
the rapid bioassessment of streams and lakes using benthic macro invertebrates. 2nd Ed. Ministry of
the Environment Technical Report ISBN 0-7778-7378-8.
Hebert, P.D.N., Muncaster, B.W. and Mackie, G.L. 1989. Ecological and genetic studies on
Dreissena polymorpha (Pallas): a new mollusc in the Great Lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.
46:1587-1591.
3
46 .; Iff
HilsenhofI, W.L. 1977. Use of arthropods to evaluate water quality of streams. Technical
Bulletin No 00. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI.
HilsenhofI, W.L. 1988. Rapid field assessment of organic pollutin with a family-level biotic index.
Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7:65-68.
Hynes, H.B.N. 1960. The Biology of Polluted Waters. Liverpool, Liverpool University Press.
Krantzberg, G. and Sherman, R.K Severn Sound sediment chemistry and bioassessment,
1988-1990. Water Qual. Res. J. Canada 30(4): 635-671.
Mackie, G.L. 1991. Biology of the exotic zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, in relation to
native bivalves and its potential impact in Lake St. Clair. Hydrobiologia 219:251-268.
Mackie, G.L., Gibbons, W.N., Muncaster, B.W., and Gray, LM. 1990. The zebra mussel
Dreissena polymorpha: a synthesis of European experiences and a preview for North America.
Report prepared for Water Resources Branch, Ministry of the Environment by B.A.R.
Environmental. ISBN 0-7729-5647-2.
Madill, P, Shennan, RK and Miller, S. 2001. Tributary ecosystem health monitoring program.
Severn Sound Environmental Association Technical Report [in draft].
Meritt, R W. and Cummins, K W. (Eds.) 1984. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North
America, 2nd Ed. KendalllHunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa
Resh, V.H. 1995. Freshwater benthic macro invertebrates and rapid assesment procedures for
water quality monitoring in developing and newly industrialized countries. Pages 167-177 in W.S.
Davis and T.P. Simon (Editors) Biological Assessment and Criteria: Toolsfor Water Resource
Planning and Decision Making. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.
Rosenberg, D.M. and Resh, V.H. (Eds) 1993. Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic
macro invertebrates. Chapman and Hall, New York, New York.
Reynoldson, T.B., R.c. Bailey, Day, KE., and Norris, RH. 1995. Biological guidelines for
rreshwater sediment based on Benthic Assessment of SedimenT (the BEAST) using a multivariate
approach for predicting biological state. Australian Journal of Ecology 20:198-219.
Reynoldson, T.B. and Day, KE. 1998. Biological sediment guidelines for the Great Lakes.
National Water Research Institute Report, Environment Canada
Severn Sound Remedial Action Plan (SSRAP). 1989. Stage 1 Report: environmental conditions
and problem definition. Toronto. ISBN: 0-7729-4702-3
4
tfb~~)
Severn Sound Remedial Action Plan (SSRAP). 1993. Stage 2 Report: a strategy for restoring the
Severn Sound ecosystem and delisting Severn Sound as an .AIea of Concern. Toronto.ISBN: 0-
7778-1168-5
Speller, S.D. and Pope, RJ. 1989. 1988 Survey of aquatic macrophytes and benthos in Sturgeon
Bay and Penetang Bay. Unpublished Report prepared for the Ontario Ministry of the Environment
by Tarandus Associates Limited.
Stanfield, L., Jones, M., Stoneman, M., Kilgour, B., Parish, 1. and WIChert, G. 1998. Stream
Assessment Protocol for Ontario.
Schloesser et aI. 2001 J. Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery 8:125-141 - Hexagenia
Horst 1976 Ecology 57:199-204 - Hexagenia
Yoder, C.O. and E.T. Rankin 1995. Biological response signatures and the area of degradation
value: new tools for interpreting multimetric data. pages 263-286 in W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon
(Editors) Biological Assessment and Criteria: Toolsfor Water Resource Planning and Decision
Making. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.
5
,
1 ~e\.E drat\. october 200~
Si I< iUS of oeJ~CiN~S fOR D~LlSi\NG s~VERN soUND I<S I<N I<Rf/'. Of CONcERN
SiR'" i~G'I fO"- 1I\~~i\NG SC\\~oU\.~ fOR o~\..ISi\NG
OE\..\S1\MG oaJEC1NE 100'\ S1 ~ 1US oeJEC1\\JE
USE \MP~\RMEN11
RES10R~1\ON
~C"'\E\JE01 REt.AED\J>..\. J>..c1\ON COt.Ap\.E1E.
oPEN W J>..IER . additional sanw\ifl\1 is pfoposed 'Of
'Ii) Degfada\ion 0' '\ Re'lno\dSOn and Da'l {'\998) ha\l8 2002 \n se\l8rn SO\lnd \0 repeat \M ONGO\NG t.AON\iOR\NG
ben\MS. ,\, 10 reach appropriate benthiC ~,..... ......"'.. '" . GL""""" '" 11\e\hOd 0' Re"jl'lo\dson and oa'l
C011\11\\lniW \afge\S and de\ef11\iniog i11\paif11\en\ 0' beo\h\C {'\99&) and \0 cooW11\ \11\pfO\lemeo\s.
ecos'I$\e11\ o\}\ec\i\l8S 'Of se\l8m com11\\lni\'I S\f\lC\\lf8 in \M opeo wa\ef .
'{ES SO\lod, ".,..,. S.... ....... .... .. ~ "" ""
~Of '\994 data. \11\paif11\ent oo\ed \0
p",""",' S"'''''''' "'" ..~""" ...... ."
..."'" \0 ......,' "'" ""''''''. ..~""""", '"
'hO ......"" doe '0 ..........""'. 1h'
".. ....... ........... ...."'" '" ,\!\I'
",,,..' C''''',...~ (\J '" wind"')' rh'
"",,_...\nII 1M .E'S! ",,,,,...
indicate that the nen\hiC co11\11\\lOiW is \n
trans\\iOn \0 feCO\l8f'#.
fOL\'oW uP sOURCE COtllROL IN
iRla\.J1 fl-R\ES . coo\in\led sO\lfCe coo\fo\ io W J>.. iERS\\EDS
, . L....... """"",en' ..."""", .\\h wa\efsMds. addl\\Ooal sampling
....."'" "",CO' " 'OU"" " -~ ~
""".,,, """ S",," S.... ......""'.
.
6
'\
.J
~
6
i "ilLE d,aft Oelo"'" ZQ01 N
J\N J\REI\ Of CONCE.R
Si "iUS Of OaJECil\IES fOR OELISilNG SE\lERN SOUNO "S
51RA'n:,G'l fOR MEE1\NG SC~EOULE fOR OELlStlllG
OEL\51\NG oeJEC1\\1E 2.00'\ 51 A 1U5 oeJEC1\\1E
USE \MPA\RMEN1/
RES10RA1\ON REWiEOI,..l ,..CiION COWiPlEiE.
ACH\E"E07 . addl\lonal saflWllng Is proposed tor
2. .,..""",n' ~ ...- In ,.., ".Ie.... 200'\ In Severn Sound \0 contlrm ONGOiNG WiONliORING
2. f of\ne in\erlm. \0 nave improved condl\iOnS in pene\ang ~a'l
'(ES benthOS cnarac\Elrls\IC ot Improvemen\s.
co",.... \0 ",_ _""",,,2. ....4)
mElso\rophlC condi\lonS possli)\'J changing trom eu\rophlC \0
throughout Severn Sound. meso\rophlc conditions,
2.\,) ,..- ....""'" \1.... '02. .... '94) . u ,ot Windsor s\udles ot predlc\OfS ot
la) io maln\ain and ennance . tound no HexSgeniS in most ot :ene\ang ma~\'J popu\a\iOnS shOuld be applied
presence ot \\'IEI ma~I'l HexSgenlS aa'l. In '\996, HsxSgenia ma~I\e5 'Her~ \055
all an Indlca\Or ot ecos'ls\em """"" 't"" 14 ~ 2" .,- " """"
nealin. ........ ". """.1>1'1 ....... \0 · ""'"
\helle Insec\S,
lb) i 0 have a sludge 'HOrm . 2.\0\ ,,,,,,,,,, ....,I \nil \1902. .... ~4) . no turt\16r actIon
"",,,,,,,, ",b<\ICId ....\\'1 """"" \II ".. ofl
dens\\'J. especiall'l LirnnodfllUS 1 ,....... II"'" ."'"' "",... D8"'.... ~
hOffrneisteri. lesll \han ',),OOOfro In \Ublticld sludge 'HOrms In '\996 'Here
all 10ca\iOns. .l9nl."''''' _ ."n ,,,",, Ia'JOI' " 22 ~
26 ,,,_ ....,.. In II" .nO .."...""
'\ 996. respec\we\'J,
J
\
~
..
1
1,,\I\..E droll oelo,,"' 200\ CO!lCERII
SI"I\JS Of oaJECl\\1ES fOR DE\..\S\\!lG SE\I€.R!I SO\J!lD "S "II "REI' Of
5~If.G'/ fall 1Af.f.,.ING 5CI\f.OU\..f. foil 0f.\.15\1NG
OE\..\S1\NG 06JEC1NE tOM S1"1US 06JEC1NE
UsE \tA,,"\RtAEN11
RES10R"1\ON . possible repeat sampli09 to trec\<. REtAEOIM. "CiI0N COtAP\.EiE.
"C\-\\E"E01 ,. ,... ""..... ""','" "." ,~ m...... ONGOING tAON\iOR\NG
3. "bseOce o~ acute aod chroniC reco\l8f'J '
'(ES and midge laN8e af\d '\994 tests \.Is\Og .
to)l\C eflects on benthOS ,""""" _""" "",,,,,,, ,ao' ~ ,ab ~.
a\\ributable to trace metalS or sod""'" "'....... ~~, .,-......~ '"'"
organiC chemlca\S \0 sed\meots ,... ...""'" ",."'" ,.....,. ~ ,ed"""'''
thro\.lghout se\l8rn Sound, ofl '^'" .... 51'. .",""" o' ......
d f\a io 2.000 pending t cnar\\OO a\ at ~
s\.l(\l8'/ 0
20M'?)'
-5:
,
~
l
'0
'--'~p-(
t.
,/
Table ~,l, Indices of benthic community structure at 13 long-term stations
in Severn Sound (199,8 duplicate? T -samples per station)
(
Station Species %EPT %DIP H' Mich. Hilsenhoff
Richness Hablndex
C1 45 68.4 11.2 2.961 119 4.26
C2 33 34.2 36.0 2.899 103 4.72
C3 36 58.3 19.4 2.345 54 5.21
C4 42 52.3 13.5 3.167 81 5.51
H1 22 9.0 48.4 1.902 72 5.24
H2 31 38.2 15.0 2.699 68 4.37
H3 27 48.0 8.5 3.316 119 4.40
W1 25 25.9 24.3 3.133 82 5.14
W2 17 11.0 33.7 1.889 93 5.07
W3 32 57.7 14.3 2.713 88 4.90
SO 26 35.6 29.4 2.444 114 5.02
S1 32 47.5 31.1 2.825 102 4.80
S2 30 44.6 11.1 3.001 120 4.38
z5
\
~
I. ) f
1" ab\e
species
Richness
%EP1"
O/oO\P
V'
'\)~~' \
,~
Ran~ed values of indices of benthiC community strUC~ure for thirteen long-term stati6"~
in severn Sound l199' duplicate? i_samples per station)
H'
c~ C4 C'3 C2 W'3 5~ \-\2 52 \-\'3 50 W~ \-\~ W2
45 42 '36 '3'3 '32 '32 '31 30 27 26 25 22 17
C~ C3 W3 C4 \-\3 5~ 52 \-\2 50 C2 W~ W2 \-\1
68.4 58.'3 57.7 52.3 48.0 47.5 44.6 38.2 '35.6 '34.2 25.9 1~.0 9.0
\13 52 C~ C4 W3 \-\2 C3 W1 50 51 W2 C2 \11
8.5 11.1 11.2 13.5 14.3 15.0 19.4 24.3 29.4 31.1 33.7 36.0 48.4
\13 C4 W1 52 C1 C2 51 W3 \12 50 C'3 \11 W2
3.32 3.17 3.13 3.00 2.96 2.90 2.83 2.71 2.70 2.44 2.35 1.90 1.89
C1 \-\3 50 C2 51 W2 W3 W1 C4 \11 \-\2 C3
52 88 82 81 72 68 54
120 119 119 114 103 102 93
\13 C2 51 \N3 50 \N2 \N1 C3 \-\1 C4
C1 \-\2 52 5.07 5.14 5.21 5.24 5.51
4.26 4.37 4.38 4.40 4.72 4.80 4.90 5.02
,
~-
,
-
Hab\ndeX
fj:~-
"
H\\senhoff
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
'" 0.0
(/)
.~ -0.5
-1.0
-1.5
-2.0
..2.5
-1.5
Figure 1 A Se"ern Sound benthOS community
comparison of sites samp\ed in 1994 and 1998
90, 99% confidence \imits
o
559/94 0
00.
o
o 0
a
000
o
o 0
5~~iro cO 0 0 e
O 0 523-98
o 00 553-98 554/94 .
000 0 o. o.
. Cfi 559QO 0 554<9\1 0 0
CO 0(}J . 0 . ~-98
o 56\194 0 000 561-98 . Q2'1.98
o 00 . CO 0 · 0 0 56tJ'
052~ 00 0529-Q Cbo CA 0 0
~ 000.00'00
00 0 0>
o 8 0
o 0
54'1/94
562194
.
o
..1.0
o
-0.5
0.0
AX'S 1
o
o Reference S\te
. 1994 S\tes
. 1998 Sites
523/94
.
o
o
o
o
~
1.5 ,
0.5
1.0
o
2.0
\.5
\.0
0.5
(i")
(f) 0.0
~
-0.5
_\.0
_\.5
-2.0_ \.5
S d beothOS COIOIOUOit-J
figure 18 se'le~o ouo \ d iO 1994 aod 1998
olOparisOO of S\tes salOP e..
C 90, 99% coofideoce \\IO\ts
541-9\1 562-9\1
000 . "-9\1
o.
o 0 0 0 56)-9\1 }rl-9b 0
. .
o 80 /i/-9PO \I 0554.9() 523194
~1-9S ~ 55~ 0 . t::::J .
01."t). 0 ~ v 0
() 00 00 0 0 0
o 5~4 0 0 0 <0 0
o ~. 0 0 d~O
o 0 cR:<:;0 Q9-9\1 0 0 000
+0 0
6)0 0 0 00
o 0 ~61!24Q 0
o 0 541194 0 . (1) 0 0 0 55.4
o. 0
o 053194 0
o 5.
56'l194
.
o
o
o 0
o
0.5
-0.5
0.0
~\S~
_\.0
o
o
o
o
o
o
Retereoce S\te
"\ 994 S\teS
1998 Sites
-g:
\.5 \
~
\.0
--
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
C')
(/) 0.0
~
~0.5
~1.0
~1.5
~2.0
~2.5
figure 1C severn Sound benthoS conununit'/
comparison of sites samp\ed in 1994 and 1998
90,95, 99% confidence \imits
o
o
o
o~
o
o
~2.0
-1.5
o 541.98
(). 98 552-
56'.... , 0 "~ 0 0 ~o
.524:6\_98
o SO · 0 0 <(,.' <9
o 0 0 554-98 CD In
0,,,.91 <+ <:r
A~ 0 '''~.
OQ:w.~' 00 0 <P 0 d"
· C{g 0
& 0 co 0..,9."190 0 0
o <DOO oU <6
8 ;P,~ g~ 0 0 ,,,J1
oar 0 @4/94 '.
o 0 00 .
00
o 0
-1.0
-0.5 0.0
AX\S 2
0.5
o Reference S\te
. 1994 S\tes
. 1998 S\tes
1.0
1.5
~
2.0 \::)
'\
~
~
;::, ~ o~ <D "--t ='1.:2 . \/.,
~-;.;~ ti '[;J r
'~Q' - ~1-
: '-,j\.-
... ~\<:1'\
~
;..,-~
l \Q
! .~ r
~ \
O'b\
. ~r:::f
( ~..!!t ~
\0..f!? 7
',~ pf
\ / '
ZJ/
\
~
),
~
i
/I
/
If
If
i (
\ ~
(i)r ~
l'"-r.:~
","
./
t"""
. .
4b ~ 61
J:J.....
".
.~
.'
.
.
.
.
-
p
\
{
!
/
.~
1
\
~ Midland Harbour
i
//
~"'\. /
~
3 Kilometers
~ . ~
j~
r:J
\1 '
~aj
;!. ....
~./, I
~
Penetang Bay
;-CF
t ~ / ,
F/~~ (
2
o 1
1
Legend
Hexagenia
. Present
. Not Present
CHS Chart
N Shoreline / Shoal
Hexagenia Nymph
(Severn Sound RI'P, 1998)
Midland Harbour
~' ~
v~. ,/' \\:,.
'c .: V I
~..J ',- 1;
" s ." 6
~ ',~
3 Kilometers ~
'>\
1 Severn Sound RAP - 1998 Benthic Study
(l)
, .~ ~c
~ (
O"tt\
~ t:: (
, ~~ ~
", 0~ ~
'\ p~
~V
...
, ,
\
~
)
I~
If
~ /Y II)
rf' ---
\
'~
.1
......:.._,.
'--
\..~ "
\
.
, i
~
~ .
\ .~ J,
) -j Penetang Bay
f!,<'d. .~
L .j
'!~ '
,.r=--: a3
il. fI'~
~ J
~./}
~
v
,~
:Y~
i
,
\
i
\
I
i
i
~
/
(
)
/
1
o
1
2
. .
=
'.' c;.~ #,~
'''C:'::Q
~ ~~;
. ... ~ <3,' ~
\...~.~~...~~~. .
, ....
"'~
. .
"P._ ".. .
~:.'.
,~
.
.
.
n
I
.09
~t/~ ~
/ '
, I
~
Legend
Hexagenia
. Present
. Not Present
CHS Chart
I /V Shoreline / Shoal
Hexagenia NyrnJJn
(Severn Soood RAP, 1998)
0+ 0-2
2-4 NIA S tn P6 2-4
4,6 4-6,
! 6-8 2000 ! ...: f Stn P6
~ 8-10
,5 10-12 ~ 1996
. 12-14
,2 ~
-; 14-16 e
(\ 16-18
18-20 1,- ,
I ,.-nT"-," ,- ""~I--'-'''-' -.-, ",-,-.--, '.',' --,
,.---....-/
6 8 10 12 14 n 2 4 6 8 10
Concentration NI-I) (mgrl) Concentralion NH } (mgl .')
0-2
2-4
E 4-6
-'!. 6-S
.. S.IO
~
~ 10-'
'~ 12-1
" 14-1
~ 16-'
L;
IS-2
I
0
Stn P 5
2000
I ,- C' ,.. I ' .,," , I !
4 6 S 10 12 14
Concenlration Njimgl')
Stn P4 2000
insufficient sediment
for analyses
~
1
,II
.
~
~
Stn P3
2000
2
4 6 8 10 12
Concentral;on NH ) (roS"')
.
Penetangu.~hene HarboUf2
1996/2000
Ammonia
2-4
4-6
'~ 6-8
g S-IO
]
~
e
Fig. 1
Stn P5
1996
Stn P7
1996
24--r-6S'--'1012-14
Concentration NU ) (mgrl)
S tn PI
1996
o
4 6 8 10
Concenlralion N~(mgr')
---'-1-- '.-T--'-,-......,-..,-.-..-I---.---.r--.--,
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Concentration NJlmgl')
n-2
2-4
4*6
S tn P2
1996
o
I ' ,- , I I I
4 6 8 10 12 14
Concentralion N!(mgr')
," I ' I " I ' I . '" -, ' I
o m ~ w ~ IOOIMI~IW
Concentration Nj{mgl')
n-2
2-4
4-6
~ 6-8
g ~-IO
'Ii
JI
~
8
Stn P3
1996
- (,-M
11 M-IU
NB: Scale on ~
v
graph P2!
Stn P8
1996
14
10 i'z
14
. '-'-r--4--r-~'-8-'W-J2J4
Concentralion NH I (mal .')
Conccntrntwn NJI I fmg)")
.
0-2
2-4.
4.6,
ij' 6-8
i 8-IOjNIA
i 10-12
,U 12-'4
':t 14-16
~ 16-11
18-20
,.8
Stn P7
2000
o ---2~--r~~~6-'--8WIi'~1'4
Concontmlion Nil) (mIl")
!
]
i!
~
I:!
8
n PI
2000
I"'~
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Concenlralion N~(m8f')
~
~
,6
~
I!
8
Stn P2
2000
. r .-1 ',-,'-"1 " I.', '" ' 'I' -r-~rm_.'.,--'-"",
o m ~ W W IOOlml~IW
Coucentralion Nt(mgl')
,
C
-l~';~~-' ,-.
6 8 10 ' 1 V
12 14
1)-2
2-4
_ 4.6
! 6-1
1 I-III
,j 10-12
.I 12-t4
. 14-16
.~ 16-18
u
11-20
o
Stn P8
2000
~
Concentration NH J (mgr')
,
4b'~
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impairment:
draft October 1 200 I
i) restrictions on the consumption offish and wildlife
Delisting Objective:
To have no restrictions on consumption of fish and wildlife from Severn Sound
attributable to local contaminant sources.
Rationale:
Persistent environmental contaminants can accumulate in the flesh offish and wildlife to the extent
that conswnption of the fish may place people and predatory wildlife at risk oftoxic effects.
More recently, the guidelines for advisories have been reviewed and revised for both mercury and
PCBs as explained in the Guide to Eating Ontario Sport Fish (MOE/MNR, 2001) and in recent
reviews published by Health Canada (1998).
Advisories for fish consumption are developed by measuring the concentration of the contaminant
of concern in a series of fish filet samples ranging in size ( and age). In 1987, concentrations of
mercury at or greater than 0.5 uglg (wet weight of fillet) and PCB concentrations at or greater than
2 uglg (wet weight of fillet) were used to indicate the start ofincreasing restrictions on
consumption. The more recent guidelines use a range of concentrations starting at .45 uglg for
mercury and starting at 500 t}glg for PCBs to indicate the start of restrictions on consumption based
on a risk assessment analysis and linear regression of length vs contaminant concentration
(MOEIMNR 2001).
The concentrations of persistent contaminants in fish and wildlife are contributed by general
(regional or global) sources andlor local sources. Mercury is a natural element usually fotmd in
the natural environment in very low concentrations. The use of mercury, even in paints and in
products such as thermostats and switches has been or is being phased out The manufacture of
PCBs has been discontinued and their use is also being phased out On the scale of an Area of
Concern, it is important to establish the presence of any local sources of contaminants and to
control them. Iflocal sources are present and available, they may result in unusually high
concentrations in fish and wildlife resident in the local area. Localized biomonitors and
assessment of sediment concentrations to suggest the presence or location of active sources is a
commonly used approach to determine active sources of contaminants that may be present in trace
or tmdetectable amounts in water samples from discharges. In the absence of any local sources,
the concentrations of mercury and PCBs in fish and wildlife should reflect the general pattern for
the regional populations and may be in decline with the regional-global source control programs.
In order to determine the status of fish consmnption in Severn Sotmd, the trends in contaminant
concentrations in sport fish, other organisms such as birds eggs, mussels or young-of-the~year fish
and sediment assessment were used.
46 ,65
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
For the presence of active sources or bioavailability:
1. Tissue concentrations of mercury or PCBs in young-of-the-year spottail shiners
(Notropis hudsonius)
2. Tissue concentrations of mercury or PCBs in sport fish fillets - especially mercury
in walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) and PCBs in carp (Cyprinus carpio).
3. Surficial sediment bulk concentrations of mercury or PCBs augmented with, where
necessary, sediment bioavailability testing.
4. Concentrations ofmunicipal sewage plant sludge or biosolids
5. Other biomonitors providing evidence of potential local sources such as caged
mussels (E/liptio compianta) or waterbird eggs (especially Caspian terns,
Redwing blackbird e~).
Current Status:
....
In 1987, the sport fish conswnption advisories for the Severn Sound area were similar to other
areas of southern Georgian Bay. At that time, advisories based on mercury and polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) were in effect in the Severn Sound area (MOEIMNR 1987). The 2001 Guide to
Eating Ontario Sport Fish (MOEIMNR, 200 I) has been revised to include more recent data :/:Tom
Severn Sound and has recognized the statistical similarity of southern Georgian Bay (Guide area
GB4) which includes Severn Sound.
Biomonitoringfor active sources of mercury and organochlorine chemicals was conducted in 1987
using young-of-the-year spottail shiners (data of Suns and Hitchin, in Severn Sound RAP, 1993,
Table 2). Spottail shiner residues for mercury ranged between 11 and 40 nglg wet wt. at sixteen
sites throughout Severn Sound. Penetang Bay spottail shiners were well within the overall range
(11-29 nwg W.W., 16 nglg off Main Street WPCP).
One site of seventeen sampled for spottail PCB residues in Severn Sound in 1987 exceeded the
HC Aquatic Life Guidelines of 100 ngig (Midland Harbour 164 ng/g). Four other sites had low
PCB concentrations (<60 ng/g) while twelve of the seventeen samples were below detection for
PCB concentration (<20 ng/g) (Severn Sound RAP 1993).
Walleye (>55cm), smallmouth bass (>35cm) and northern pike (>75cm) have advisories due to
mercury contamination. Walleye samples from Severn Sound show a significant decline in mercury
concentrations :/:Tom 1976 to 1989. Additional collections in 1993 and 1999 continued to show
similar mercury residues to 1989. The levels ofrnercury contamination in Severn Sound walleye
are similar to or lower than other areas of Georgian Bay. Levels are thought to reflect regional
mercury levels rather than any local Severn Sound source (Figure 1 and 3). Carp continue to show
low tissue levels of PCBs and other organochlorine chemicals (1982, 1992, 1996, 1999). Severn
Sound carp are considered the cleanest fish in the Great Lakes with respect to organo-chlorine
chemical contamninants. Values of PCBs for 1999 show that even large carp are suitable for
unrestricted consumption (MOE data, Figure 2 and 4).
2
46 ,~/p
PCBs have been fmmd in eggs of tree swallows and red-winged blackbirds, herring guHs, caspian
and common terns (Martin et al. 1995; Bishop et al. 1995; Weseloh et al. 1997). Martin et al.
(1995) indicated that the most sensitive indicators of local contamination in Severn SmD1d were
common terns, red-winged blackbirds and tree swallows. Low or undetectable concentrations of
mercury and PCBs were found in the meat of waterfowl iTom the Severn Sound area as part ofa
Canada-wide survey of residues in waterfowl and gamebirds (Braune et al. 1999). These
investigations indicate that although there is organochlorine contamination in meat or eggs of
indicator species, the contamination is low and of a regional or basin wide nature.
Additional sediment sampling since 1988-1990 collections (Krantzberg and Sherman 1995;
Sherman et al. 2001) has indicated no change in metals concentrations of open water surficial
sediments. The Wye River at the site of the former Mitzubishi Plant in Midland had elevated
metals (based on lead and zinc) concentrations in the area immediately off the outfall
(approximately 600 nr). The contaminated sediment in the localized area was excavated and
disposed of according to MOE requirements. A review of mercury and other metals fa sewage
plant sludge is part of the ongoing biosolids management programs of each mW1.icipality operating
a sewage plant The results for the Severn SOWld area (Table 4) suggest that mercury
concentrations in sewage plant sludge has generally declined, reflecting the reduction in use of
mercury in industrial and household products since the early 1 990s.
The information summarized above suggests that there are no new active sources of metals or PCB
contamination in the Severn Sound AOC and that trends in sport fish suggest declines to low tissue
residues of these contaminants.
Actions to be completed:
- continued review of sewage plant sludge quality results
- continued sport fish monitoring beyond delisting to track mercury in walleye and PCBs
and organochlorine chemicals in carp
- repeat 1987 YOY spottail sampling to confirm absence of active sources of mercury and
PCBs as spottaiIs are available
3
;/0-67
References:
Bishop, C.A., Koster, M.D., Chek, A.A., Hussell, DJ.T. and Jock, K. 1995. Chlorinated
hydrocarbons and mercury in sediments, red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) and tree
swallows (Traehyeineta bieolor) from wetlands in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 14(3):491-501.
Bratme, B.M., et al. 1999. Chemical residues in waterfowl and gamebirds harvested in Canada,
1987-95. Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service Technical Report Series Number 326.
Krantzberg, G. and Sherman, R.K. Severn Sotmd sediment chemistry and bioassessment,
1988-1990. Water Qual. Res. J. Canada 30(4): 635-671.
Martin, P.A., Weseloh, D.V., Bishop, c.A., Legierse, K., Braune, B., Norstrom, R.J.l-995.
Organochlorine contaminants in avian wildlife of Severn Sotmd. Water Qual. Res. J. Canada
30(4):693-711.
MOEIMNR. 2001. Guide to eating Ontario sport fish.
Proctor and Redfern Ltd. 1996. North Simcoe County Class Environmental Assessment to address
the management ofbiosolids and hauled sewage. Environmental Study Report.
Severn Sound Remedial Action Plan (SSRAP). 1993. Stage 2 Report: a strategy for restoring the
Severn Sound ecosystem and delisting Severn Sound as an Area ofConcem Toronto.ISBN: 0-
7778-1168-5
Sherman et.al. Surficial sediment quality of SS in preparation
Weseloh, D.V., Rodrique, J., Blokpoel, H., and Ewins, PJ. 1997. Contaminant concentrations in
eggs of Black Terns (Chlidonias niger) from sourthern Ontario and sourthem Quebec, 1989-1996.
Colonial Waterbirds 20(3):604-616.
4
TABLE 1
OBJECTIVes FOR [)EI..ISTING SEVERN SOUND AS AN AREA OF CONCERN
USE IMPAIRMENTI DELISTlNG OBJECTIVE 2000 STATUS STRATEGY FOR MEETING OBJECTIVE SCHEDUL.E FOR DEUSTlNG
RESTOAATION ACHIEVED?
I) Fish and '/IAldl\fe To ha\!ll no restrlctlons on sport fish: Presently. walleye (>S5cm). . continued sport fish monltorlng beyond REMEDIAL ACTION COMPLETE.
consumption. consumption of fish and smallmouth baSS (>35cm) and northern pike dellstlng to track natural reco\!llry. ONGOING MONITORING
'/IAldllfe from the Se\!llm (> 75cm) ha\!ll ad-Asories due to mercury statistical analysis of trends
YES sound atl:rlbutable to local contamination. carp ha\!ll declined In tissue
contaminant sources. le\!llls of PCBs and other organochlorine _ consider YOY fish monitoring (perch If
chemicals betwaen 1982 and 1992 and continue spottalls not available) to confirm lack 01
to ha\!ll loW residue le\!llls (1982. 1992. 1996. local sources
1999). There are no restrictions on
consumption of carp due to mercury or PCBs,
DOE. HCB. dieldrin and PCBs ha\!ll been found
In eggs analyzed tom red-IMnged blackbirds.
herring gulls. caspian and common tems (CWS
& MNR. 1991).
AdlAsorles on '/IAldlife meat consumption ha\!ll
bean Issued by Health and Welfere Canada,
HO'M3\!11r. they are of a general neture and can
not be applied to a single location such as
Se\!llm Sound. pooled values of watertov.1
from se\!llrn Sound area are low or beloW
detection Braune (1999).
Biomonltors. sediment and blosolids quality do _ re>Aew GL mercury trends lor basin-'/IAde
not Indicate a local source of mercury. changes
"
-=-=- =
"
-l:-
CJ
,
\}
~
5
Table 2 ORGANOCHLORINE AND MERCURY RESIDUES IN YOUNG-OF-THE-YEAR SPOTTAIL SHINERS
FROM SEVERN SOUND - 1987
Site Number N Fish % Lipid PCB DDE HCB Mercury
Size (ngl g (ngl g (nglg (nglg wet)
(mm) wet) wet) wet)
1 Beausoleil Island 7 58~4 4.2:i:0.4 ND 7:i:2 ND 29:i:7
2 Penetang Bay - Michaud Pt. 7 54:i:3 4.2:i:0.3 ND 6:i:3 ND 11 :i:4
3 Penetang Bay - Asylum Pt. 7 58:i:4 4.3:i:0.4 ND IH8 2:i:1 23:i:5
4 Penetang Bay - Tannery Pt. 7 63:i:4 5.9:i:0.8 27:i: 13 6:i:2 ND 20:i:8
5 Penetangui shene WPCP 7 52:i:4 3. 7:i:0.4 ND 5:i:3 ND 16:i:8
6 Not Available
7 Midland - Downtown 7 59:i:4 4.8:i: 1.1 I 64:i:42 9:i:l ND 13:i:8
8 Midland - WPCP 4 66:i:7 6.6:i:0.8 55:i:25 19:i:19 ND 13:i: 8
9 Wye Ri ver 7 62:i:5 6.I:i:O.8 ND 9:i: I ND 14:i:8
10 Grandview Beach 7 63:i:5 6.6:i:0.6 24:i:18 13:i:5 l:i:l
11 Port McNicol! 6 55:L2 3.8:i:O.7 NO 7:i:2 HI 22:i:8
12 Hog Bay - West Shore 7 52:1:3 3.8::!:O,6 59::!:30 4::!:2 NO 26::!:14
13 Methodist Island 7 52::!:3 3.I:i:O.4 ND 4:i:2 3:i:2 11::!:4
14 Victoria Harbour 4 50:i:3 4.0:i: 1.2 NO 5:i:0 TR 17:i: 10
15 Sturgeon River 7 72:i:3 + 2.7:i:0.2 ND 6:i:2 ND 3 7:i: 15
16 Sturgeon Bay 7 71:i: 7+ 5.7:i:0.8 ND 12:i:4 TR 27:i:1O
..
17 Waubaushene 7 65:i:6 6. 6:i:0.3 ND 1O:i:3 1:1:1 11 :1:4
18 Port Severn 7 67:1:3 2.6:1:0.1 ND 5:1:1 HI 40:1:0
+ Yearling fish
N = number
PCB = poly-chlorinated biphenyls
DDE = breakdown product of pesticide DDT
HCB = hexachlorobenzene
"
~
From Severn Sound RAP Stage 2 Document - Appendix 2.5
,
\J\
~
6
Table 3 Surficial Bulk Sediment Quality for A.'eas in Severn Sound
Penetang Bay Sturgeon Bay Open Severn Sound
19941 19882 1994 I 1988 2 1980 3 1996 4
Parameter !rean sd l1~an sd !rean sd n~an sd !rean sd mean sd tEL SEL
TP (mJ!/J!) 0.97 0.50 1.41 1.15 0.89 0.10 1.08 0.12 1.10 0.18 1.30 0.10 0.60 2.00
TOC (mfl/1() 62 24 59 29 40 10 42 7 35 7 41 10 10 100
Hfl (JJfl/fl) 0.23 0.13 0.08 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.03 0.20 2.00
Cd 1.22 1.02 0.86 0.33 0.45 0.29 0.29 0.16 0.45 0.12 1.40 0.60 0.60 10.00
Cr 84 45 81 41 78 7 39 9 27 7 48 8 26 110
Cu 76 102 37 II 19 5 15 4 12 4 27 7 16 110
Fe 23693 4967 25236 4674 20583 4188 37600 5300 20000 40000
Ph 70 38 73 28 24 10 21 6 14 7 51 21 31 250
Mn 464 Il2 576 120 460 1100
Ni 24 10 27 7 22 7 20 5 39 9 16 75
Zn 200 148 142 34 Il5 36 89 23 73 26 164 35 120 820
AI 16270 3040 17153 3948
1 from Reynoldson, unpublisbed
2 from Krantzberg and Slerman 1995
3 from Ontario MinistJy of the Enviromrent, unpublished
4 from Sherman et a1. 200 I inprep.
LEL = Proviocial Lowest Effect Level
SEL = Proviocia1 Severe Effect Level
I'
5-
7
\
~
();
,. I /&/
4b
Table 4 Severn Sound Sewage Plant Biosolids Quality Characteristics
(units in mWL unless otherwise noted)
Total
Ammonia+ Solids
As Cd Co Cr Cu Hg Mo Ni Pb Se Zn Nitrates Total P (% )
Penetang Main Street Plant
1985 0.14 0.15 <0.10 2.67 12. 15 0.06 0.26 0.59 5.6 0.17 23.2
1990191 0.10 0.09 <0.07 2.88 8.93 0.08 0.17 0.37 2.6 0.09 12.1 53.3 908 2.26
1995 0.11 0.05 0.05 1.15 8.63 0.03 0.02 0.51 4.2 0.02 13.1 276 990 2.67
1999 0.05 0.1 0.05 0.71 7.36 0.03 0.07 0.36 0.9 0.05 8.2 146 543 2.37
penetang Fox Street Plant
1990191 0.13 0.11 0.07 5.65 12.40 0.03 0.21 0.44 3.2 0.12 16.2 82 1350 2.81
1995 0.02 0.06 0.05 0.85 11.80 0.00 0.02 0.20 3.7 0.02 7.7 25 1510 3.37
1999 0.05 0.13 0.09 0.64 6.39 0.01 0.06 0.28 1.2 0.05 6.9 117 325 2.53
Port McNicol! Plant
1985 0.15 0.10 0.30 2.43 25.33 0.03 0.26 0.38 1.2 0.19 18.0
1990191 0.16 0.04 0.35 2.15 22.40 0.04 0.49 0.31 1.9' 0.13 11.1 - 249 1205 2.96
1995 0.02 0.04 0.05 2.11 25.90 0.01 0.02 0.32 3.3 0.05 4.5 - 1160 3.51
Victoria Harbour Plant
1985 0.29 0.20 0.29 3.45 25.33 0.06 0.25 1.10 7.2 0.28 54.0
1990191 0.23 0.18 0.06 4,14 21.89 0.04 0.41 0.78 4.1 0.19 25.1 202 1560 3.88
1995 0.07 0.13 0.05 1.61 10.70 0.08 0.09 0.46 4.2 0.02 12.5 1078 3.02
Coldwater Plant
1985 0.08 0.17 0.13 1,07 17.58 0.19 0.23 0.61 2.8 0.12 14.6
1990191 0.06 0.07 0.10 0.96 16.82 0.19 0.15 0.69 1.8 0.10 13.5 201 424 2.42
1995 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.69 13.87 0.15 0.02 0.50 0.9 0.02 13.1 325 2.43
1999 0.4 0.1 0.1 2.51 24.88 0.15 0.16 0.52 0.87 0.3 10.26 246 830 3.64
penetang Mental Health Centre Plant
1985 0.13 0.58 <0.1 3.10 20.50 0.05 0.27 0.44 2.2 0.21 20.5
1990191 0.90 0.11 <0.05 7.98 16.54 0.03 0.25 0.28 3.8 0.15 12.3 22.6 1002 2.26
1995 0.06 0.06 0.05 2.01 11.50 0.00 0.02 0.23 2.9 0.14 5.1 21.9 790 2.07
Elmvale Plant
1999 0.5 0.1 0.1 1.85 15.2 0.1 0.1 0.86 1.11 0.5 13.2 541 1150 4.11
Port Se'Jel11 Plant
1999 <.2 <0:1 <.1 1.91 3.5 0.05 0.11 0.62 0.44 0.2 4.46 13.3 225 0.83
Midland Plant
1981 0.4 0.31 0.3 49 14 0.12 0.3 113 52 0.05 67
1990/91 0.2 0.24 2.6 80 33 0.11 1.34 58 25.2 0.12 93 818 3.6
1995 0.17 0.10 0.2 35 24 0.09 0.49 17 8.6 0.11 25 911 1169 3.6
1999 0.13 0.11 0.2 17 16 0.04 0.37 11 2.7 0.06 38 707 943 3.4
Data 1Tom plant operations monitoring
8
II""
Figure 1 Mercury in Walleye from Severn Sound (GB4)
Sport Fish Consumption Advisories in 2001 Guide
4b -&d-
Fish Length (em)
Location 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-45 45-55 55-65 65-75 >75
Geoman Bav GB4 Severn Sound <:J::t @) @) @)
Georgian Bay GB4A Col1in2Wood Harbour <:J::t @) @) @
Lake Huron H3 ~ ~ <:J::t @)
Lake Huron H5 CJ::1 CJ::1 ~ @) @) @)
Georgian Bav GB 1 CJ::1 ~ CJ::1 <:J::t @) G)
Geoman Bav GB3 CJ::1 @) @) @)
North Channel NCl CJ::1 CJ::1 .~ <:J::t ,@ G)
North Channel NCZ CJ::1 CJ::1 ~ ~
Sl Mary's River CJ::1 CJ::1 <:J::1 @) @) Q)
Figure 2 PCBs in Carp from Severn Sound (GB4)
Sport Fish Consumption Advisories in 2001 Guide
Fish Length (em)
Location 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-45 45-55 55-65 65-75 > 75
Georgian Bav GB4 Severn Sound CJ::1 ~ <:J::t <:J::t <:J::1
Georsrian Bav GB4A Col1in,gwoodHarbour <:J::t @) 0 G)
Lake Huron H 1 @) @) @) @
Lake Huron H3 <:J::t @) 0 CD
Lake Huron H5 <:J::1 CJ::1 <:J::1 <::;::1 <:J::t @) Q)
North Channel NCZ @) Q) Q)
@) Indicates frequency of fish consmnprion in number of fish/week.
CJ::1 Indicates "no restirctions" on consumption.
9
Figure 3 Mercury Concentrations vs. Fish Length
for Severn Sound Walleye
10
. 1976/77
III 1989
A 1993
... 1998
. 1999
- Regressions
--
S -...
0.. 1
~
I::
.$2
.....
Cd
...
.....
~
u
I::
0
u
Q
=' 0.1
e
Q.)
:::E
0.01
30
40
50
60
Length (em)
80
70
90
1976/77: PCB(Ppb) = -1.4859(lengtb(cm)) + 0.0237, l = 0.8091, n = 23
,
1989: PCB(ppb) = -2.0827(1ength(cm)) + 0.0281, r- = 0.7132, n = 18
1993: PCB(Ppb) = -2.0060(length(cm)) + 0.0272, r2 = 0.9097, n = 20
,
1998: PCB(Ppb) = -1.7044(length(cm))+ 0.0211, r- = 0.8338, n= 15
1999: PCB(Ppb) = -1.9271 (1ength(cm)) + 0.0238, r2 = 0.7634, n = 17
10
qb , &3
I .
46 ,&1
Figure 4 PCB Concentrations vs. Fish Length
for Severn Sound Carp
10000
. 1982
II 1988
A 1992-96
... 1999
- Regressions
. .
.
-
i 1000
0..
'-'
c:
o
'.a
~
1:
<!)
u
c:
o
U
aJ
U 100
~
.
tEl
/'
/,// .
"j/ . .
D. /
... Ii ..tie.
~/: ~~ ~ ...~
.. .. .6...
..
1999
!!I
//D.
L1!!
.
,/
/"
/
~<P.> /
\:, / III I!I
//
// ~
/ ,\~"j. ,
b:..
8.
..
...
~
1m
...
10
30
40
50
60
Length ( em)
70
80
90
1982: PCB(ppb) = 1.6775(length(cm)) + 0.0168, r 2 = 0.2655, n = 16
~
1988: PCB(ppb) = 0.1698(length(cm)) + 0.0325, r - = 0.2477, n= 17
1992-96: PCB(ppb) = -0. 1240(length(cm)) + 0.0373, r 2 = 0.2912, n = 14
1999: PCB(ppb) = 1.8652(length(cm)) + 3.9756, r 2= 0.0163, n= 20
11
4D/[6
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impairment:
draft October 1,2001
Iii) degradation of fish and wildlife populations
Delisting Objectives:
1. To protect and rehabilitate fish and wildlife habitat.
2. To restore a balanced, self-sustainingfish community by restoring top-level
predators including walleye, northern pike, large and smallmouth bass and
muskelunge to levels similar to the early 1970's, with these species forming at
least 20-30% of the total predator catch, and walt eye forming at ~east 10% of
trapnet results. -....
3. To maintain a natural diverse fish community, to discourage the introduction of
exotic species and to prevent the extinction of native or desirable species.
4. To maintain a self-sustaining diverse community of colonial waterbirds which
currently nest in and near the Sound.
5. As part of the Matchedash Bay project of the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan (NAWMP) to produce 2450 waterfowl including 880 Mallard,
210 Black Duck and 1360 other waterfowl of various species (NAWMP 1991).
6. Wildlife populations will be maintained at levels sufficient to provide
recreational and economic benefits, ensure environmental quality and ecosystem
integrity and ensure public safety (1\1NR Land Use Guidelines).
7. To re-introduce a self-sustained population of Trumpeter Swans in the Severn
Sound area.
8. to find no significant toxicity from water column or sediment contaminants in
fish and wildlife bioassays.
Rationale:
1. See use impaiI"Irent (xiv).
2. Based on changes in corrnmmity noted in the early 1980's, a return to the proportion
of predators fotmd in the mid 1970's was thought to be reasonable. More recently,
MNR bas developed the Early Summer Index Trapnet Survey protocol or ESrn
(MNR. UGLMU, 1998) to assess walleye populations in Georgian Bay. The ES1N
consists of a trapnet set each day at approximately 30 randonmly selected sites
during the time when temperatures range between 12 to 20 oc. TIris method
replaces the fOI"Irer long-term spring fixed-location 1Iapnet survey of the MNR
1vfidhmst District (SS1N).
1
4b~0
3. Eutrophication and habitat degradation can affect the species offish inhabiting
littoral areas. Fish biomass can be high in eutrophic areas, but often the biomass is
dominated by large cyprinids (Scheffer 1989; Lee et al. 1991). The diversity and
ecological integrity of the fish corrnmmity in Severn Somld and other AOCs was
assessed by the Depart:Irent of Fisheries and Oceans (Minns, et al. 1994, Randall et
al. 1993, 1998). The rationale for their data collection was provided by Valere
( 1996).
4. The surveys of nesting colonial water birds in the Great Lakes (Weseloh ?CWS)
and a survey conducted in 1991 and 1992 (Weseloh et al. (1997) provided a basis
for assessing the diversity of waterbirds in the Severn Sound area. Additional
information on Osprey and Double-crested Connorants was also available for
assessing the health of these populations (Thomas and Bird 1998, CWSIMNR
annual monitoring of Connorant nesting colonies).
5. The Matchedash Bay Project under the Eastern Ha~itat Joint Venture recognizes the
importance of the Matchedash Bay area in Severn Sound as an inte~tionally
important flyway for waterfowl. Targets set at the outset of the project (NA WMP
1991) relate to area of habitat to be secured, restored or enhanced and production
of waterfowl. While no specific rrethods were developed to assess waterfowl
production targets, MNR Ducks Unlimited and CWS use waterfowl nesting
surveys, spring and fall staging counts and hunting statistics to assess the status
waterfowl of Matchedash Bay.
6. The aspects of this objective pertaining to recreational and economic benefit of
wildlife populations in the Severn Sound area relate to uses such as hunting and
trapping. Statistics on these uses are kept by MNR. The assessrrent of ecological
integrity of wildlife relates to assessrrent of key indicator species or groups of
ecosystem health that have been developed (and are currently being assessed) in the
Great Lakes. The Marsh Monitoring Program (MMP) describes a protocol to
measure indicators of ecosystem health in wetlands. The Forest Bird Ironitoring
program also provides a rationale for upland habitat areas.
7. As an extirpated species in Ontario, effort has been made to reintroduce Trwnpeter
swans to Ontario starting in the Wye Marsh. An objective of the program is to
reintroduce a self-sustained population (Lumsden and Drever 2001).
8. Testing of sensitive species may reveal the presence of toxic factors not previously
measured that will impair the health of fish and wildlife in Severn Sound.
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
1. See use impairment (xiv).
2. Open water fish community
a. spring trapnet index survey at two fixed, long-term nearshore sites in Severn Sound were
conducted through MNR Miclhurst District starting in 1975 (SSIN). The protocol for MNR
trapnet surveys in Lake Huron Georgian Bay has been revised to provide an improved
statistical method (ES1N). Historical trends in percent catch, catch per unit effort, age-
length, age :fi:equency and relative weight were used to assess trapnet catch in light of
recent changes in the Severn Sound (and Georgian Bay) area such as the introduction of
2
Lfb 'ffJ 1
zebra mussel, changes in harvest as well as the changing trophic status of the nearshore
(Gonder et al. 2001. Fisheries population dynamics of Severn Sound. :MNR UGLU
Technical Report In preparation).
b. Nearshore fish conmnmity was sampled by DFO using an electrofishing boat to sample
85 I OO-m transects which ran parallel to shore approximately following the 1.5-m depth
contour in five locations within Severn Sound during 1990, 1992 and 1995 (Valere 1996,
Randall et al. 1998). Minm et al. (1994) calculated an' Index of Biotic Integrity' (mI), a
composite indicator of the health of the littoral fish conmnmities. The IBI integrates several
biological indicators (species richness and composition, trophic composition and fish
abundance and condition) into a single index of ecosystem health.
c. Fish conmnmity surveys of Severn Sound as part of Georgian Bay or Great Lakes
surveys such as 1vINR Lake Huron Unit Muskie survey, Walleye survey and DFO Fish
Community Biomass surveys.
d. Creel survey of Severn Sound sport fish by 1vINR Distri~t (1975-1992) and MNR
L.Huron Unit (2000 and 2001). :..
e. shoreline seine surveys by :MNR District (1980,1985), Carn Portt (1989/90)
f. Larval fish surveys of selected ernba~nts in Severn Sound MNR L.Huron Unit (1972),
DFO(I989-1994).
Tributary fish community
a. MNR District with assistance from Severn Sound RAP (1982-1999) amual tributary
biomass surveys of selected reaches in Hog Creek, Sturgeon River and Coldwater River.
b. one-titre stream surveys of reaches throughout the Severn Sound watershed (eg. North ~
Coldwater ~ Wye ~ Copeland Creek through SSEA Portt (in prep.2001).
3. Waterbirds
a. long-term colonial waterbird nesting surveys of sites in the Great Lakes (eg. Watcher
Islands, Georgian Bay) - CWS with assistance ofMNR Parks Canada
b. gull survey (CWS with assistance ofMNR., Parks Canada, approx.1 O-yr freq., 1999)
c. CWS survey of distribution and abillldance of waterbirds during summer in Severn
Sound (Weselohetal. 1997).
d. spring and fall waterfowl staging surveys in Matchedash Bay (MNR with assistance of
CWS 1989, 1998).
e. osprey nesting success has been monitored by the Georgian Bay Osprey Society in the
Severn Sound area.
4. Wildlife
The ecological integrity of interior forest birds was studied by Tate et al. (1998). The
study examined the presence of 12 indicator species and nesting success of the wood thrush
and the red-eyed vireo in a range of upland forest habitats in Severn Sound.
The Marsh Monitoring Program (MMP, Environment Canada, Long Point Bird
Observatory, Bird Studies Canada) monitors the health ofrnarshes by surveying indicator
species that utilize these habitats during breeding season. Twelve marsh bird species and
five amphibian species were chosen as indicators of the two target groups because: 1.
They are susceptible to environmental deterioration and 2. they are easily surveyed by
volunteers.
3
4b - h'Y '
Hunting and trapping statistics for the Areas covering the Severn Sound area were
compiled by:MNR Midhurst District stafffor the last twenty years in order to assess the
value oftbe economic use ofwildife in Severn Sound.
5. Matchedash Bay Project
Spring and fall waterfowl staging surveys in Matchedash Bay (:MNR with assistance of
CWS 1989, 1998) were used to assess proj ect targets for waterfowl production.
6. Trumpeter Swans The Wye Marsh Reintroduction Program includes monitoring of
nesting success and population distribution and health in the area.
7. Toxicity to fish and wildlife
The occurrence oflead poisoning of Trumpeter swans ttomresiduallead shot in wetlands
in the Severn Sound area was used as a measure of health of wetlands for this species and
other waterfowl that may be exposed. The health of the wildlife populations, in general
was also used as an indication of the presence of toxic factors.
Current Status:
---
Open water fish community
Top Predators
The objective of restoring top-level predator fish in order to prOIrote a health balance in the
Severn Sound fish community was established in 1992 by comparison of the proportion of
predator fish species in 1975 spring trapnet catch at fixed index sites (SSITN). Restoration of the
comparatively low walleye population of the late 1980's toward 1975 population levels to 10% of
the spring trapnet catch was considered feasible. As of spring 2001, less than 10% of the trapnet
catch are top-level predator fish with less than 5% of the catch being walleye (Figure 2 ).
The results of the SSlm for 1999 and 2000 were compared to the new Early S~r Trapnet
survey (ESTN) protocol recently introduced by the MNR UGLMU to Georgian Bay for assessment
of walleye population status. The two methods appear to be sampling the same walleye
population. Adapting the FWIN CUE benchmarks established for assessrrent of walleye
populations in inland lakes (ref?) to ESTN in Georgian Bay, the walleye population is considered
"at risk" with CUE values declining in recent years to 2 fish per trapnet night (Figure 6). CUE
for walleye, northern pike and largemouth bass is dropping over the last three years (Figure 6 ).
Mean age of walleye is decreasing and apparent mortality increasing (Figure 7 and 8).
Since 1992 several factors that could influence the walleye population and other sport fish
populations have changed.
1. Fishing pressure for walleye has apparently increased in Georgian Bay especially
in Severn Sound since the early 1990's.
2. The exotic introduced zebra mussel has infested Severn Sound since 1994-95 and
has contributed to changes in open water trophic characteristics and nearshore
habitat conditions. The newly introduced round gobie may also be adversely
influence the walleye and other sport fish populations.
4
lib - hCf
3. The trophic status of Severn Sotmd bas changed due to phosphorus control with
decreases in phosphorus, phytoplankton and ZDoplankton biomass in open waters.
4. Water levels have decreased starting in 1999 to near record lows adversely
influencing nearshore spawning and nursery areas.
Two indices of the plumpness and physiological well-being of the walleye population were used
to examine the health of walleye present in Severn Sound. The mean length at age was examined
for the period prior 1974 to 1993 (prior to significant zebra mussel infestation) and the post-
infestation period 1994 to 2001 (Figure 9). There does not appear to be any significant difference
between years or between the pre- or post-infestation periods. The relative weight by size class
for walleye (equation of Murphy et al. 1990, grouped into length classes after Gablehouse 1984),
is generally below the index" standard relative length" of I 00 after 1988 (Figure) suggesting that
the growth condition is below optimal but bas similar values from year to year to 2001. Both of
these indices suggest that the growth condition of Severn Sound w~lleye may not have changed
over the period of record. Information from the 2001 Creel Survey of Severn SotlIlC!. (currently
under way by the 'MNR UGlMU) is needed to further evaluate the effect ofbarvest on walleye.
In view of these recent changes, the original RAP Stage 2 delisting objective for top-level
predator fish may no longer be appropriate. Resolution of recorrnnended changes in harvest
(reduced sport catch, review of quotas, control of First Nation harvest of spawning walleye at the
Port Severn) as well as review of results of the new ESTN protocol and population status
benchmarks ttom Fall Walleye Index Netting prograxm (FWIN) will be needed to establish a new
objective for Severn Sound and other Georgian Bay walleye populations.
Open Water Fish Community Diversity
During 1990, 1992 and 1995, Randall et a1. (1998) conducted electrofishing surveys at five
locations in Severn Sound (Penetang Bay, Hog Bay, Sturgeon Bay, Matchedash Bay and the Port
Severn area). The average number offish captured per transect was 38 (range 0-170), average
biomass was 3.7 kg (0-34.8 kg), and the average species richness was 5.3 species per transect (0-
12 species). Eighteen of the thirty four species offish were rare, comprising less than 1 % of the
total catch in numbers. Average richness and biomass tended to be highest in the protected (low
fetch) embayments with medimn to high macrophyte abundance.
Most of the fish captured at Severn Sound were cool or warm water species which are usually
associated with littoral habitats, often with submerged macrophytes, in embayments in the Great
Lakes (Randall et a1. 1998).
Top predators (piscivores) comprised between 17.6% and 29.8% of the total biomass. Native
species of fish made up 88.1 % to 99.9% of the total biomass. The electrofishing survey data from
Severn Sound indicated the fish communities inhabiting the inshore areas were diverse, all trophic
groups were represented, and there was consistency in the catch data between the bays and areas
surveyed.
Randall et al. (1993) compared fish data in littoral habitats of Severn Som1d with data ttom
Hamilton Harbour and the Bay ofQuinte, Lake Ontario. Generally, fish biomass was higher in
5
~b - 7D
Hamilton Harbour than in other areas, possibly because of the more eutrophic conditions
(phosphorus levels). Although total biomass was high, habitat degradation had a negative impact
on the trophic structure of the fish comrmmities. The biomass of carp and other non-native species
was higher in Hamilton Harbour, while species richness was lower than in the Severn Sound bays
(Table 4).
Top predators (piscivores) comprised a higher proportion of the biomass at Severn Sound than in
Hamilton Harbour (Table 2). Using the nearshore fish community da~ Minns et al. (1994)
calculated an · Index of Biotic Integrity' (IBI), a composite indicator of the health of the littoral fish
connmmities. The IBI integrates several biological indicators (species richness and composition,
trophic composition and fish abundance and condition) into a single index of ecosystem health. By
design and by demonstrated correlation, the IBI integrated the effects offour main factors
influencing fish assemblages: exotic fishes, water quality, physical habitat supply, and piscivore
abundance (Minns et al. 1994). Significantly, the IBI values for ~ Severn Sound bays were higher
than the IBI values for Hamilton Harbour (Table 2; also see Smokorowski et al. 19~8). Within
Severn Sound, the nequei:1cy distribution ofIBI values by quality class ranged nom very poor to
excellent, but varied among the survey locations (Table 2). IBI scores were lowest in Penetang
Harbour, and highest in Matchadash Bay and Port Severn, although the differences among locations
were minimal. Phosphorus concentrations were highest, in inner Penetang Harbour (Table 2);
Minns et al. (1994) cautioned that Penetang Harbour may be close to the transition nom a clear to
a turbid state. Thus, the water quality conditions in SOIre localized areas showed signs of
degradation. Generally, however, the fish data nom the inshore areas of Severn Sound indicated
that the fish communities were relatively healthy.
Stream fish community diversity
Based on the report on long-term changes in stream biomass (Ross 1999), the numbers ofYOlmg-
of - the-year rainbow 1rout is improving in area s1rearns with some fluctuation due to temperature.
Fish were surveyed at 341ributary sites across Severn Sound in 2000 (C. Portt and Associates,
Table 3). A total of31 species were captured at one or more sites. None of the species are
considered rare, threatened or endangered in Ontario.
Waterbirds
Severn Sound and southeastern Georgian Bay have been identified as one of 15 critical areas for
waterfowl use in the Great Lakes (Prince et al. 1992). Surveys of waterbird distribution and
abundance were made during 1991 and 1992 throughout the coast of Severn Sound (Weseloh et al.
1997). Of32 subareas surveyed, gulls and Caspian Terns were the only species observed at all
locations throughout the Sound. Cormnon moorhen, belted kingfisher, common loon and green-
backed heron were the least frequently observed. The highest species diversity was found at Wye
River, Matchedash Bay (N&S), Hog Bay, Sturgeon Bay, Penetang Bay, Wye River, Roberts Island
and Quarry Island. The highest mean density of birds (birdslkm excluding gulls) was found at
Matchedash Bay N, Hog Bay, Sturgeon Bay S and Matchedash Bay S - all areas adjacent to
6
1b " 11
provincially significant coastal wetlands. Highest gull densities, Canada geese and mallards were
found in Penetang Bay S and Midland Bay SW - the most urbanized areas in Severn Sound. The
areas of high waterbird use appeared to be natural areas of emergent and submergent vegetation,
bedrock outcrops or large boulders and support protection of coastal wetlands and restoration of
natural shorelire.
The Georgian Bay Osprey Society reported 22 osprey nest sites within Severn Sound as of2001.
Osprey nests in Severn Smmd have higher fledging success than nests in northeastern Georgian
Bay areas (Thomas and Bird 1999).
Matcbedasb Bay
Waterfowl strong in Matchedash Bay - [report excerpts from Cynthia Pekarik for 1998 m:mitoring,
possible stats from Tiny Marsh to complete summary of Mansell attd Craig 1995]
Waterfowl nesting surveys indicate that the relative species composition has not c~ed over the
last 40 years (Tyrooshuk et al. 1990).
Wildlife
[Information ITom the MNR Districts on licences, stats of use for dear hunt, waterfowl htmting,
turkeys and trapping coming from Midhurst]
According to MNR Midhurst staff, the deer population in the 76~B,C Htmting Units (which
include Severn Sound), declined in the early to mid-I 990s followed more recently by a slight
increase. Low predator populations and mild winter (except for the winter of2001) were felt to
contribute to this increase. Hunter success rates and deer observed are given in Figure 10.
Reptiles aDd ampbibiaus
Severn Sound continues to support a diverse community of reptiles (7 species) and amphibians (10
species). The more connnon species include the Arrerican toad (Bufo terrestris), spring peeper
(Hyla crucifer), tetraploid gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor), bullfrog (Rana eatesbeiana), green
frog (Rana clamitans), northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), wood ITog (Rana sylvatiea),
common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), painted turtle (Chrysemys pieta) and common
garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis).
Three significant species were encountered. Map turtles (Graptemys geograhica) occupy the
small rocky islets and rocky inland areas and are more common in the northern part of the So1.md.
Blanding's turtle (Emys blandingi) and the spotted turtle (Clenmys guttata) are considered
uncommon and are widespread in Severn Sound. The five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus) is
restricted to the southern edge of the shield and is considered to be rare and local. The milk snake
(Lampropeltis doliata) and the pickerel frog (Rana paulustris) are uncommon and widespread.
The massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus eatenatus), the Eastern Hog-nosed snake (Heterodon
7
16 -- 10
platyrhinos) and the fox snake (Elaphe vulpina) are considered rare and local in the northern part
of the Sound. The comrron northern water snake (Natrix sipedon) is also fOlmd in Severn Sound.
Interior Forest Birds
The ecological integrity of the interior forest bird community of Severn Somd was assessed by
Tate et al. (1997). The overall forest bird comrmmity integrity was rated as good. The species
diversity in the AOC was considered good (near excellent) for a comparable size area in southern
Ontario. All fifteen indicator species were found in the area and the comrmmity composition of
forest bird habitat was considered fair. The reproductive success of Wood Thrush, Rose-breasted
Grosbeak and Red-eyed Vireo was considered fair to good. Despite sufficient forest patch size to
support healthy populations of interior forest birds, indications of disturbance of these habitats
were noted where Neotropical migrants and non-native, hmnan-associated species were present.
Marsh Monito~ ~
Severn Sound was considered to have a high diversity of marsh birds with all 12 Il1a!shbird
indicator species and a healthy diversity of amphibians including all five indicator species
represented (Long Point Bird Observatory 1997, Weeber and Vallianatos 2000 - MMP). The
three larger provincially significant wetlands in Severn SOl.md (Tiny Marsh, Wye Marsh and
Matchedash Bay) have recently been identified as Important Bird Areas by Environment Canada
(Wilson and Cheskey 2000a, b, c) with respect to black terns and least bitterns. Studies of tree
swallows and redwinged blackbirds in Port Severn area, Matchedash Bay and the Wye Marsh for
contaminants (Bishop et al. 1995) also noted high hatching and :fledging success - indications of
healthy populations.
Trumpeter swans
The goal for the Ontario Trumpeter Swan Restoration Program was to establish 15 wild breeding
pairs by the year- 2000; progress on the estimated status of the Trumpeter swan in Ontario has been
reported previously by Lumsden and Drever (2001). The population of Trumpeter swans in
Severn Somd has been increasing since the initial release in Wye Marsh in 1991. By August
2001, the population was estitmted at 103 swans (Coxon, pers. comm.), including the YOtmg of the
year. The success of the reintroduction effort at Wye Marsh was limited by lead poisoning :lTom
spent lead shot. Trumpeter swans have a high susceptibility to lead poisoning. Ingestion of as few
as three pellets is sufficient to cause death. The problem was addressed through a ban on the use
oflead shot for waterfowl hunting (starting at Wye Marsh in 1993) and retrediation ofseditrents in
wetland pools through a vibration technology developed through the Lead Shot Remediation
Project Between 1991 and 2001, at least 46 Wye Marsh swans suffered :lTom lead poisoning. As
a result of compliance with the lead shot ban and lead shot retrediatio~ there bas recently been a
decreasing trend in the percentage offtee-flying swans developing lead poisoning (refer to table
4).
Reduced deposition of spent lead shot within Severn Sound, particularly within the popillar
waterfowl feeding areas, lowers the risk of Trumpeter swans contracting lead poisoning through
iruzestion of toxic lead shot while remediation oflead shot contaminated sediments addresses the
~ ~
8
LIb ,1'j
issue of pre-ban pellets remaining in sediment at a depth accessible to foraging waterfowl. The
vibration device, developed through the Lead Shot Remediation Project, enhances the sinking of
lead pellets to depths in the sediment beyond the reach of Tnnnpeter swans while minimizing the
impacts of the sediment disturbance on the surrounding water, plants and sed~nt profiles.
Remedial activity wiH reduce the losses to the Wye Marsh swan program ftom lead poisoning, but
presumably oot eliminate all cases. Eleven hectares oflead shot-contaminated sediment in Wye
Marsh were treated with the vibration device dming 1997 and 1998, and approximately six
hectares of Hog Bay were treated with the remediation device in 2001.
Actions to be completed:
- ongoing remediation of coastal, wetland, riparian and upland habitat to emure the continued
support of a healthy ecosystem
- Creel Survey to continue beyond 2001 and include winter creel
- continued monitoring of fish comnnmity in Severn Sound
- continued monitoring of waterbird community of Severn Sound and adjacent areas of Georgian
Bay
- continued implementation of the Matchedash Bay Project and long-term monitoring of the
wildlife comrmmity of Matchedash Bay
- ongoing monitoring of the wildlife comnnmity of Severn Sound
- continued monitoring ofTrw:npeter swan population
-....
References:
Bishop, C.A., Koster, MD., Chek, A.A., Hussell, D.J.T. and Jock, K. 1995. Chlorinated
hydrocarbom and mercury in sediments, red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) and tree
swallows (Trachycineta bicolor) ftom wetlands in the Great Lakes-St Lawrence River Basin.
Enviromnental Toxicology and Chemistry, 14(3):491-501.
Gablehouse, D.W. 1984. A length-categorization system to assess fish stocks. North American
Journal of Fisheries Management 4:273-285.
Gonder, D. et al. 2001 in prep. Fisheries population dynamics of Severn Sound, 1974 - 2001.
MNR UGLMU Technical Report
Lee et al. 1991.
Long Point Bird Observatory. 1997. Marsh bird and amphibian corrnnunities in the Severn Sound
AOC, 1995-1996. Marsh Monitoring Program Newsletter Supplement
Lumsden, H.G. 1984. The pre-settlement breeding distribution oftrmnpeter swan, Cygnus
buccinator, and tundra swans, Cygnus columbianus, in Eastern Canada. Canadian Field-
Naturalist 98(4) October-December 1984.
9
qb - l~
Lumsden, H.G. and Drever, M 2001. TI1e trumpeter swan Cygnus buccinator experience in
Ontario. Fourth International Swan Symposium, Airlie Centre, Virginia.
OMNR. 1991. Matchedash Bay Provincial Wildlife Area Management Plan. Ministry of Natural
Resources Huronia District, :MNR 3080-1, ISBN 0- 7729-6273-1
Minns, C.K., Cairns, V.W., Randall, RG. and Moore, J.E. 1994. An Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI)
for fish assemblages in the littoral zone of Great Lakes' Areas of Concem Can. J. Fish. Aquat
Sci. 51: 1804-1822.
Murphy, B.R., Brown, M.L. and Springer, T.A. 1990. Evaluation of the illative Weight (W,.) Index,
with applications to walleye. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 10:85-97.
North AIrerican Waterfowl Management Plan (NA WMP). 2000. ~xpanding the Vision: 1998
Update of the North AIrerican Waterfowl Management Plan. Report prepared for ~ US Fish and
Wildlife Service, Mexico SE:MARNAP, Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service.
Prince, H.H., Padding, P.I. and Knapton, R W. 1992. Waterfowl use of the Laurentian Great Lakes.
J. Great Lakes Res. 18(4):673-699.
Randall, RG., Minns, C.K., Cairns, V.W. and Moore, J.E. 1993. Effect of habitat degradation on
the species composition and biomass offish in Great Lakes Areas ofConcem Can. Tech. Rept
Fish. Aquat Sci. No. 1941.
Randall, RG., Minns, C.K., Cairns, V.W., Moore, J.E. and Valere, B. 1998. Habitat predictors of
fish species occurrence and abundance in nearshore areas of Severn Sound. Canadian Manuscript
Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2440.
Ricker, W.E. 1975. Computation and interpreatation of biological statistics offish populations.
Dept of the Environment Fisheries and Marine Service Bulletin 191.
Scheffer 1989
Smokorowski et al. 1998
Tate, D.P. 1998. Assessment of the bilogica1 integrity of forest bird connmmities - a draft
methodology and field test in the Severn Sound Area of Concem Severn Sound RAP Technical
Report Canadian Wildlife Service, Environmental Canada.
Tym:>shuk, S.J. and Martin-Downs, D. (Gartner Lee Ltd.). 1990. A biological inventory and
evaluation of the Matchedash Bay Provincial Wildlife Area. OMNR, Huronia District and Parks
and Recreational Areas Section, Central Region, Aurora. Open File Ecological Report 9003.
117pp.
10
t/b ~ 7!J
Weeber, RC. and Vallianatos, M (eels.). 2000. The Marsh Monitoring Program 1995-1999:
monitoring the Great Lakes wetlands and their amphibian and bird inhabitants. Bird Studies
Canada in cooperation with Environment Canada and the US Enviro~ntal Protection Agency.
Weseloh. D.V., Ryckman, D.P., Pettit, K., Koster, MD., Ewins, P.J., and Harm, P. 1997.
Distribution and abundance of waterbirds in surmner in Severn Sound (Georgian Bay), Lake
Huron: an UC Area ofConcem J. Great Lakes Rs. 23(1):27-35.
Wilson, W.G. and Cheskey, E.D. 2001. Wye Marsh Important Bird Area Conservation Plan. Can.
Nature Fed., Bird Studies Can., Fed. OfOnt. Naturalists.
Wilson, W.G. and Cheskey, E.D. 2001. Matchedash Bay Important Bird Area Conservation Plan.
Can. Nature Fed., Bird Studies Can., Fed. OfOnt Naturalists.
Wilson, W.G. and Cheskey, E.D. 2001. Tiny Marsh Important Bira Area Conservation Plan. Can.
Nature Fed., Bird Studies Can., Fed. OfOnt. Naturalists. '-
Val ere, B.G. 1996. Productive capacity oflittoral habitats in the Great Lakes: field sampling
procedmes (1988 - 1995). Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2384.
11
TABLE 1 draft October 2001
STATUS OF OBJECTIVES FOR DELI STING SEVERN SOUND AS AN AREA OF CONCERN
USE IMPAIRMENTI DELI STING OBJECTIVE 2001 STATUS STRATEGY FOR MEETING OBJECTIVE SCHEDULE FOR DELISTtNG
RESTORATION ACHIEVED?
Iii) Degradation of fish 1. To protect and rehabilitate 1, See below under xi"; _ Fish Habitat Management Plan should be FURTHER REMEDIAL ACTION IN
and wildlife fish and wildlife habitat. implemented ongoing COASTAL. WEn.AND. RIPARIAN
populations, AND UPLAND HABITAT.
CONTINUED MONITORING
1. SEE xiv BELOW REQUIRED TO FOLLOW mENDS
2. NO. NOT DUE TO 2. To restore a balanced self- 2, At present (20c0). <10% of Iota I sport fish -MNR Lake Huron Unit with local FURTHER REMEDIAL ACTION
LOCAL QUAUlY sustaining fish community" by catch are top-Ie-..el predator IIsh with <5% partnership should conduct spring trap net UNKNOWN. CONTINUED
CONDITIONS restoring top-Ie-..ei predators walleye. Based on recent assessment by MNR sur.ey to monitor sport fish. especially MONITORING REQUIRED TO
including walleye. northem L Huron. walleye population Is considered in the walleye. FOLLOW mENDS
pike. large and smallmouth "trouble" range. Proportion of predator species -DFO protocols resource intensi-..e - future
bass and muskellunge to remains low. Walleye and other top predator laNSI IIsh and adult fish community
le-..els similar to the early species ftuctuating at low proportion of total assessment to be confirmed
1970'S with these species catch. Netting protocol has shown comparability _fluctuations in the natural ecosystem or in
forming at least 20-30% of the of hlstoricaltrapoet method but oew method is har.est will inftuance Index catch from
total predator catch. and statisticallY more satisfactory. Preliminary year to year
walleye forming at least 10% results for 2001 and historical relAew indicate _ MNR considering reduced catch limits
of trapnet results. These that walleye and other top predator species and/or slot size limits for walleye
objecti-..eS may require CUE. is declining, Walleye mean age is -Impro-..ements to walleye spawning area
relAsion in light of other decreasing and estimated mortality is ongoing _ protection from spring har.est
studies of walleye in Ontario 'ncreasing. Creel sur.ey results are pending. needed.
_ consider relAsed objecti-..e in
light of recent neltlng &ur.eys 4
and new MNR protocol.
"
5:-
~
~
12
TABLE 1 draft october 2001
ST~TUS Of OBJECTIVES f('" DE1.ISl1NG S""..... SO.... '" AN ~""" Of coMCERtI
USE \MPA\RMENTI DEUST\NG OBJECTIVE 2001 STATUS STRATEGY fOR NlEETING OBJECTIVE SCHEDULE FOR DEUSTING
RESTORATION ACH\EVED1
8. To find no significant 8. Sewage plant efl\uents toxic due to chlorine _sewage plants optimizing operation to
toxicity from water column or and ammonia (MOE. 1992). No sediment pro'IAde nitt1\cation and minimize chlorine
sediment contaminants in fish toxicity. as disinfectant
and wildlife bloassays.
"
-+
c:
--
15
-
Table 2
Severn Sound lAke Ontario
LoCation Penetsng Hog Sturgeon Matehedash pt. Severn Quinte Hami\ton
Year of survey \990 \990 \992 \990 \995 \990 \990
Number of samples M 2S 23 36 21 59 60
Number of samples with 0 catch 3 I 2 0 0 3 \
nsh asscn\blag,e measures
Species rienness 5.\ (0-12) 4.8 (0-9) 4.7( 1-8) 6.9 (4-\2) 6..1(\-\0) 6.;(0-\4) 4.\ (0-0)
Biomass 4.8(0.00- 3.&(0.0-12.&) 2.HO.I-IOJ)) 3.7(0. \-9.5) 2.&(0.1-8.2) 1.<X0.0-30.n 9.\(0-1\.9)
21.2)
% Piscivore biolUlSS 17.&(0-\00) 22.'X0-&3) 29.8(0-94) 23.8(0-69) 1"7 .6l 0-60) 25.\(0-82) 9.5(0-96)
% Generalist biomass \5.6(0-\00) \3.3(0-83) 3.\(0-29) 26..1(0-80) 2 \ .5(0-99) 21.6(0-98) 45.5(0-\00)
% specialist biot1't\Ss 66.6(0-\00) 63.8(6- \(0) 61.0(6-\00) 49.8(9-\00) 60.9(\-\00) 41.3(0- \(0) 44.9(0-\00)
Percent native biomass 9\.0(\2-\00) S8,H\6-\00) 99.9(99- \(0) 90.1(22-\00) 90.5(6- \(0) 11.2(2- \ (0) 31.1(0-\00)
Indcx of Biotic Integrity (IB\) 5S ,6(0-9 n 6\.6(0-9n 62.4(46-82) 65.8(39-86) 62.8(25-90) 58.0(0-91) 30.2(0-14)
AdjUStcd \H\ 56.4(0-9\ ) 6\. \(0-9n 62.0(46-82) 6\.9(28-86) 60.4(24-90) ~ 48.5(()..93) \1.&0-58)
, Adi "",d \IJ \ is me Index ofBiotic 10I'l'Ii'1 ,,0" adj ..,ed 10< off,..,,, s!'<"'" ("" \ex')
ComParison 0 f fish assemblage ""asures at live areas in Severn Sour<! and twO areas in Lake ()ntafio. Val \JOS are
averages (with ranges in parenfuesis). The compositional ""asures (percent trOpmc grnUPS and percent native) were
calculated for transects where the biorf<\SS was greater than O. From Randal 1<)9& (I <)90 data was from Sn>>korowski
et at (\998)).
"
&
~
C:Y
\6
Table 3
N
b
f fish
t
d
hect
"P" indicat
t. but
b
t
'Iabl
-- , ,,-
Station code
Common name AR- Ao.. BC- Bl- Bl- C2 C6 CR- CR- cc- H2 H3 H6 HD- Mo.. MC- MD1- MD2- NR- NR- MPP- MPP- PD- PD- RD- 5C- 51 52 MMC- 1M- WMo.. WR- WR-2 we.
chinook salmon 16 136
rainbow trout 280 394 131 237 429 121 P 48 517
brown trout 27 16 613
brook trout 600 615 263 161 708 173 P 240 133 207
central mudminnow 556 452 133 718 31 P 360 150 80 621 5'
white sucker 65 27 111 66 32 667 103 80 247 P 111 909 95
northern redbelly dace 323 267 P P 150 611 182 91 552
brassy minnow 417 56 69
horny head chub 22 16 P 184 444 222 27
golden shiner 160
common shiner 387 P 185 49 P P 450 61 159 27
rosyface shiner 554
spotlin shiner 167 P 56
bluntnose minnow 180 99 556
fathead minnow 120 22 300 333 P 909 1034
black nose dace 200 222 105 P 83 P P P 533 485 960 25 P P 400 P 267 545 7448 3j
longnose dace 16 P P 308 173 40 P
creek chub 266 P 722 P P P 173 250 727 359 2000 31 741 P P 370 111 440 P 1200 182 1273 32 5724 5'
brown bullhead 56
tadpole madtom 103
brook stickleback 556 22 308 105 16 154 480 P 100 80 111 61 182 345 5
rock bass 16 123
pumpkinseed 65 108 16 708 49 ,j 67 32
small mouth bass 16
largemouth bass 25
white crappie 111
yellow perch 98 25
Iowa darter 51
, ohnny darter 22 127 25 167 32 345 4
logperch 164 28
mottled sculpin 120 131 112 389 311 500 135 96 215 146 5455 80 360 20 245 1200 95 3
minnows 140 288 754 0 105 0 403 722 212 667 779 936 1311 253 250 1212 359 3120 292 153 P P 550 0 644 880 40 54 1467 425 2818 191 1482 1
17
t3
~
-
4b ,3;;t
Table 4: Occurrence of Lead Poisoning in Free-Flying Wye Swans
Cal endar Total Swan #of # of Free-Flying # ofConfirmed* Lead Poisoning
Year Population.) Held Swans Cases of Lead in Free-Flying
Swans Poisoning Population (010)
1991 16 7 9 1 11.1
1992 20 4 16 2 12.5
19930 30 4 26 5 19.2
1994 28 3 25 5 20.0
1995 49 20 29 2 ~ 6.9
-
1996 59 15 44 3 6.8
1997t 62 0 62 4 6.5
1998 75 0 75 5 6.7
1999; 86 0 86 8 9.3
2000 87 0 87 2 2.3
2001~ 103 0 103 2 1.9
.:.this number does not include permanent capti ve breeding pair( s)
* confirmed through blood analysis, radiograph and/or necropsy report
Cllead shot ban implemented in Wildlife Management Unit 76, including Wye Marsh
t non-toxic shot required for migratory game birds within 200 m of a watercourse or waterbody; remedial activity
implemented in Wye Marsh
:j: non-toxic shot required nationally for migratory game birds
~ remedial activity implemented in Hog Bay
18
b
figure '\ year 2000
Georg\an BaY
,...\a\ Boat count
Boat COllots B~ selected RaI\98S
. 100 to 198 t4)
\I 50 \0100 t8)
o 25 to 50 t12)
. 5 to 25 t61)
ro 0 to 5 (38)
20 fllgh\S 10\a\ Ma~ 5-<)c\ 21/00
source Minis\('j 01 I-Ia\o13\ Resources
Upper Great LaKes Ur\\t
/'
';
....
..
,
\9
4b ' 33
Figure 2 Composition of catch in Sturgeon Bay,
Severn Sound from Spring Index Trapnet
Survey 1975. 2000
Predatory Fish
680
:;:;
'iii70
8.
g60
Q
~50
l40
en
0)30
0)
t1:I
c: 20
0)
~ 10
a...
0-757779
1_ Walleye
81 83 85 87 89 91 93
. N.Pikel Muskie _ Sm. Bass
95 97 ~
D Lg. Bass
cOO
~
'iii70
8.
goo
Q
~50
'~40
0.
en
0)30
0)
t1:I
c: 20
0)
u
Qj 10
a...
Benthic Fish
0-
~ 77 ~ ~ 83 85 ~ 89 ~ ~ 95 W ~
1_ White Sucker . Redhorse Sucker _ BroM1 Bullhead
0-
~ 77 ~ ~ 83 85 ~ 89 ~ ~ 95 W ~
1_ Black Crappie. P, Seed _ R. Bass D Y. Perch
Source: OMNR I Se\em Sound Fixed Index Trapnet
20
cOO
~
'~70
0.
goo
()
rn 50
Q)
'~40
0.
(/)
Q) 30
0)
t1:I
c: 20
0)
u
Qj 10
a...
Panfish
Figure 3 Yearly Severn Sound Index Netting
Walleye ~e Composition 1974 to 1989
~ 50~ -~~.~~;;::
60
50
c
:& 40
'13
o
0. 30
E
o
020
?fl
10
o
111 m
+1;jJ1 1--1---1-" 1-1-
7 9 11 13 15
Age
60
50
c
~ 40
'13
o
0. 30
E
o
020
?fl
10
o
60
so
c
~ 40
'13
o
0. 30
E
o
020
?fl
10.-~
O+_,-Iil-111
1 3
r
" '~',' m,. ~ rn D+--J--I---.1-1S-I-
I!1,W,_ I 13
-, 7~ 9 11
Age
c
~ 40
'13
8. 30
E
<320
;;;e.
10
,l,Jillc,___I___I__
11 13 1S
0+-1--' [J 'm 10
1 3' 51
60
SO
c
~ 40
'13
o
0. 30
E
o
020
~'
o
10
W: -
;\ .~
I u 1\ I ill I (] I D, C,'___I_+'_'__
7 9 11 13 15
Age
o +__,_..,m,
1 3
60
50
c
~ 40
'13
8. 30
E
<320
;;;e.
101 ' , 0,1, j
, . I. ,
, j )
o +_I.ffi,___,_,tJl_m_1 -, -p>>-,
1 3 5 7 9
Age
21
\
+~+m I-IJ-I.J::I-I--'-
11 13 15
c
~ 40
'13
8.30
E
<320
;;;e.
10
o
_,l,lJi.,IiJ,,_,---t--
7 9 11 13 15
Age
60
SO
c
~ 40
'13
0
0. 30
E
0
020
;;;e.
10
0++
1
60
50
c
~ 40
'13
,0
" 0.30
E
o
020
;;;e.
10
IJIJ+rn-I,c-t.Ct.fill.m I m-l.Iiilt-~-I-I-i-'
5 7 9 11 13 15
Age
~
C
\
~
-4:
o +-tJJlJ)L.m-jlJi_,JiI-jJil."JilIJEJ.,.IJI+-+-+---t
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
Age
c:
~ 40
'91
&. 30
E
o
020
";J!.
Figure 4 Yearly Severn Sound Index Netting
Walleye Age Composition 1990 to 1997
60 I - - ----, 60
50
c:
g 40
1/1
&. 30
E
o
:J 20
'I!.
60
50
50
c:
o
:c:s 40
'91
o
0.30
E
820
~
o
i \ i "
, , , '
ID' 0'1 j' ffi'
t; ~ ,. ~ \ :: !
0+--1 -fll- I- +I-f- flD ID.Io_IQ,___I_+_
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
Age
10
0+-1 co fm I m ,m 1 ill, m 1 In I rn , co , 0 , ill , I] ,0, "
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
Age
60 ""'_--0 .---,._0_0.--., 60
c:
~ 40
'91
o
0.30
~
020
";J!.
10
o
60
50
10
II Ii
I, -
50
c:
o
:0;:140
'91
o
0.30
E
820
'#.
10 I ...
o +,-1 O,JII"~,,,,,
1 3 5
+m, m,'om"fiI, "'of-.flOll -",--,-
7 9 11 13 15
Age
50
c:
o
:c:s 40
'91
o
0.30
E
820
'#.
10 .
o +--I.tW,rn,.III,
135
I
(:
'~=-~'Iml,Wol_(jJIr;)_I_-IDI_'_
7 9 11 13 15
Age
22
10
60
50
c:
~ 40
'1/1
&. 30
E
o
020
..,.
60
50
c:
o
:c:s 40
..~
/'0. 30
E
o
020
~
.
10
O+--j'-lml-(j)IJj'I~'
1 357
,,' Ii
.' 1.1:1+--1-1--+-
9 11 13 15
Age
10
0++
1
o +'-IJtm)iI,11I+IiI-tJi1Ji1~D,,-_,,___~_
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
Age
~
,
~
figure 5 ~ear\Y S8-Vern sound \ndeX Netting
wa\\eye Age composition '\998 to 2000
60
60, It -------- 60
c:
60 \ ~ 40
c: ''0)
~ 40 i 30
'(0) E
i 30 8 2,0
E ~
8 2,0 0
'\0
~
0 '\3 '\6
'\0 o '\ '\'\
13 15 3
o 1 9 11
3
60
50
c:
.~ 40
'(0)
i30
E
8 2,0
~
0
10
. un tlt\. 'au-r--1
O+-' 3 5 7
1
1'\ 13 15
,
\
t'
23
Figure 6 Severn Sound Index Trapnet Survey
Catches per Trap Net Night
50
45 -r- , -------,-----
1: 40 - ___________________________Walleye
CI
z35
Q; 30
z
a.25
10
t: 20
13 15.-
1\1
u 10-
~ J~'il-TD,m-r_T-rl'1 ~~I.J~~, [IJ~t~JT(~)C~
82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00
50
1: ~~ 1 ~:_~~=-~~~=~:=~:_=:==:~:No[fhernPlkfi
CI
z35
Q; 30
z
a.25 . u___..u____,,_.._..__
i ~~,,---I"'I'---, --','I"lu"I- i -1I___,I-lu,_,II,-,'I,----'-'-_',-~,--
o 10 .- ~ .. fI- I ~
~ II J~ :: ~~,~ .~ ~ ~~, , :, :-: -:. -1 r-~-
82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00
50
45
1: 40
CI
z 35
Q; 30
z
a. 25
E 20
:Y 15
~ 10
5
o
82
_..~_._-,_.__._...._-
------------
_._----~-
-._---
11-.1 -:f
-, -T -{ -r--r-t -1
LargimQM1n-Biii-
":]],tdjJ:aj~~;;
84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00
700
_600
.c
C>
2500
......
~400
0.
~300
t:
.c
.s 200
co
()
100
o
82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00
-- -
Brown Bullhead
~ ._----.-----
- -..-----.-.------.-----
, --
· :T=.,:~.=j~ 11~tLJjl,j;
700
...... 600
.c
C>
2 500
-
~ 400
0.
~ 300
t::
.c
.s 200
co
()
100
o
82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00
_ Severn Sound Index Trapnetting
_ Early Summer Trapnetting
24
-----~-,--~----_.---------
Black Crappie
---.------
----_. .
-----
._-------- - -- -
jlD=~:==~k L
~
\
<XJ
~
Figure 7 Mean age of walleye from Severn
Sound from 1974 to 2001
8
-,
I I
~,
r _~ .i
1.
6
Q) -,-
0)
<(
~ 4 111-r-H1-
Q)
~
2 -llf-m----Ir
~~
~
t1
I
---',<---.~ ----1\
--.--.....---....--...-..-...-
~ m It I
/'
II 1)1
i---I:--I--l-IJ- I J~ J-~l,-
~ I II HI
J
~ 1['
I
---- l---'!f----n
I~ II I~ 1I1I I~
O-t~1-L-11B I I II~ IIll 1m,
74 76 83 85 87 89 91
" III lID 1111111
93 95 97 99
I I~ I m I
Source: OMNR
25
, ,
,
SMIN
D
ESTN
~
\
~
~
o
...
....0
G)O
~o
~N
-;0
~..
~
O~
en
..-oOC-
~e.
~~
......
...."
~c:.
~'='
~~
0(:
~'i
d)~
G)CI)
~
~
.fIIIIII'
U-
o
o
cD
(j)
<.D
(j)
<:t
(j)
C"l
en
o
(j)
cD
cD
<.D
cD
<t
cD
~
o
cD
cD
t-
<.D
t-
<t
It-
o 0
-.::-
;fu#~
o
t-
000 0 ~
to \!") <t C'?
(. oM a,\B.1 f4\\B\.10~
\.0
M
~
o
~
~
Q)
\0.-
CD
-0
C.
o
Q)
a:.
z
~
o
. .
~
\0.-
::>
o
(f)
F\9ure 9 Re\atiVe we\ght bY s\~e c\aSS of wa\\eye
from se'l8rn Sound from 1974 to 2000
~30
1
~20 - ---
....... -'-
..c
O>~~O --
.-
Q)
'$ ~OO
Q)
.~ 90 -
........
co
Q) 80
oc 7 0 -V, - - - --'" --'-'--'-----'-'-'--;-- c____,_'---
'-\--------- - --'- -
60 -'M7'6 . 83 85. 87 89 9~ 93 g5 97 99. o~
stock Quality preferred Memorable trophy ~
c:
Data Source: OMNR. Relative weight equation of MurphY et al. (1990), groupS after GablehOuse t 1984)
27
__ 250-379 -ca-- 380-509 -- 5~0-629 -- 6~0-759 --- >::: 760 \ c3
JfP ;/ V'{ /
figure 10 Wa\\eye roean \ength at age
pre- and post-1ebra rousse\S
900
"E 80
g, 10
~60
3 50
)40
r- 30
20
o 2 4 6 8 '\0 '\2 ,\4 '\6 '\8
_ 74- 75- 76. 82. 83. 84. 85
. 88' 89' 90' 9'\' 92. 93
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
~ \
\
\ \
--
\ \ \ \ \
, " " . -
\'\994 - 200'\. I , - ,
, \ ,. .
\ ..
\
\
\
\
\
\
900
'E 800
S 700
.s 600
0'>
3 500
~ 400 \.'
;g. 300 ..,' \
200" , \ ' \
o 246 8
\
\
~o ~2 ~4 ~6 ~8
'-,
_ 94 _ 95 _ 96. 97 · 98. 99. 00
~
28
source: oMNR
f-b -q()
Delisting Severn Sound as an Area of Concern
Discussion notes for review of use impainnent:
draft October 1,2001
xiii) degradation of phytoplankton and zooplankton
Delisting Objective:
To ensure phytoplankton species and biovolume are representative of mesotrophic
conditions and to have a balanced zooplankton community. (ie. more Daphnia)
Rationale:
In the Great Lakes, phytoplankton and zooplankton have been used to monitor ecosystem
response to changes in physical conditions, nutrient concentrations, and trophic interactions
(Nicholls and Hurley 1989, Mazumder 1994, Makarewicz et al. 1998). More specifically,
phytoplankton have been used to assess the impacts of nutrient load reductions in eutrophic areas
of the Great Lakes (Nicholls and Hopkins 1993, Gemza 1995, Millard et al. 1996).
Indicators used in Severn Sound:
Phytoplankton biovolume of euphotic zone composite samples were used in a bi-weekly
monitoring program at long-tenn stations in the open waters of Severn Sound from 1973 to the
present (see Nicholls et al. 1977 for phytoplankton analytical procedure, see viii Eutrophication
summary for sampling program).
Zooplankton were collected as vertical hauls through the water column at monitoring stations
using a conical closing zooplankton net (Johannson et a1. 1992, McQueen and Yan 1993).
Samples were identified, enumerated and measured for biomass calculations using the ZEBRA
software.
Current Status:
Overall phytoplankton biovolume bas decreased to less that 1 mm3/L from peak values of6
mm3/L in the late 1980s and early 1990s (Todd and Sherman 2001 in prep.). The proportion of
large diatoms associated with nutrient enrichment bas decreased since the early 1990s. However,
the community structure may be influenced by selective filtration of zebra mussels. Increases in
blue-green algae such as Microcystis spp. and increased shoreline complaints of filamentous algae
such as Mougeotia and Spirogyra have been noted. The response of phytoplankton to changes in
nutrient loadings is also being reduced further by zebra mussels. A model of predicting
phytoplankton biovolume using inputs that are not confounded by zebra mussels (phosphorus
'..
\<
1
Jfo ~q(A .
loading and temperature) suggests that, the phosphorus control measures taken in Penetang Bay
would result in the delisting objectives for open water trophic indicators would still be met in the
absence of zebra mussels (Todd and Sherman in prep.). Response of phytoplankton in the south
end ofPenetang Bay was evident prior to zebra mussel infestation.
'.
Zooplankton biomass has also declined since the early 19905. The predominant species Bosmina
longirostris, which represented up to 75% of the total biomass in 1990, declined in abundance,
biomass and in proportion of the total biomass. Daphnids are still scarce and represent a small
proportion of the total community. Zebra mussel veliger larvae abundance has also declined in
recent years at all stations.
References:
Gernza, A.F. 1995. Spatial and temporal water quality trends in Severn Sound, Georgian Bay
since the introduction of phosphorus control guidelines: Nutrients and phytoplankton 1973-1991.
Water Quality Res. J. Canada. 30(4):565-591.
Gernza, A.F. 1995. Zooplankton seasonal dynamics and community structure in Severn Sound,
Lake Huron. Water Qual. Res. 1. Canada. 30(4):673-691.
Johannsson, O.E. , Shaw, M.A., Yan, N.D., Filion, J-M. And Malley, D.F. 1992. A comparison of
rreshwater zooplankton sampling gear: nets, traps and submersible pump. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 1894.
Makarewicz, 1. C., Bertram, P., and Lewis, T. W. 1998. Changes in phytoplankton size class
abundance and species composition coinciding with changes in water chemistry and zooplankton
community structure of Lake Michigan, 1983-1992. J. Great Lakes Res. 24:637-657.
Mazumder, A. 1994. Phosphorus-chlorophyll relationships under contrasting herbivory and
thermal stratification: predictions and patterns. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51 :390-400.
McQueen, DJ. and Yan, N.D. 1993. Metering filtration efficiency ofrreshwater zooplankton
hauls: reminders from the past. J. Plankton Res. 15(1):57-65.
Millard, E. S., Myles, D. D., Johannsson, O. E., and Ralph, K. M. 1996. Phytoplankton
photosynthesis at two index stations in Lake Ontario 1987-1992: assessment of the long-tenn
response to phosphorus control. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 53:1092-1111.
,~
Nicholls, K. H., Carney, E. C., and G. W. Robinson. 1977. Phytoplankton of an inshore area of
Georgian Bay, Lake Huron, prior to reductions in phosphorus loading. J. Great Lakes
Res.3 :79-92.
2
#
4b ~q3
Nicholls, K.. H., Robinson, G. W., Taylor, R, and Carney, E. C. 1988. Phytoplankton an
phosphorus in southern Georgian Bay, 1973-1982, and implications for phosphorus loading
controls. Hydrobiologia 163:85-93.
Nicholls, K.. H., and Hurley, D. A. 1989. Recent changes in the phytoplankton of the Bay of
Quinte, Lake Ontario: the relative importance offish, nutrients, and other factors. Can. J. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 46:770-779.
Todd and Sherman 2001in prep. Recent changes in phytoplankton corresponding with nutrient
load reductions and zebra mussel establishment, Penetang Bay, Severn Sound, Georgian Bay.
Technical Report in prep.
"
"
"
i ~6\...E. 1 draft october 2001
S1 1'1l1S OF OBJECII\f€.S FOR OEUSIING SE\lERN SOlINO I'S I'1'II'REA OF CONCERN
1001 SiAiUS SiRA TEG'l fOR tAEET\NG SCIIEDUI.E foR 011.\..1&\1I0IO
USE \tAPA\RtAENi' DE\..\Si'NG OBJECT\\IE OBJEC1\\1E
RESTORA i,ON
ACH\E"ED1 continuation ot annual monitoring REMED\Al ACilON CoMPlEIE.
10 ensure p\1-y\oplan\c.\On speci~s Ptw\Oplan\c.o\n biOI/O\ume is decreasing in program is proposed \0 confIrm ONGOING MON\10R\NG
)(iii) Degrada\ion ot ,..""'.. ,. nu\f\"" ""ell"'" H"""" ""
P\1-y\op\an\c.\on and biOl/O\ume are represen\a\\IIe communiW structure ma'l be influenced b'l improvements.
and 'Z.oop\an\c.\OO ot meso\rophiC conditions and \0 selec\ive fI\\ra\ion ot 'Z.ebra musse\S,
popu\a\iOns. hal/e a balanced 'Z.oop\an\c.\on Increases in blue-green algae such as,
communiW. tie, more Daphnia) MicroCystis spp. and increased s\1Orel\oe
'1ES complain\S of ti\ameo\OUS algae such as
Mougeotia and spirogyra \18ve been no\ed..
iM response ot ph-y\oplanl<\On \0 changes In
nu\rien\ loadings is also being reduced turtner
b'l 'Z.ebra mussels, Response ot
phv\oplaOI<\On in the south eod ot pene\ang
8a'l was evident prior \0 z.ebra mussel
intes\a\iOn, .
200p\anl<\on biomass hBS also declIned ~ince
\he eaM '990s. l\'1e predominant specIes
80smlna \ongiros\ris. which represeo\ed up
,. ,,% ot "'."... ."""..." ,.... ~
"......"'.., -". """......... ~
\\'Ie \o\al biomass. oaphnids are s\ill scarce
"" ,""'... . .m" ....- ~ "" \~.
_m"""" C.... num"" ~ ..... m....
veligers have been oa\ed in opeo water
sampli09 hoWever. ve\iger \a{l/ae abundaoce
has alSO declined in recent 'ears a\ a\l
s\auoos.
.
.
,.
+-
D~
\
~
~
4
4b~Cf5
8.0 8.0
PI P2
6.0 6.0
".....,
-
'..J
....
E
J: 4.0
,::;. 4.0
0,)
E
::I
'0
;>
0
CD 2.0
2.0
6.0
'..J
....
E
E
...... 4.0
0,)
E
::I
'0
;>
0
CD
2.0
0.0
8.0
P3 P4
6.0
0.0
8.0
0,0
~
1980
1985
1990
1995
I
2000
Year
FigureiAnnual variation in phytoplankton biovolume
(dominant algal classes) at Penetang Bay
sampling stations.
4.0
2.0
0.0
I
2000
I
1995
I
1980
1985
1990
Year
_ Bacillariophyceae
l1li Chlorophyceae
_ Chrysophyceae
c=J Cryptophyceae
_ Cyanophyceae
_ Dinophyceae
~
..
/
.
Figure2Changesintwocommondiatomsfrom
Penetang Bay 1982to 2000
1800 -I I ,- 35
I
1600 ~ - I - Melosira
~ Stephanodiscus
1400 I - Total phosphorus I 30
-
:::J 1200 ...J
0
- :J
("') -
E 25 (f)
E 1000 2
- 0
Q) .c:
E a..
(f)
:J 800 0
0 .c.
> 20 a..
.2 (\1
CD 600 I~ .....
I 0
~ 1\ t-
400 ,
- 15
200 ~ 1m IU_R 1~9 II~ I~ It! 11.1 III II I I ~
o I .1.'1 .m .t:'~ .m _Ill .n .(1'1 _,,'I .tt _"I .r.1 .'.1 .I~ _I'-) .. -- . . I 10 ,
I I I I ~
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
p4
20
---'
___-1-.--'
~ 5 .-\-------
----...-
-,--
~ 0 -' --------
---
5 -'----
--
o
89
78
20
~5
- -.-
1 a-Ini\ \\ nr,.-...-
5 -1"'''''''''..'-
o --'i-rr-T' \ 89
78
"'1
- I
-
- ----.~-* 1 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 - -
- - - - - -
--
- -
- - -
........ i
.-lIlT ~-
25
20
~5
~O
5
o
89
year
78
'00
p~
p3
--
-
--
08....r-e--3 AnnUa\ ,"'v.....
Zoop\an\<.ton species
R\chnesS
'00
'\ 65
p5
20
~5 -
- ,10
---- .-.---- -- ~
-- - - - - - -
----~---"---- - - - - - - - - - - -
.--.-r\TT -
20
15
10 -
-----
-
~
,-'
----
.---
5 --'--
o
89 '0
'00
5
0-
78
'00
78
89
..
\I'
.. c..... "'"
.. ,.
hs 1.J-IL '-I
Zooplanl(ton Biomass
Station P 1 Station P4
400 100
" 0~
E E
- -
C1 C1
E -S 80
';; 300 (/]
VI (/]
co co
E E
0 0
in in
iii iii
~ 200 :J
C
C C
<{ <{ 40
c c:
co co
Q) Q)
~ ~
Q) 100 Q)
> ,~
~ ]i 20
"3 :J
E E
:J :J
0 0
0.-, ,
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
-
Cyclopoid copepods
Non-Daphnid cladocerans
Calanoid copepods
Daphnid cladocerans
cY
~
40
30-
P4
20--
..._II~
O-Lr-~'-'-'-'-'
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00
10-
40
30 -
20
10-,
O-Lr-----r--r-'-'-'- '-r-
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00
P1
40
30 -
20-' '
10-
M1
, Fi3{~r
Annual Oreissena
Veliger Densities
(# x 103/m3)
40 --
30 -.
PM2' 40
- .. I 30
BS
- -....
....... .
~
~
~
.. ., 20 -'.
I,
o
_ ell n
"I- T T--T
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00
Year
4 "'. "IiI!
'.
'\
_III
I I I I I I .,.
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
... .
., ,
o L-r-----j---,-- ---,--IIjI---T----T-
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00
10 --.
of /0
JIb/IOU' .
-rota\ pnospnof\.lS (ug1L)
0 ~ ~ 0 0
~ ..-
0 (/)
0 ~
~ I.-
0
s::.
0-
CO (/)
0 en 0
en s::.
S ..- 0..
-
+- '. ~
'. 0
\-
-+-~ (0
<::s Q)
~ '>-
: en
en
..-
tr.l
.~
~
~ ,
tr.l I C
rI",- 0
a ~
~ c
\( cv
.~ -
0-
M "'It \ "'- 0
0.. '. ; 0
~ N
J. -
a \.J cv
\/ .......
~ cc.: '~ 0
/"'\ \-
C)
~ ;---L
.E~ \
'..\
tr.l lD
en
a CP
..-
... (f)
~, (Ij '-
.~ Q) "-
)- ......
(f)
~1.S'. \ ~ 2
~ ;: CP
en '-
~ ..- tJ)
~ c.
~'Qj 0
("1 CQ
CP
en
1- ..-
. ... . ^~, : I
t .
~ 0
.. \~ CP
CP
..-
-.c:-
0..
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
~ (<) ("1 ..-
(~U11 6U1) sseU1o~9
,-
,.''''''--'''"'''-- ~"'-.,"~"' ''''..,5A --}
, \
,
file :IIIU ntitl
), c
'-";! I
May 8, 2002
.~
RECSVED
MAY- 9 200Z
Mr. Mayor and Council, ORO-MEDONTE
TOWNSHIP
My daughter and I were awakened at 4:11 AM. this morning by the sound of dump trucks (3'
unloading their loads and the doors of these dump trucks banging several times with each
unload as they then pulled away from Duncor Industries on the 4th Line of Oro South. On '
Monday May 6, 2002 we were awakened at 5:03 A.M. by the same sound. It usually does not .
begin until around 6-6:30 AM.
"
...........,
Since mid-March of this year there has been incessant dumping, levelling and rolling of the
yards of Duncor and Vandergeest Industries from approximately 6 - 6:30 AM. with Vandergeest
working sometimes until midnight with the doors wide open facing me. With the exception of
the last 3 days of last week (May 1-3) this is continual, yet sporadic, therefore unsettling. The
dumping of truckloads of soil by Duncor onto Vandergeest's yard as well as very recently, its
own, then the levelling sometimes by as many as three beeping bulldozers and a roller,
occurred many times last year, but has increased monumentallly this spring. Then at times they
haul the dirt away that they had dumped!
Please refer to my previous correspondence and photos to Council throughout the last year.
As of March 19,2002 there has been no contact from anyone regarding possible solutions to
this now intolerable situation. Prior to that there was also no response or contact regarding this
situation except at my presentation to the Committee as a Whole at which time a berm on my
property was suggested to which I provided a response. The exception to this has been follow
up by the Ward 4 Councillor, Mr. Harry Hughes, who has listened and been supportive.
This intolerable situation is creating numerous physical and emotional symptoms for myself and
my family as a result of the insomnia, anxiety, anger as a direct result of the actions of these
industries and the non-action and avoidance of Council and department members with regard
to my previously stated concerns.
It appears to me that there is a conflict of interest here with Duncor doing work for the Township.
If there is no satisfactory solution proposed within the next two weeks, another route of action
will be necessary (legal, media). No one should have to live in these circumstances in beautiful,
quiet, rural, environmentally-conscious Oro-Medonte!
Refer to copies of previous correspondence dating back to June 25, 2001 as well as my "public
opinion suggestions" regarding changes to the Official Plan and a very specific Noise By-Law
which I will leave at the front desk later today.
: c9juM -J tL~II-LC-V- (JJ-~~jrJ~1
Irena-Wieslawa (Versha) Szczebior
, cc: G. Dunlop
D. Goldhawk
J. Cockburn
5/8/2002 8:22 AM
, I
€ i~LiJ ~ !.JL 1'-'1
5a-~
THE CORPORATION OF THE
~t~~~~f~}.:~~)gf~:~~~'~~'Y~:?t!~~!t;i~~':.~r~~':): ~:-~~;'f~~-i~;::~~~:.&. *:."::~~~~~:',-. 7
148 Line 7 5.. Box 100
Oro. Ontario LOL 2XO
TOWN~tIIP
rgff)-~~~
Phone (705)487-2171
Fax (705) 487-0133
www.township.oro-medonre.on.ca
March 19, 2002
Ms. Versha Szczebior
RR#1
Shanty Bay, ON
LOL 2LO
Reference: Buffering/Screening of 279 Line 4 South. Oro
Dear Ms. Szczebior:
The Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte passed the following motion at the
Committee of the Whole meeting of February 27, 2002 with respect to the above-
noted matter:
"It is recommended that the correspondence from Versha
Szczebior, Shanty Bay re: bufferinglscreening, 279 Line 4
South, Oro be received and referred to staff for a report to
CounciL"
The Director of Engineering and Environmental Services will bring forward a
report for Council consideration of your concerns.
We trust the above is self-explanatory; however, should you have any questions
in this regard, please contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
,~ \ . j~' ')
lV~J...It--- ;;:/1.../7,^,</~~""..,;2 cl,j..LJ
"- /-'
Marilyn Pennycook L
Clerk
...
Idrw
5Q.-- ~
279 Line 4 South
R.R. #1
Shanty Bay, Ontario
LOL 2LO
April 18,2002
Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk
Township of Oro-Medonte
P.O. Box 100, Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
To: Members of the Council of Oro-Medonte
RE: PUBLIC INPUT INTO THE NEED FOR REVISIONS TO THE OFFICIAL
PLAN OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE - SPECIAL MEETING
MAY 8, 2002
..
Regarding the request by the township for public comments into the need for revisions to
The Official Plan ofthe Township ofOro-Medonte, I respectfully submit the following
suggestions:
1.
Under Development Policies - A section be adoed for existing industries and
commercial ventures in which adequate buffering/screening and landscaping of
current industries or commercial enterprises within 2,000 feet of a residence or
agricultural enterprise be made mandatory and enforced - for the mental and
physical health of the occupants of the neighbouring residence; for the health and
safety of any animals or crops on the neighbouring residence or agricultural
enterprise thereby ensuring the livelihood of the owners of the residence or
agricultural enterprise; to maintain the market value of the residence and
agricultural property in the vicinity rather than decrease its value by tens of
thousands of dollars; for the health, safety and protection of the water sources and
environment in the immediate vicinity of these industriaVcommercial businesses
which may be affected by chemicals, dust, toxic fumes, noise etc.
The buffering/screening/landscaping should be sufficient and high enough to
adequately block out the view of the industry and its noise within a minimum
length of time (example, within 3-4 months of completion/occupation of the
facility) rather than theI2-IS years which it takes seedlings to mature. Fences
should be barrier type(wood rather than chain link) and high enough to block out
viewslnoise and must be sufficiently maintained to prevent eyesores from
developing in the future. Currently a high standard oflandscaping is required on
new businesses adjacent to Highway 11 only and outdoor storage screened from
Hghway 11 only.
.5 b ,Lf
RE: PUBLIC INPUT INTO THE NEED FOR REVISIONS TO THE OFFICIAL
PLAN OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE - SPECIAL MEETING Cont'd.
Irena- W. (Versha) Szczebior
-2-
2. Under the same policy that new industries/commercial businesses also be bound
by the same provisions as I have suggested above for the same reasons and that
they be applied to within 2,000 feet of a residence or agricultural enterprise, rather
than "adjoining" or "adjacent" as currently defined by Council.
3. Under the same policy that any re-development of existing industrial/commercial
uses involving expansion be under the same site plan control provisions as I have
suggested above as it applies to their expansion. Currently existing industries may
expand up to 25% each year and avoid being under the current site plan controls.
4. Once again as in D7.5.l.g) "close promiximty" be defined as approximately 2,000
feet for existing, new, and re-developed industrial/commercial businesses and that
adjacent, abutting, and adjoining be dropped from the wording of the policies.
5. That a noise avoidance policy or bylaw be incorporated into the official plan as it
pertains to industries/commercial businesses - with definitions of types of noise
pollution (e.g. grinding, welding, lift trucks, dump trucks, painting, spraying
equipment, hammering, banging of metal etc.), the times of day that this type of
noise is allowed (for example: 8;00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. only), and enforcement
policies - whether it be through a bylaw officer or other agencies. Again this needs
to be defined and made immediately enforceable for the physical and mental health
and protection of humans, animals, crops, property values, and the environment.
Respectfully submitted,
d). uJ. ~~
Irena-W. (Versha) Szczebior
cc: H. Hughes
/iws
~. -<
.:::a J
~
VERSHA SZCZEBIOR
R.R. 1, Shanty Bay, Ontario LOL 2LO
(705) 487-7562
February 18, 2002
The Corporation of the Township ofOro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Box 100
Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
Attention: Ian Beard, Mayor
Jennifer Zieleniewski, c.A.O.
Keith Mathieson
Mr. H. Hughes
Members of Council
Gentlemen and Madams:
RE: BUFFERING/SCREENING OF 279 LINE 4 SOUTH, ORO
Further to your letter of November 20, 2001 I offer the following response.
1. Regarding the "present Official Plan policies requirement" and "present controls"
in place, I suggest that these policies be amended to protect a residence or
agricultural enterprise from the effects of industries/commercial businesses, both
for existing and future businesses, as soon as possible
2. Regarding Duncor Enterprises Inc. and the Township not having means to require
them to contruct buffering/screening at "this present time", Council mayor may not
be aware that Duncor surrounded their industry with a see-through wire mesh-type
fencing with barbed wire on top at the end of December 2001. Needless to say, in
spite of their previous dialogue with Council members about my concerns, this
type of fencing does not afford any buffering/screening whereas a solid type of fencing
along the south side (such as the Drive-In has) if encouraged by the Township, would
have. IfDuncor now planted two rows of mature (7-8') evergreen trees along the
south side of the mesh fence this spring, this would certainly be one solution. If
Vandergeest Welding then planted a similar two rows of mature evergreen trees in
alignment with Duncor, it would help solve the current problem.
3. I do not agree with your statements regarding loud beeping or any other type of
noise as being a temporary condition. I live there, you do not. Please
refer to my original letter to the Township as wen as the notes on my personal
statement to Council. As for members of Council's comments that they did not
notice any noise, dust clouds etc., when they visited, there seemed to be an
almost uncanny ability of Vandergeest in particular to be quiet at these times
as if they knew ahead oftime when a visit would occur.
54{,
I.W Szczebior, 279 Line 4 South, Oro
- 2-
It is obvious that the situation with noise, dust, etc. is not as bad when there is snow or
it is cold during winter when the enormous doors facing me are not open because of the
temperature, nor is there as much activity with trucks, etc. from both enterprises. It is
much worse from early spring to late fall.
4. Regarding the berm on MY property solution which was brought forward by a
member of Council at the October 24,2001 meeting, this did not cross my mind as a
possible solution. I had hoped instead that Council would either encourage the
industries in question to build a berm with trees on top or similar landscape
screening/buffering to protect me, or would amend the plan/policies/controls in
place to be able to enforce all industries to comply with new policies.
Your letter states the "Township is willing to assist me....when projects allow the
opportunity". This is a very nebulous statement.
This is not a good solution from my point of view for the following reasons:
a) There are no details regarding the where, when, what material, how long,
the costs involved, the completion, the trees on top, etc.
b) Two years ago I spent over $550 adding gravel and grading my 300' long
driveway. Large dump trucks going up and down would surely flatten
and rut the surface so that it would have to be done again at a substantial
cost
c) The berm would need to be very high and long in order to shield the view of
the very tall buildings involved - who would level off/complete the berm -
who would plant trees on top, at whose cost?
d) The field involved next to my driveway and house in which the berm would
be built would be unrentable and unusuable for planting/harvesting until the
work was completed which at the meeting was suggested could take several
years, thereby decreasing both rent and crop production
e) What would the content of the berm material be, from what sources, what
assurances would there be that the soil was not weedy, contaminated or
toxic in nature
f) At the beginning of the construction/expansion of the three industries in
question, two springs ago I planted 50 seedlings along the separating fence
line spaced 5' apart. These seedlings would of course be killed in the process
of creating a berm
5a-l
l.W. Szczebior, 279 Line 4 South, Oro
- 3 -
Council's proposed solution of a berm on my property could create even more problems
for me. A better solution would be as above #1, #2:
1) Amend the present official plan and present controls to protect residences and
farms a specific number of feet away (example, within 1200' of an adjacent
border) with buffering/screening guidelines - have it apply to all existing
industries as well as future ones
2) Encourage Duncor and Vandergeest to plant at least two rows of mature
evergreen trees along the south side of Dun cor's recently erected wire mesh
fence continuing along the south border of Vandergeest's property and any
future industrial growth adjoining my borders
3) If the above two are not possible within a reasonable length of time (by the
fall of2002) then I would suggest financial and physical planning and
assistance from Council in planting at least two rows of mature i.e. 7-8'
evergreen trees along the adjacent fence border on my side taking into account
the seedlings already planted there. This may be the most cost effective and
environmentally friendly solution.
Since no other possible solutions relating to the buffering/screening being placed on my
property were considered by me or discussed at the meeting, I would suggest the berm
being built on my property be put on hold for now and two or more rows of mature
evergreen trees be planted along the fence border (between my property and EricAnna)
on my side beside the existing seedlings (40 are left and are about one foot high) with
Oro's assistance.
Of course 1 would be open to other solutions as they pertain to being placed on my
property to protect my residence and agricultural land from the offending industrial
properties.
Sincerely,
~~ - GLo. ~ c Jd--~'
Irena-W. (Versha) Szczebior
liws
'\
, (- -, .A
,~,r u~ ..l......:. { ()..~~(...._ (. L.
, _,..:l__
n
',.:./..~.(
-
/;,."'./ .....
'....
S0 -~
THE CORPORATION OF THE
, 1~~~~;d:*~~'i'-j.:t~; :~; .i~;~.~::~~~t'.~T~r;~.~-';.:.;:~~ ;':~~'~~:'"/' :~;.;;Z:'" ;.f'f.f(:~,,;::~:~
148 Line 7 S.. Box 100
Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
TOWN~I1IP
rg/V-orJ#b~
Phone (705)487-2171
Fax (705) 487-0133
www.township.oro-medonte.on.ca
November 20,2001
Ms. Versha Szczebior
279 Line 4 South
R. R. #1
SHANTY BAY, Ontario
LOL 2LO
Dear Ms. Szczebior:
Thank you for your correspondence with regards to the buffering of 279 Line 4 South.
'\' ; ,1.
/ .~ I
The pLe.sent Official Plan policies of the Township of Oro-Medonte for buffering involves
the requirement by industrial/commercial properties abutting residential properties to
construct adequate buffering and would be addressed under Site Plan Control. Under
these Ple~ent cogtLols... the only property required to construct this buffer is the property
owned by Ericana Industries Inc., which borders along your north property line, if they
were to add more than twenty-five (25) percent floor space to their existing buildings. In
conversation with the owners of this property, there are no plans to expand their existing
operation in the near future, but have been made aware that buffering would be a
condition of Site Plan Control if and when expansion takes place.
~ ~ ~ ."r
, " ,(. "
.~
,..\
\
~
~ As neither Ericana Industries Inc. or. Duncor Enter:e.rises Inc. are subject to Site Plan
\,' c Control Agreements, the Township has no means of requiring them to construct
'\, 'buffering or screening ,at this present time. Jess-Cor HOldirigsTn'c-:!s-under a Site Plan
. ," Control Agreement butCfr'el1Dt required to construct buffering or screening, as their
,~,:;~., . :;. property is not abutting a residential property. Mr. Vandergeest, the owner of Jess-Cor
:,""','\ Holdings Inc., has indicated he is willing to-I2lant_tr.e.es_..atQog,_the south limit of his
.. ,.' property, which will provide screening of his property in the fut!,!re. /,
, -
Your reference to loud, irritating, beeping noises was a temporary condition, which
occurred during placement of fill in the Jess-Cor property, and is a requirement by law
for all industrial/commercial vehicles while travelling in reverse.
..,
. . ./2
5^C( ~q
Page Two
Letter to Versha Szczebior
Re: Buffering of 279 Line 4 South
November 20,2001
At the Regular Committee of the Whole Meeting, which you attended on Wednesday,
October 24, 2001, a solution for your consideration to your concerns was suggested to
construct a ~n your property. The Township is willing tQassist YOU by constructing
a burm on your property when municipal projects allow the opportunity. 7
1
Please contact the undersigned, in writing, with your intentions pertaining to this
solution.
Sincerely,
\.
'J
j -. '
{' ,< ,,'
'..~~ ,'., I
I
j
. .t___~/ ....::.--.---'
,
,"
-
, ,
Keith Mathieson, C.R.S.I.
Manager of Public Works
r"
KMlps
/.^-['
I ,
, c,
c.c. Jennifer Zieleniewski, C.A.O. . , p.Y-
Ian Beard, Mayor . y_c
I M~mbefs, of CQuncil fv~ ~-'
..- } \...C r- Cl 1" -J. fj.j, ') -I-u"* - 8-- r
!,J.....
, ..
- 1--- '<, t....
',. '., ," . c. . -'., l,,'..k. '.: ~t '- jv-'-'"
'.. J! ^,l"'Vv-'1
L-ct. (\. \..,~ .
./ '-.
I... r ,A..' ~~.... ,
~ I .
~~ cJii,'" ctv~:~'~'
~-- :....
.,
,..,..
(.(f)~ IUJfA.,''1 h f(o/c.c;t ~
/
'\ ~ ,;
~y",- i J.J:k.t:.<...,:rl'V I .:.,. /'
/'
I
. I
~ /--
~
/ .L."
;,-, I
! i "
v
....,.-......-.1. .
\:.
r'
......~.. .
~..,.
'-' t ."-
"/...,;"
/ ;_........~
.' '< . t.--..,.,._..
./' -
. "Iof.,_,_
,
-' e.-,.-;,,-~1-
....
.--'
~.- .
: ().. '.
"'Q'\..~
\ .
,;;... ..
.'......
~'
"..,../
". ~.. - "-. .."'). -
-
'!. :.,
L':~~}-<
'.
, i~" ~_.1
;
..,-' ~
r/
"
... ",-,"
, '"
....-'
r'-.-,
( r'~ -'
,-,-
-/' .
- '
!'e,
I ,,,_
I L......
~"_..
,
\ \ ',-
...' ) , - \,.'
~$v
f'f. ...,r
D v"../\,"" . ~
1,_ ,[) \ 'l..-Q,.'t ,,_Y Q...
, _ ~'f p..--' j'.J<. ,. .,'
.I -i ./ J:.:.~."'.. (~ of ....:- ~ ......1.
,
I,
'-
'-.'.
--~....~_..
'.'
. !f'" .-.
t'... \..:: :..-
-'
l J ~ J. t:'
"'---.-....... --...
I
, '-'~,
- .,
"..J
, ,
,.- c
::Ja -' 10
October 24,2001
STATEMENT RE #279 LINE 4 SOUTH (LOT 22, CONC.5, ORO)
AND NEIGHBOURING INDUSTRIAL PARK
First I would like to present some background, then my views, and then propose some
solutions.
The subject properties (159 acres) have been residential and agricultural pre-1870's.
The above properties have been in my family since 1986. Prior to that my father rented
the land since 1967 and used it for agricultural purposes, both crops and pasturing cows.
It has always been an agricultural enterprise, both owned and rented. In August of 1999 I
moved onto the farm in the pursuit of a peaceful country existence free from stress.
Hamm's, the adjoining industry was small, but expanded last year in 2000, therefore
should still be covered under Section D7.,5.1 (more than 25% expansion of the floor area
may be subject toSite Plan Control.) Duncor, a large construction company with loaders,
bulldozers, dump trucks, next to Hamm's was built recently, but its yard and machinery
area have become much larger in the last two years extending to the newly built last fall
in year 2000, Vandergeist Welding.
Within the two years that we moved into our idyllic retirement setting, we have watched
the adjoining business (Hamm's) expand with some storage of debris in view of my
laneway and yard, Duncor expand its line of trucks and heavy machinery further down
the field up to Vandergeist Welding which was built in 2000 with its tanks, machinery,
paint spraying equipment and its extremely high doors, all facing my front verandah,
laneway and yard.
No effort has been made by any of these three industrial sites to buffer the visual and
noise impacts of their businesses on my agriculturally and residentially zoned property.
The noise begins at about 6:00 a.m. with the Duncor trucks unloading and loading the
dump trucks, and by 6:30 a.m. there can be banging, spraying, welding, and the beeping
ofloaders up to approximately 11:45 p.m., six and sometimes seven days per week.
Think about this: shortly after 6 a.m. to almost midnight 6 - 7 days a week. There is no
weekend for us anymore.
In this past first week of October I seriously considered calling the Police at 10:30 p.m.
when the banging on pipes was so loud from Vandergeistjust as we were about to go to
sleep. I was so frustrated that I could think of no other recourse but to call the Police
because the noise was such a disturbance. I have been informed that Vandergeist does
have an afternoon shift working. How long before this becomes a fully fledged 3 shift 7
day operation? The doors which face my front and side"yard are about three stories high,
are always open, bright lights flooding out up to close to midnight, with banging, and
even loaders zipping around at bedtime, and then, we are awakened by the incredibly
loud banging of dump trucks unloading and loading shortly after 6 a.m. and trucks going
up the road or the beeping noise of loaders driving backwards.
...
5a -\1
Lot 22, Conc.5, Oro. 279 Line 4 South & Industries
-2
We cannot leave our windows open at night in the summer, or in am home on my day
off on Friday, or on weekends, we cannot leave them open during the day either.
At times the noise of trucks or machinery literally creates vibrations inside our house.
We keep our blinds closed in the living room and dining room which face these doors, at
all
times after dusk. When we decided upon this farm as our future retirement home, many
thousands of dollars were spent on repairs after years' of tenants neglect, including an old
fashioned verandah to sit on warm summer nights and to enjoy the sounds, sights, and
smells of the nature. Now we cannot sit on our lovely verandah because of the noise and
visual impact of these industries' activities, all of which face my home. In addition to
banging, grinding, whistling, beeping and welding, there are major dust clouds of what I
assume is spray paint used to complete very large welding jobs, which billows into the
air sometimes for days at a time in the humid, heavy and still air of the summer. Surely
this in itself is an environmental and health hazard.
My family's quiet enjoyment of our retirement home has been severely curtailed by the
noise and visuals. Any animals (cows, horses, sheep) which may roam about would be
adversely impacted by all of these noises, and as well my property value and resale
potential has been severely affected as confirmed by Royal LePage.
These all amount to environmental pollution, noise pollution, visual pollution due to the
long lineup of heavy duty machinery, storage trailers, trucks, loaders, signs, lights, tanks
and items waiting to be repaired, and possibly hazardous chemical pollution due to the
spray painting fumes, all in close proximity to a farm and residence. I refer you to the
photos previously sent to Mr. Beard and extra copies that I have with me now.
To this purportedly environmentally-conscious Council, and I refer now to Mr. Beard's
election campaign brochure in which he stated that "in the interest of keeping Oro-
Medonte beautiful, I will not be placing any signs. I do not believe that anyone who
cares about the township's'natural appearance or our environment would pollute it to win
an election" (see copy) I maintain that this situation is infinitely more environmentally
pollutant than signs which can easily be removed, and to the suggestion that nothing
can or will be done, I say this is not acceptable. These industries are interfering with
my daily life to the point where I am about to call the police to report the noise. There
must be a solution to this distressing, intolerable situation barring trying to sell it off at a
pittance since no-one else wants to live or raise livestock or horses next to this tumult
which is obviously worse in spring, summer and fall.
Add to this mix the Cleamet tower eyesore, the traffic congestion, noise, garbage from
the drive-in as well as regular vandalism, and the Line 4 South does not appear to be a
place where anyone would like to reside or farm, unless of course Council upholds and
enforces the existing official plan or amends it. Or is my family forced out of our
retirement home, or Oro, because a solution cannot be found?
5a - ,~
Lot 22, Conc.5, Oro, 279 Line 4 South & Industries
....
-:} -
As I read Section D7.5.1 it appears that "new" uses would apply to Vandergeist Welding
which was just built.
B) states "adequate buffering from adjacent residential uses shall be provided on site"
The dictionary (Webster's, New Webster's) definition of "adjacent" is "lying near, close
at hand, neighbouring". I am adjacent to an entire industrial park, i.e., park being more
than one industry. Whether Council uses their selective interpretation of "adjacent" as
"abutting" is irrelevant since I am in fact "adjacent" (i.e. lying near or close) to not one
industry, but an entire industrial park.
In G) it says where a proposed use abuts (next to) OR IS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY to an
existing residential use, fencing, landscaping, berming or a combination of these features
shall be utilized to ensure than there is adequate screening between the uses. This
sentence does not say just abuts, but in close proximity to. It does not define the distance
in feet, or meters, it simply says in close proximity. Look at these pictures from my
porch and yard, we are in close proximity.
In C) Buildings are designed to blend in with their surroundings and with other buildings
in this area. In my opinion, three storey high buildings with doors just as high with lights
coming out of them all evening do not qualify.
In d) it states buildings or structures on untreed sites shall incorporate landscaping to
enhance the site and surrounding area. These three industries are untreed, their
machinery and activities are in direct view of my front yard, living room, dining room,
porch,laneway. No effort has been made to beautify the areas directly affecting my
family. They decrease my property value immensely.
In addition I am told by the township that there is a noise bylaw and that there are no
specific times involved. It appears then that these industries are also in contravention of
the noise bylaws many days of the year.
In addition I began this process on June 5th, -2001 after waiting to see the outcome and
effects of these industries and their contribution being very disturbed by the activities,
and have received only one piece of correspondence dated July 11,2001 which states that
I would be advised of further action by Council. It has taken four months to reach this
point with virtually no communication from the township regarding the status. This is
not effective communication with taxpayers.
These 159 agricultural acres have been fanned and lived in since the mid 1800's. People
have lived here peacefully and quietly for well over a century. My European immigrant
parents owned the farm across from this one and have been Oro taxpayers since 1954 .
...
-'Ii C3
h ,{__
"--u
Lot 22, Conc 5., Oro, 279 Line 4 South & Industries
-4-
I have done by part - I have contacted Duncor, Vandergeist, and also planted 50
seedlings along one fence which of course will take decades to become an effective
barrier. I have contacted Council. I do not want to hear that nothing can or will be done.
In hearing this I do not feel adequately protected by Councilor the Township, and feel as
if I am being forced to leave my homestead and scuttle out of Oro.
The solutions to this situation lie in the Official plan in the sections I have read earlier.
Enforce the bylaws and the development policies. Make the industries (Hamm's which
may fall under the expanding by 25% section, Duncor which has seemingly expanded its
yard area, and the newly built Vandergeist Welding) take personal and community
responsibility and pride in complying with the Official Plan, with such barriers as
fencing, landscaping, benning, trees, opening doors facing the other way, or storing their
heavy equipment on the other side of the building.
Or, amend the plan to incorporate enforcement of these bylaws and extend enforcement
to old and new industries to indeed protect all residential and a2:ricultural taxpayers
from industrial pollution.
I respectfully request further consideration, discussion and a vote be taken on these
Issues.
"\ , /; .. \ . </
"'(1 ! ' J
'___~>\" /~L~ - Le/. ( L(tt.. ,.J-1Gz }i ~.~~:/xr~.c ,\LL..<..-r1
__ /~ ,,,,,,/ J
Irena-W. (Versha) Szczebior
/vs
cc: M. Pennycook, Clerk
Page 1 of 1
Main Identity
csq - 14
From: "versha john" <vjjohn@sympatico.ca>
To: <harry.hughes@township.oro-
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 5:06 PM
Subject: telephone conversation of July 13, 2001
As per your suggestion, I have sent e-mails to the CAO et al. However in response to a couple
of items you mentioned, Vandergeist had already piled up earth, (berms?) earlier this spring
facing my right of their large entrance door by the newly parked white transport storage trailer.
From their perspective these might be the berms you had mentioned they were to put in place
which of course do me no good.
As for the location of the buffering now and for future development going north to Cone.5,
ideally it should be down along my fence, from ConcA down to wherever the development
ends as you suggested. I believe buffering is to surround the perimeter of the industrial
development does it not? However, does this mean that Hamm's, my next door neighbour
would be solely responsible providing this, or would it be a shared responsibility among the
three industries? I did mention having the buffering by Duncor and Vandergeist's border
simply because I could not imagine Hamm's, which is minor in comparison, agreeing to provide
the length of buffering by my fencing, alone.
V. Szczebior
viiohn@sympatieo.ca
~
7/15/01
Page 1 of 1
Main Identity
54 ~)5
From: "versha john" <vjjohn@sympatico.ca>
To: <harry. hughes@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>; <ron. kolbe@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>;
<cao. township@oro-medonte.on.ca>; <neil. craig@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>;
<ian.beard@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 11: 15 AM
Subject: 279 Line 4S, Oro, BUFFERING OF NEIGHBOURING INDUSTRIES
Further to my letter of June 25, 2001, the situation with the neighbouring industry, Vandergeist
Welding in particular, is worsening. This business which sometimes stays open varying hours into the
evening (past 11 :30 p.m. on July 13th) as well as on weekends, is now doing very noisy all-day
grinding and whistling apparently being made by two separate machines relating to their business
functions which causes major dust clouds, as well as other large machines, transport storage trailers,
etc. being brought on site. This noise, visual and environmental pollution which has absolutely no
buffering/screening provisions, as well as the other industry, Duncor, adjacent to it, is becoming
intolerable.
To date I have not received a response to this matter. When may I expect a response and speedy
resolution?
Sincerely,
Versha Szczebior (Ms.)
vjjohn@sympatico.ca
'..
10/3/2001
Page I ot I
Main Identity
5{j - I b
From: "versha john" <vjjohn@sympatieo.ca>
To: <ian. beard@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>; <harry. hughes@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>;
<cao@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>; <neil. eraig@township.oro-medonte.on.ca>;
<ron. kolbe@townhip.oro-medonte.on.ca>
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 9:24 PM
Subject: 279 Line 4 South (Lot 22, Cone.S, Oro)
RE: BUFFERING/SCREENING OF 279 LINE 4 SOUTH (LOT 22,
CONC.5. ORO) FROM NEIGHBOURING INDUSTRIAL BUSINESSES
Further to my letter of June 25, 2001, the situation with the adjacent Vandergeist Welding
business is worsening daily, both in noise, visual, and environmental pollution. As of this week
there is now very noisy all-day grinding and whistling which also creates major dust clouds,
apparently caused by two separate jobs and pieces of machinery relating to their business
functions, as well as additional large machinery, transport truck storage etc. being brought on
site.
To date I have not received a response from Council. When may I expect to hear proposed
solutions to this distressing situation?
Sincerely,
Versha Szczebior (Ms.)
....
1 O/3f200 1
THE CORPORATION OF THE
C(j-i1
148 Line 7 S.. Box 100
Ora. Ontario LOL 2X0
TOWN~tIIP
-&/V-Of7#b~
Phone (705)487-2171
Fax (705) 487-0133
www.township.oro-medonte.on.ca
July 11,2001
Ms. Irena-Wieslaw (Versha) Szczebior
279 Line 4 South
RR#1
Shanty Bay, ON LOL 2LO
Reference: Neighbouring Industrial/Commercial Enterprises
Dear Ms. Szczebior:
Your correspondence dated June 25, 2001 with respect to the above-noted
matter was received by the Council of The Township of Oro-Medonte at the
Council Meeting held on July 4, 2001.
A motion was passed to refer your correspondence to staff for a report to Council
following a site inspection.
We will advise you of further action by Council in this regard following the site
inspection and Council's receipt of the report from staff.
R~spectfully, \
/ .i ~ J"
~~vcv ~U!~7 :<..t;-f!1;:;.-
Donna Worthington .J
Administrative Secretary
Idrw
c.c. Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO
Ron Kolbe, Director of BuildinglPlanning
50- {11
279 Line 4 South
R.R. # 1
Shanty Bay, Ontario LOL 2LO
June 25, 2001
The Corporation of the Township ofOro-Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
Attention: Mr. Ian Beard, Mayor
Mr. Neil Craig, Deputy Mayor
Mr. Harry Hughes, Councillor
Council as a Whole
Dear Sirs/Madams:
RE: 279 Line 4 South, (Lot 22, Cone. 5, Oro-Medonte)
The above property has been in my possession since 1986, and prior to that was owned,
rented and tenanted by others. My family physically moved onto this property in August
1999. At the time there was one building adjoining my property (Hamm's) and another
being built (Duncor). Within two years I have watched the adjoining business expand,
with a storage of debris in view of my laneway and yard, Duncor expand its line of trucks
and heavy machinery further down their industrial field; and a new industry (Van der Geist
Welding) built last fall with its tanks, machinery etc. and its high doors all facing my yard.
No effort has been made by these industrial/commercial enterprises to buffer the visual
impact of their business on my agriculturally zoned and residential area. I have contacted
Duncor to be told there is nothing they can do about it. Until a couple of weeks ago, the
DuncorNandergeist businesses began around 6 a.m. and were still going until 8 - 9 p.m.
with trucks dumping their load continually making very loud, irritating noise, beeping,
dust, etc. Vandergeist Welding also operates all day Saturday.
Many other townships such as Severn, Innisfil, Springwater- (site plan specific) have
buffering and general provisions on planting/fence etc. requirements in their zoning
bylaws to lessen both the noise and visual impacts of industry on their
residential/agricultural neighbours. For example a high berm with trees on top would
reduce noise as well as offer a visual barrier.
Enclosed are photographs which show the visual impact from my newly renovated front
porch. There must be some action taken by Council to minimize the effects of this rapidly
growing and expanding industrial park area on my property.
-5 fI- ,e;
Lot 22, Conc. 5, Oro-Medonte (279 Line 4 South)
- 2-
The quiet enjoyment of our home is being disturbed by noise, any animals which may
roam about on my properties will be adversely impacted, the unsightly aesthetics of these
industries is causing us frustration, interferes with our peaceful, private, country lifestyle,
as well as decreases the property value of my land and residence as I have been informed
by realtors.
I urge you, Mr. Mayor and Council to assess this situation promptly as this industrial park
continues to change and expand almost on a daily basis in the hope of alleviating the
impact on my family dwelling, as well as the impact of any other current or future
industriaVcommercial developments on adjacent residences or agricultural land in Oro-
Medonte.
Please respond in writing regarding Council's intentions to resolve this matter promptly
in a satisfactory manner.
Sincerely,
Q I A
, i' d
i., .( r Ai"
~ Li{~ ~!JJ Ij!j;)'~~'(;./~ ~{~~~
'-'
Irena-Wieslawa (Versha) Szczebior
/vs
r
.
,
\.
::Jb
.'
May 1, 2002
i
I
!
(
\
/!::~t;
#~ ~-;~~'
~; ~!t::
~, "~1f,,
Madame CI@tk
Box 100
OroMedonte, Ontario
LOL 2XO
Beth Bashford
5 Sugarbush Rd.
R.R. #4
Coldwater, Ontario
LOK IEO
835-3687
'.
'<"
"
Dear Madame Clerk,
We have just moved into the wonderful community of Sugarbush, in Oro Medonte, and
are enjoying it immenseJy. 1 was however, rather shocked to find that it is lacking a
community park/playground. This just does not seem right for an area so filled with
youngsters. hi fact, J have been told that there are so many children in this community,
that a second school bus was needed to transport this community's youngsters to school.
11 does not take a large park to satis~y the playfulness of a great number of youngsters.
I'm sure we've aU had the wonderful opportunity to watch many children making good
use of a somewhat smaU playground. For children, any type of playground is an asset.
Playgrounds not only help youngsters build strong social skills, essential attributes in
ones future, but parents alike often gain valuable contacts, experiences and knowledge
from others while sharing time at the local playground. The old saying; "it takes a vilJage
to raise a child", surely must have been making some form of reference to the local
gathering spot - the playground!
With this letter, I am asking you, Madame Clerk, to bring to council for consideration, a
request for a playground for the Sugarbush Community.
) look forward to your reply.
..
Sincerely,
,
~~
Beth Bashford
The Corporation of the
County of
Simcoe
May 6, 2002
Tel: (705) 726.9300
Fax: (705) 726.9832
Beeton Area: (905) 729.2294
Administration Centre
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1XO
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Telephone Extension 289
Members of Council
Township of Oro Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
Dear Members of Council:
I would like to extend congratulations from the County of Simcoe to you and your
residents for the recent receipt of a Municipal Waste Minimization A ward from the
Recycling Council of Ontario.
The awards are held annually, and are designed to recognize municipalities, regional
governments and groups of municipalities that divert a significant percentage of waste
from disposal. Both historic improvement in waste minimization performance over the
past three years and overall performance in the year 2001 (measured in kg of waste per
capita) was considered.
Bronze Award Winners, such as the Township of Oro-Medonte, are municipalities that
generated between 216-280 kg per capita, a 20% reduction from the estimated provincial
average.
We are very proud of our resident's efforts towards waste diversion, and are pleased with
the relationship that has developed between the County and your municipality with
respect to waste management programs. We look forward to continuing co-operative
efforts in the future to achieve new and ambitious diversion goals.
S/l& ~
Mark Aitken
Director
Environmental Services Department
County of Simcoe.
~~e-4
Rosanne Fritzsche
Waste Reduction Officer
@
b q-/
TION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
TION OF THE CITY OF ORIlLIA
N OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
and
*
Part of lot 19, Concession 7
Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe
Designated as Part __ on Plan SlR-
(0 CI-cZ
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE, THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ORILLIA and THE
CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
and
*
Agreement of Purchase and Sale
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. DESCRIPTION AND PURCHASE PRiCE........................................................ 5
2. DE PO S IT .............................................................. ............................................ 5
3. PRICE ADJUSTMENT AND SURVEy............................................................. 5
4. ACCEPTANCE AND CLOSING DATES .......................................................... 6
4.1. Irrevocable Date............................................................................................................................... 6
4.2. Acceptance Conditional................................................................................................................... 6
4.3. Completion Date .............................................................................................................................. 6
5. MUNICIPAUINTERNAL SERVICING .............................................................. 6
6. BUILDING PERMITS AND SITE PLAN ........................................................... 6
6.1. General.............................................................................................................................................. 6
6.2. Site Plan ............................................................................................................................................ 6
7. PURCHASER'S CONDITIONS ........................................................................ 7
7.1. Zoning, Use and Restrictions .......................................................................................................... 7
7.2. Soil Conditions and Environmental Tests...................................................................................... 7
7.3. Notice re Conditions ........................................................................................................................7
8. PURCHASER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND COVENANTS ..................... 8
8.1. Acknowledgement Regarding Registered Title ............................................................................. 8
8.2. Acknowledgement Regarding Management and Covenants........................................................ 8
8.3. Land Sale Policy ............................................................................................................................... 8
8.4. Purchase "AS IS" ............................................................................................................................. 8
8.5. Airport Operational Policies and Liability.................................................................................... 9
8.6. User Fees ........................................................................................................................................... 9
8.7. Capital and Operating Improvements ........................................................................................... 9
9. PURCHASERS DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND SECURITy................. 9
9.1. General.............................................................................................................................................. 9
9.2. Security ........................................................................................................................................... 10
9.3. Defa ul t............................................................................................................................................. 11
10. TITLE MATTERS ........................................................................................ 11
10.1. Requisition Date ......................................................................................................................... 11
10.2. Title ............................................................................................................................................. 11
10.3. Documents of Title ..................................................................................................................... 11
11. GENERAL PROVISIONS ............................................................................ 12
11.1. Realty T axes ............................................................................................................................... 12
11.2. Conditions................................................................................................................................... 12
11.3. Time of the Esseoce.................................................................................................................... 12
11.4. T eoder ......................................................................................................................................... 12
11.5. Family Law Act Compliance.....................................................................................................12
12. AMENDMENTS AND OTHER GENERAL MATTERS ................................ 12
13. NON ASSIGNMENT .................................................................................... 13
14. NON-MERGER AND SEVERABILITY OF COVENANTS........................... 13
15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS .................................................................. 13
16. SCHEDULE "A" .......................................................................................... 15
17. SCHEDU LE "B" .......................................................................................... 21
. ... . ." ...,.~~. _______.L_ __~__u..._
~C\-3
fa C( - '-/
THIS AGREEMENT made
,2002
BETWEEN:
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ORILLIA
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF
ORO-MEDONTE
(the "Vendors")
- and -
*
(the "Purchaser")
1. DESCRIPTION AND PURCHASE PRICE
The Purchaser hereby offers to purchase from the Vendors the property located in the Township of
Oro-Medonte consisting of
( ) commercial airport development lot(s) located within
the South-West Commercial Development Area (Airside) of the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport more
particularly described as Part of Lot 19, Concession 7, fonnerly in the Township of Oro, now in the
Township of Oro-Medonte designated as Part(s) _ on Plan 51R-
and comprising
approximately
( ) acre(s) in area (the "Property") at a purchase price of
Dollars ($
Cdn,) calculated at the rate of
Dollars ($
Cdn.) per acre, in accordance with the tenns
contained herein.
2. DEPOSIT
The Purchaser submits herewith the sum of
Dollars ($
Cdn.) by cheque payable to the
Vendors' solicitor, upon acceptance, as a deposit to be held in trust, pending completion or other
tennination of this Agreement and to be credited towards the purchase price on completion, and the
Purchaser further agrees to pay the balance of the purchase price, by cash or certified cheque, on
closing, subject to the adjusnnents contemplated herein.
3. PRICE ADJUSTMENT AND SURVEY
The Vendors and Purchaser agree that the purchase price is calculated at the rate of
Dollars ($
Cdn.) per acre and the Vendors agree to provide to the Purchaser, at the Purchaser's expense, a
surveyor's certificate as to the precise acreage of the Property, at least thirty (30) days before the
closing date, whereupon the purchase price to be paid shall be adjusted accordingly. Such certificate
shan be final and binding upon the Vendors and the Purchaser. If required, a reference plan describing
the property being purchased shall be prepared at the Purchaser's expense prior to closing.
4. ACCEPTANCE AND CLOSING DATES
4.1. Irrevocable Date
The Purchaser agrees that this offer shall be irrevocable by it until 5:00 p.m. on the day of
, 2002, after which time, if not accepted, this offer shall be nuH and void and the deposit shall be
returned to the Purchaser without interest or deduction.
4.2. Acceptance Conditional
The Purchaser acknowledges that any acceptance of this offer by anyone or more of The Corporation
of the City of Barrie, The Corporation of the City of Orillia or The Corporation of the Township of
Oro-Medonte is conditional upon acceptance and approval of the tenns of this offer by each of the
respective Councils for the Vendors.
4.3. Completion Date
This Agreement shall be completed on the
day of
,2002. Upon completion, vacant
possession of the property shall be given to the Purchaser.
5. MUNICIPAUINTERNAL SERVICING
The Purchaser acknowledges that the Property is a serviced lot for which all municipal services or
privately owned and maintained services including paved roads, hydro, water, sanitary sewers and
stonn drainage ditches will be available on or before closing or which the Vendors shaH provide
within a reasonable time foHowing closing. The Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that it will be
responsible for any fees to install and connect laterals to existing sanitary sewers, water, hydro and
natural gas supply at the standard charges imposed by the Vendors, the Township of Oro-Medonte
and/or other utility suppliers providing electrical and/or similar service connections. Such standard
charges are in addition to any other applicable charges that the Vendors, Lake Simcoe Regional
Airport or governmental authorities or agencies are entitled to or required to coHect in connection
with the development and use of the Property by the Purchaser.
6. BUILDING PERMITS AND SITE PLAN
6.1. General
The Purchaser agrees to comply with all building codes, land use or other municipal by-laws of the
Township of Oro-Medonte, any other statutory requirements and payment of the fees as would be
applicable to the owner of a property not related to aeronautics located within the Township of Oro-
Medonte.
6.2. Site Plan
The Purchaser agrees that it will apply, at its cost, for site plan approval and a building pennit for
construction of all buildings or other structures to be located on the Property. The Purchaser shaH
provide to the Vendors and the Township of Oro-Medonte's Planning and Development Department a
site plan in compliance with the Township of Oro-Medonte's site plan requirements and, without
ro C\-5
limiting the generality of the foregoing, will show on such plan the location of the building(s) and
outside storage, the ITont elevation of the building(s), the exterior building materials, the landscaping
treatment and the screening of outside storage parking areas, access point for groundside and airside
access, signage, outside lighting, lot grading and details regarding all proposed materials to be used in
connection with construction of driveways, parking areas, taxiways, and aprons, all in accordance
with municipal zoning regulations and the Vendors development regulations.
7. PURCHASER'S CONDITIONS
This Offer shall be subject to the fulfillment of the following tenns and conditions on or before the
day of ,2002:
7.1. Zoning, Use and Restrictions
The Purchaser satisfying itself that the Property is zoned so as to pennit the construction and
operation of airplane hangar buildings and there are no restrictive covenants running with the property
that would in any way derogate ITom the zoning, use or the construction of airplane hangars and
related facilities (save and except as set out in Schedules "A" and "B"). For greater certainty, the
pennitted uses shall include those related to commercial aviation pennitting aircraft storage,
maintenance and repair, aircraft finishing, sales, fixed base operations, commercial aIr servIces,
charter flight services and flight training but not including ultra light aircraft.
7.2. Soil Conditions and Environmental Tests
The Purchaser conducting soil and environmental tests and investigations on the Property in order to
satisfy itself as to the environmental condition of the Property and that the results of such tests are
acceptable to the Purchaser in its sole discretion. The Purchaser shall, at its cost, supply copies of all
test results and reports to the Vendors upon receipt of same and agrees to secure any consents for use
by the Vendors that may required in this regard.
7.3. Notice re Conditions
In the event the Purchaser is not satisfied with the results of such investigations conducted pursuant to
Sections 7.1 and 7.2 above, the Purchaser may, by written notice to the Vendors, delivered on or
before 5:00 p.m. on the
day of
, 2002, tennmate this Agreement. In such event, the
deposit shall be returned forthwith to the Purchaser, without interest or deduction and the Vendors and
the Purchaser shall be released from their respective obligations hereunder. For purposes of such tests
and investigation, the Vendors hereby grant to the Purchaser and its agents access to the Property and
the consent necessary to conduct all reasonable soil and environmental tests thereon.
:;~i=::~~;:I:.:~~r::~~:~:~~tto~~~\aGti"efjl9f;\G~i~AltIl#18ttIiF&\J~rilmatI~a~(lsale:',
!Cjty.~i'rie'8rid~j,{)5110102.1f16'PM951D9'Q2.II;"5'~P~GE6'0F'1 ~
o ~-b
8. PURCHASER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND COVENANTS
8.1. Acknowledgement Regarding Registered Title
The Purchaser acknowledges that title to the Property is registered in the name of The Corporation of
the City of Barrie as trustee in accordance with the tenns of an Agreement made between The
Corporation of the City of Barrie, The Corporation of the City of OriJJia and The Corporation of the
Town of Oro-Medonte which Agreement is dated the day of _, 2002 and registered on
title as Instrument No.
8.2. Acknowledgement Regarding Management and Covenants
The Purchaser acknowledges that the Vendors have established the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport
facility (the "Airport") as an aerodrome in accordance with the Airports Act and the Municipal Act
and have empowered a commission incorporated as Lake Simcoe Regional Airport ("LSRAC") to
operate and manage the Airport in compliance with the Air Regulations (Canada). In accordance
with the tenns of the Agreement referred to in paragraph 8.1 above, the LSRAC is authorized to
manage, operate, maintain and improve the airport facility including the establishment and
enforcement of aU rules and regulations relating to the use and operation of the Airport. In addition,
the Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that LSRAC has authority, as manager of the Airport, to
enforce the tenns of aU agreements and covenants entered into with, or imposed for the benefit of, the
Vendors. In furtherance of this, the Purchaser acknowledges a~d agrees that the title to the Property
will be subject to the Agreement set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto and the covenants in the
fonn attached hereto as Schedule "B". The Purchaser agrees to execute copies of the covenants in
fonn suitable for registration on title to the Property at the time of closing.
8.3. Land Sale Policy
The Purchaser acknowledges that the Property is being sold by the Vendors pursuant to the Land Sale
Policy and Airport Development Regulations in effect at the date of this Agreement and the Purchaser
acknowledges having been provided with copies of these documents prior to execution of this
Agreement. The Purchaser agrees that it shaU be bound by the tenns of the Land Sale Policy and
Airport Development Regulations and shaH execute an acknowledgement to this effect for delivery on
closing.
8.4. Purchase "AS IS"
The Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that it is purchasing the Property in its present condition, "as
is" and, subject to the tenns contained herein, has conducted or shaH conduct aH inspections during
the conditional period set out in Section 7.3that it reasonably requires to detennine if the Property has
been used as a waste disposal site or contains waste as that tenn has been defined and/or designated
pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario) or any federal legislation of similar type or
nature and that the Vendors make no representation or warranty concerning the soil and/or
environmental condition of the Property at the time of sale. The Purchaser further acknowledges and
C:\WinO()Ws\tfimi>\T&V;$aleao~fu;Q9ma~clOc:m;~J\\":OrX\jim\aGtive files\GorpBr<!te mallers'Jsr<! matlem\land 63le
...lireBmen~' ~ale1il9reemeA,t'08maytJ2.d~1I4i.c:>'~:';;' . .';'. .
!()ttYij,fiBal"ii8iand\'$1~OIOZ'1n6PMDSt.'9t1&~PAGE'H)F'1
0q-7
~ q-~
agrees that it has conducted or shan conduct such tests as it deems necessary to determine to its
satisfaction, that the soil conditions for the Property are satisfactory to support the development and
construction of the building and other structures contemplated for its proposed use ofthe Property.
8.5. Airport Operational Policies and Liability
The Purchaser acknowledges that the LSRA may be required to temporarily close certain portions of
the Airport facility for maintenance, security and safety purposes or in accordance with any
operational policies that may be invoked from time to time which the LSRAC deems necessary for the
safe and responsible operation of the airport. In addition, the LSRAC may deem it expedient to
impose noise abatement requirements, operating curfews and other measures to minimize impact
from airport operations on the surrounding area. The Purchaser agrees that the Vendors and LSRAC
shan not be liable for any loss or damage claims arising from the interruption or restriction of the
Purchaser's business operations as a result of such temporary closure or the imposition of such
requirements provided they are consistent with the normal operation of an airport facility.
8.6. User Fees
The Purchaser acknowledges that the LSRAC reserves the right to implement user fees for land, use
of ramps, airport parking facilities for aircraft and motor vehicles as well as after hour call-out
charges. The Purchaser agrees that it shan be responsible for payment of any such fees that may be
imposed from time to time provided they are reasonable and in keeping with the normal operation of
an airport facility.
8.7. Capital and Operating Improvements
The Purchaser acknowledges that the Vendors or the LSRAC shan not be required to make any capital
or operating improvements to the airport facility to accommodate any increase in traffic arising from
the Purchaser's business operation. The decision regarding capital or operational improvements to
the airport facility rests solely with the Vendors and the LSRAC and it shan not be liable for any
claims of loss or damages arising from any decision by the Vendors and the LSRAC not to make such
capital or operating improvements.
9. PURCHASERS DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND SECURITY
9.1. General
The Purchaser covenants with the Vendors that the Purchaser shan, at an times during and subsequent
to the construction of the airplane hangar buildings to be constructed on the Property as contemplated
in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, comply with and adhere to the fonowing
requirements which shall be implemented and/or enforced on behalf of the Vendors by the LSRAC:
(a) an lot grading shan be maintained in accordance with plans approved by the LSRAC
and the Township ofOro-Medonte;
cc:\witidows\teffiPlr8vfSaleilareement;OOni<iY02:docm:.':','.orkljim'.3Gtivs'filss'.G~9i;Hemattsl'S\.IsFa.maIteFli\laRtlSale
1JgraemeFltIF&\'sale'agAlsI'!'eRt g8ma~:!;cl9G ' ,
;Clty of ~Barrie ani:lc~'1)5'1 OJ021:16;PM05/09lO:!:II'1!iAMPAGE'8 cOF 1
(b) all construction debris and rubble of any kind shall be promptly removed from the
Property and disposed of in accordance with applicable Federal, Provincial and
municipal laws as soon as possible during each phase of the construction of any
improvements made to the Property;
(c) no construction material which is unrelated to construction of the airplane hangar
buildings and related improvements as approved by LSRAC shall be stored on the
Property;
(d) all construction shall be carned out with minimal disturbance to adjacent lands and the
Purchaser shall take all necessary steps to ameliorate and rectify any such disturbance
immediately upon request by LSRAC;
(e) all measures reasonably necessary to ensure adequate siltation control is maintained
throughout the construction phase shall be implemented to the satisfaction of LSRAC
and the Township of Oro-Medonte until such time as construction and landscaping
work have been completed in accordance with the approved site plan.
The Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that the foregoing covenants are in addition to any
requirements for site plan approval that may be imposed by the Township of Oro-Medonte for
development ofthe Property.
9.2. Security
On closing, the Purchaser shall deposit with LSRAC a letter of credit issued by a Schedule 1
Canadian Bank in a fonn reasonably satisfactory to LSRAC to cover the cost of any action that LSRA
may reasonably be required to take to enforce or remedy the breach of any of the covenants set out
above. The security shall be deemed to include provisions for the liability of the Vendors and
LSRAC:
(a) for holdback(s) pursuant to subs 17(4) ofthe Construction Lien Act, 1990; and,
(b) for the estimated costs of all the Purchaser's obligations under Section 9.1 above.
During construction of the building and improvements on the property, LSRAC may, if so requested
by the Purchaser, and as elements of the construction are completed, reduce the amount of the security
and LSRAC may cause the security to be reduced to such amount as LSRAC detennines is reasonably
necessary to ensure that the Purchaser's covenants set out above are fulfilled to the satisfaction of
LSRAC. The Purchaser acknowledges that the security required pursuant to this paragraph shall be in
addition to any security required by the Township of Oro-Medonte in connection with approval for
development of the Property.
9.3. Default
If, in the opinion of LSRAC, the Purchaser shall be in breach of any of the covenants set out in
Section 9.1 above, then, in addition to any other remedies that LSRAC may have, LSRAC shall
'c:lw'rIdOws\templJ'ev sale aQreemerifWmav02.docm:lmla'll\\,'Gr1<\jim13Gth'o filos\GGrpGFate matters\lsra matter-s'land sale
"g~emeFil\re" saleag~em9Rt iJ8may02doG
City of Barrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05I09I02-9+:\.5.AMPAGE 9 OF 1
~ C\ -"
promptly notify the Purchaser, and its surety, in writing of such breach. If such breach is not
remedied within seven (7) clear days of such notification, then LSRAC shall be immediately entitled
to draw upon the security and take such other actions as in the opinion of LSRAC are required to
rectify such breach, including the right to enter on the Property, the right to purchase materials and the
right to employ workers, all at the expense of the Purchaser. The cost of such work shall be
calculated by LSRAC and its decision in this regard shall be final. The cost of such work shall
include a management fee not exceeding TWENTY PERCENT (20%) of all labour, material and
machine time charges incurred to complete such work. The Purchaser acknowledges that the
foregoing remedies are in addition to any remedies the Township of Oro-Medonte may have pursuant
to its site plan agreement to be executed for development of the Property.
10. TITLE MATTERS
10.1. Requisition Date
The Purchaser shall be allowed until 5:00 p.m. on the
, 2002 to examine the title
day of
to the Property at the Purchaser's expense.
10.2. Title
Title to the Property shall be good and free from all encumbrances, except as provided herein and
except for any minor easements to public utilities required for the supply of utility services to the
Property. If, within the time allowed for examining the title, any valid objection to title or to the fact
that a commercial use may not be lawful on the Property is made, in writing, to the Vendors, and
which the Vendors are unable or unwilling to remove, remedy or satisfy, and which the Purchaser will
not waive, this Agreement, notwithstanding any intermediate acts or negotiations in respect to such
objections, shall be at an end and all deposit moneys paid prior to termination shall be returned
without deduction except as specifically provided herein and the Vendors shall not be liable for any
costs or damages. Save as to any valid objections so made by such day and except for objections
going to the root of title, the Purchaser shall be conclusively deemed to have accepted the Vendor's
title to the Property as provided herein.
10.3. Documents of Title
The Purchaser shall not call for the production of any title deed, surveyor any other evidence of title
to the Property, except such as are in the possession or control of the Vendors or as may be
specifically provided for herein. The Transfer/Deed of Land shall, save for the Land Transfer Tax
Affidavit which shall be prepared and completed by the Purchaser, be prepared in registerable form at
the expense of the Vendors.
c:\wll1dowsltemii\l'e" sale a'Qreementt)!}maV02;docffl:~la1"J'.woFk\jim\aGti"e' flles'.GOrpOFatematteFt'ls.amatteFli\ lanEl sale
ag~ment\Fe"sale alJr~emenl OSmayQ2.EloG , " '
,C~;9fBarrie.and':; 0511 0102.1 :16, PMII5/99I02!1:~ 6 ~1'!AGE::IOOF1
fo 0.-10
o a-It
11. GENERAL PROVISIONS
11.1. Realty Taxes
Realty taxes shall be apportioned and allowed to the date of completion, the day itself to be
apportioned to the Purchaser.
11.2. Conditions
The Vendors and the Purchaser agree that there is no condition, representation or warranty of any
kind, express or implied, that the future intended use of the Property by the Purchaser, is or will be
lawful, except as may be specifically stipulated elsewhere in this Agreement.
11.3. Time of the Essence
Time shall, in all respects, be of the essence hereof provided that the time for doing or completing of
any matter provided for herein may be extended or abridged by an agreement in writing signed by the
Vendors and the Purchaser or by their respective solicitors who are specifically authorized in that
regard.
11.4. Tender
Any tender of documents or money hereunder may be made upon the Vendors or the Purchaser or
their respective solicitors on the day set for the completion of this Agreement. Money may be
tendered by a bank draft or cheque certified by a Chartered Bank, Trust Company, Province of Ontario
Savings Office, Credit Union or Caisse Populaire.
11.5. Family Law Act Compliance
The Vendors shall provide evidence on closing that the provisions of the Family Law Act relating to
matrimonial homes do not apply to this transaction and that spousal consent is not required.
12. AMENDMENTS AND OTHER GENERAL MATTERS
Notwithstanding any tenns or conditions outlined in the typewritten portion herein, any provisions
handwritten into this offer shall be the true tenns and shall supersede the typewritten portion in
respect to the parts affected thereby, provided they have been initialed by the parties hereto. This
Agreement shall constitute the entire Agreement between the Purchaser and LSRA save as aforesaid
and there is no representation, warranty, collateral agreement or condition affecting this Agreement or
the property or supported hereby other than as expressed herein in writing. This Agreement shall be
read with all changes of gender or number required by the context.
13. NON ASSIGNMENT
This Agreement may not be assigned, transferred or otherwise encumbered by the Purchaser without
the prior written consent of the Vendors, which consent may be unreasonably and arbitrarily withheld.
-c:lWindOWSltemp\rev.sale aareemenl09maYo2.dOCRl:\mlawlw9iK\jim'.;!Gti",e files\e9FJ19l'ate matlel'&\lsl'3matters\lanll sale
:agF89I1'1ent\re>' &3IeagreementJI8m~.1I9G ".'
cCity<lf..Barrieand *,0511 0/021:16 :PMOSIQ9m~PAGE 110F1
b C( - I ~
14. NON-MERGER AND SEVERABILITY OF COVENANTS
The covenants, obligations and agreements (the "Covenants") made in this Agreement and in any
schedule, document, certificate or other instrument delivered by or on behalf of the Purchaser in
connection with the transaction contemplated hereby, shall be deemed to be Covenants made
pursuant to this Agreement and all such Covenants shall survive the date of execution hereof and
the completion of the purchase and sale contemplated herein and shall continue in full force and
effect following same. If any Covenants contained in this Agreement shall, to any extent, be
invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of such Covenants or the application thereof to such
parties, persons or circumstances, other than those in respect of which it is held invalid or
unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and each of the Covenants made pursuant to this
Agreement shall be separately valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.
15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
This Agreement will enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the undersigned parties and their
respective successors and permitted assigns; no party may assign this Agreement except in accordance
with the provisions of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS the Parties have set their corporate seals under the hands of their authorized signing
officers.
*
P~ ch
Name:
Title:
I have authority to bind the corporation
Per: cis
Name:
Title:
I have authority to bind the corporation
'c:\whidowsliernD\rev sale aQreement 09mav02.docm:\mla'v'work\jlmlaGti\'e files\Gorparate maliteFSllsra maliters'Jamlsale
agreemeRt're" sale agreemeRt OSmay02.doG
cCltyofBarrle and~.05l10'02 1:16PM05109'02 9:15 !\!'APAGE 12 OF 1
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
Mayor
Clerk
We have authority to bind the corporation.
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ORILLIA
Mayor
Clerk
We have authority to bind the corporation.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF
ORO-MEDONTE
Mayor
Clerk
We have authority to bind the corporation.
~oWs\temp\revsale aQreement09mav02.docm:lmlaw\work\jimlaGlive files\GolJlorate matterG\lsra matters'lanE! sale
agr.eement\rev !Oale agr~
Cjty~f,Barrie and " 05/10/021 :16 PMOSIQII/02 9:15 .'\MPAGE 13 OF 1
~C\-\3
16. SCHEDULE "A"
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT dated as of the _ day of
,2001.
BETWEEN:
[.] [insert correct legal name ofthe three municipal owners of the lands]
(collectively the "Transferor")
- and -
[.] [insert name of Purchaser]
(the "Transferee")
WHEREAS:
A. The Transferor and the Transferee entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale dated
,2002 (the "Purchase Agreement") in respect to the acquisition by the Transferee of the
lands and premises described as [.] (the "Lands");
B. The Purchase Agreement requires the Transferee to execute an agreement setting forth the basis on which
the Transferee shall develop the Lands; and
C. The Transferee and Transferor have agreed to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth in this
Agreement and the sum of $10 paid by each of the Transferor and the Transferee to the other and for other
good and valuable consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged), the parties
hereto covenant and agree as follows:
1. The Transferee covenants and agrees that it will, within one (1) year of the date of registration of the
Transfer of the Lands from the Transferor to the Transferee, complete construction thereon of an airplane
hangar building or buildings on the Lands, to cover not less than twenty (20%) percent of the land area, in
accordance with the municipal zoning, building and other by-law requirements or approval processes of
c:lwilldowsltemolrev sale aQreement C9maV02.docm:\mla':'\WC)rk\jimlactive files\GorpeFate mattersj.l&Fa matterslland sale
agreement\rev sale agreement 08may()2.dOG
CityofcBarrie and', 05110/021:16 PMOSIOOI()2..~PAGE 14 OF 1
~ 0\- Ii
~ ~-IS
the Township of Oro-Medonte for the development of the Lands including alJ requirements for the
issuance of a building permit and the granting of site plan approval by the Township of Oro-Medonte,
The Transferee also agrees to obtain the approval Lake Simcoe Regional Airport (the "LSRAC"), to its
plans for any construction to be undertaken on the Lands and to complete construction of such building or
buildings within one (1) year of the start of such construction. The Transferee covenants to deliver to the
LSRAC, in writing, at LSRAC'S management office in the LSRAC Terminal Building a schedule of the
times of commencement of construction and completion of buildings and shall keep LSRAC informed by
written notice of any changes in the schedule and of any delay in construction times which occurs or
might occur.
2. If the Transferee does not start and complete construction of the airport hangar building or buildings on
the Lands, in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 1 above, within the periods therein set out, the
Transferor shall have the option of repurchasing the Lands from the Transferee at ninety (90%) percent of
the original purchase price, without interest, and free from any and alJ encumbrances, and the Transferee
shall provide to the Transferor alJ cessations of charges and releases of other encumbrances and execute
all transfers and assurances as may be requisite in order to transfer a good and marketable title to the
Lands to the Transferor within thirty (30) days of having been requested to do so by the Transferor. The
said option may be exercised by the Transferor on sixty (60) days notice in writing at any time, provided
that the Transferee may, at any time after three (3) years from the time of default, give notice in writing to
the Transferor at the [City Clerk's Office, City Hall, 70 Collier Street, Barrie, Ontario], with a copy to the
Airport Manager at the LSRAC at R.R. #2, Oro Station, Ontario requiring the Transferor to exercise the
option to repurchase the Lands as aforesaid. If, after receiving such notice from the Transferee, the
Transferor does not exercise its right to repurchase the Lands by giving notice in writing, mailed to the
address for service of the Transferee as shown on the Transfer, of such intention within ninety (90) days of
receipt of the said notice from the Transferee, then the Transferor's right to repurchase the Lands under the
provision of this paragraph shall terminate.
3. Construction of the buildings shall be considered to be commenced when a building permit has been
obtained and the forms for the footings are in place. The building shall be considered to be completed
when substantial performance has taken place, as such is defined by the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O.
1990 subject to any delays resulting from fires, strikes, floods, acts of God, or the Queen's enemies, or
lawful acts of Public Authorities, or delays caused by materia! suppliers or common carriers which cannot
reasonably be foreseen.
c:\windowsltemolrev sale aareement 09mavOZ,docm:'.mJaw'.Y/ork'.jim\aGti'Jo filesls91'jaoFata mattersllsra mattars'laAd sale
3greemeAtlre" s31e agreement Q8mayQ2,dos
,City of Banie and " 05110102 1 :16 PM06I{)9/{)2..9~PAGE15 OF 1
Coot-It:>
4. In the event that grading works are undertaken on the Lands prior to the issuance of a building permit and
preceding construction, the Transferee covenants to control erosion on or from the Lands by maintaining
vegetative ground cover or by installing erosion control facilities to the satisfaction of LSRAC and the
Township of Oro-Medonte.
5. Unless the covenants in paragraph 1 have been satisfied, the Transferee covenants that it will not sell or
transfer the Lands, or any part thereof, to any person, firm or corporation, without first offering in writing,
delivered to LSRAC and to the Transferee [c/o City Clerk's office, City Hall, 70 Collier Street, Barrie,
Ontario], to sell the Lands to the Transferor at a price equal to ninety (90%) percent of the original
purchase price paid by the Transferee to the Transferor, and free from any and all encumbrances. For the
purpose of this paragraph, if the Transferee is a corporation, the word "sell", in addition to its ordinary
meaning, shall be deemed to mean and include a sale or disposition of the corporate shareholding of the
Transferee by the person or persons who, at the date of the transfer of Lands by the Transferor to the
Transferee, holds or hold a majority of the corporate shares. The Transferor shall have ninety (90) days
from the receipt of an offer made by the Transferee, under the provisions of this paragraph, to accept such
offer. Such acceptance shall be in writing and mailed to the address for service of the Transferee as shown
on the Transfer. If the Transferor does not accept an offer to sell, made by the Transferee under the
provision of this paragraph, the Transferor's right, provided in this paragraph to repurchase the lands so
offered, shall tenninate. Provided however, that the Transferee may sell or otherwise transfer the said land
to a subsidiary or affiliate corporation as defined in the Business Corporations Act. R.S.O. 1990, without
first so offering to sell the Lands back to the Transferor provided such subsidiary confirms the acceptance
of the within building covenants and the offer of re-sale in this paragraph and expressly undertakes in
writing to comply therewith, by execution of such documents, in confirmation thereof, as the Transferor
may require.
6. The Transferee covenants and agrees to pay all monthly airport maintenance charges and applicable user
fees that are applicable to permit airside access from the Lands. The airport maintenance charges shall be
established concurrent with the transfer of the Lands and shall be adjusted annually based on the
Consumer Price Index subject to full review every five (5) years. The failure to pay the monthly airport
maintenance charges and applicable user fees wiJ] result in prohibition of airside access from the Lands to
the airport lands retained by the Transferor and operated by the LSRAC and. in additions. wiJ] result in
c:\wlndows\teiTIb\rev sa"~aor&eiTIeTlt09m3v02.doclJI:!1JI13wiw9Fk'jilJl\ac:.tive fileslGGl'peFate 'AilHtor<;:\ISFa, mlHteR;\13Rd sale
3greement\re>.' sale agreement OSmay02.dGc
City of Barne and', 05/10/02.1:16 PM05I09102 Q'15l'MPAGE 16 OF 1
b Q - \ 7
cessation of water and sanitary sewer service. Interest on delinquent amounts shall be calculated and
payable based on The Bank of Canada's Prime Lending Rate in force from time to time plus 3%.
7. The Transferee acknowledges that the LSRAC has provided for the supply of water and sanitary sewer
services. The Transferee covenants and agrees that it shall be responsible for payment of user fees
assessed by the LSR..A.C to provide these services, such fees to be established concurrent with the transfer
of the Lands and reviewed annuaIJy thereafter. Failure to pay the monthly user fees will result in cessation
of water and sanitary sewer service. Interest on delinquent amounts shaH be calculated and payable based
on The Bank of Canada's Prime Lending Rate in force from time to time plus 3%. In addition, the
Transferee agrees that any amounts outstanding with respect to user fees shall form a charge against the
Lands in favour of the Transferor until such time as the said amounts have been paid in full together with
all interest accruing and costs of enforcement on a solicitor and client basis.
8. The Transferee agrees to maintain the Property and aIJ buildings or improvements constructed thereon in
good condition and appearance in accordance with the requirements of a first class airport facility and as
may be required to comply with property standards by-Jaws in force in the Township of Oro-Medonte
from time to time or such reasonable property standards and maintenance requirements adopted by the
LSRAC in the operation of the airport facility.
9. The Transferee shall, at any time and from time to time, in the event of the sale, mortgage, lease, ground
lease or other disposition of any interest in the Lands or any part thereof, obtain from any person so
purchasing, mortgaging, leasing or acquiring any such interest, their agreement in favour of the Transferor
to perform each of the covenants, obligations and agreements of the disposing party hereunder (including
but not limited to those in this paragraph ) in the same manner and to the same extent as if originally
named in this agreement as the disposing party, and in consideration thereof the other party shall confirm
to the person acquiring such interest the benefits of this agreement; provided however that any such
agreement executed by any mortgagee shall provide that such mortgagee shall be obligated to perform the
covenants, obligations and agreements of the mortgaging party hereunder only for so long as the
mortgagee shaIJ be in possession of any of the mortgaged property (either directly or indirectly by way of
agent, receiver or receiver and manager) or shall have taken any steps to realize on its mortgage security.
c:\wil1dowsltemo\rev sale aQreement,09mav02.docm:\mlaw\werlAjim\aGti>le fileE'coFl'OFate matters'.I!;", matlerslJaml sale
agreement're>: sale agreement Q8may02.doc
.city of Barrie and', 05110/021:16 PM05lOQtQ~PAGE 17 OF 1
10. The parties shaH with reasonable diligence, provide to each other such further instruments or documents
or assurances and do al1 such other things as may be necessary and expedient to effect the purposes of this
Agreement and carry out its provisions.
11. Time shal1 be of the essence of this Agreement.
12. This Agreement shal1 be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of
Ontario.
13. This Agreement shaH enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective
successors and assigns.
14. This Agreement is conditional on compliance with the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 50, as may be
amended from time to time.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have set their corporate seals under the hands of their
authorized signing officers.
[. ]
Name:
Title:
Name:
Title:
JlWe have authority to bind the Corporation.
[. ]
Name:
Title:
c:lwindolNsltemplrev sale aareement'09mav02.docm:lmla\"\:/'QAI'.jimlaGti"9 files'ssrpsrale matters'Jsra matters'JaRd sale
aeFeemeRl'rev sale aereemeRt OSmay02.doc
City of Barrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05,109,102 9:15 ~.MPAGE.180F 1
~C\-18
Name:
Title:
IIWe have authority to bind the Corporation.
M:\MLAW\WORK\JIMIACTIVE FILES\CORPORATE MATTERS\LSRA MATTERS\LAND SALE AGREEMENTlREV SALE AGREEMENT
15FEB02,DQC
c:\windows\templrev sale aQreement09mav02.docm:'.mla,u\werk'JimlaGlj"e files'sel'j!erate matters\lera ",a"erellana sale
ag<eement\re" eale "!Jreement Q8mayQ2.eec
City,ofBarrie and', 051101021:16 PM~-AMPAGE19 OF 1
0C\-,Q
17. SCHEDULE "B"
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
1. The Transferee, to the intent that these covenants shall run with the lands hereinafter described as the
Servient Lands (and any part thereof) for itself, its successors and assigns covenants promises and agrees
with the Transferor, its successors and assigns of the lands hereinafter described herein as the Dominant
Lands, that the Transferee and its successors in title, from time to time, of all, or any part or parts of the
Servient Lands. will observe and comply with the stipulations, restrictions and provisions herein set forth,
and that nothing shall be done upon the said lands or any part thereof in breach or violation or contrary to
the fair meaning of the said stipulations, restrictions and provisions contained herein.
2, The Servient Lands are described as Ie]. The Dominant Lands are described as Ie].
3. The Tranferee agrees not to commence construction of any buildings, structures, driveways, parking areas,
taxiways, aprons, or any other improvements upon the Servient Lands without first satisfying and
complying with the Township of Oro-Medonte's zoning, building and other municipal by-laws or
requirements and approval processes (including, without limitation, the submission to the Township of
suitable building and plot plans showing the exact location of all buildings (including elevations), outside
storage areas, building materials to be used, landscaping, groundside and airside access, signage, outside
lighting and grading) currently necessary for the issuance of a building permit and site plan approval by
the Township of Oro-Medonte. The Transferee acknowledges and agrees that the Township of Oro-
Medonte's municipal requirements may be subject to amendment in the future and the Transferee agrees
to not commence any such construction in the future without first complying with such amended
municipal requirements, proyjded such amended municipal requirements are of general application and
apply to other properties located within the Township of Oro-Medonte,
4. The Transferee shall not commence any construction on the Servient Lands without first retaining the
services of a professional architectural firm satisfactory to the Transferor to design and ensure that the
construction of the development on the Servient Lands wiIJ be complimentary to the buildings in the area,
c:lwi"dowsl!emolrev sale acream.,"! 09mav02.docm:\mlaw'l'ler1<ljimlaGtive files'.Gel"j3GFate malter-s\lsFa matterE'JaRs 631e
ag<eeme"t'rI>V sale 3greemeRt 08m3)'02 SGG
City of Barrie and', 05/10/02 1:16PM~PAGE 20 OF 1
o 0\ -dO
~ c\-d.\
5, The Transferee agrees that prior to the commencement of construction on the Servient Lands. it wiJ] first
obtain the approval of the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport (the "LSRAC") to its plans for any construction
to be undertaken on the Servient Lands.
6. The Transferee covenants that it shall not dispense, sell or otherwise store aviation fuel or related products
on or within the Servient Lands and acknowledges that the Transferor reserves the exc1usive right to store
and sell aviation fuel and related products to users of the airport. Failure to comply with this restrictive
covenant wiJ] result in the prohibition of airside access from the Servient Lands in addition to any other
remedies that the Transferor may have. This prohibition shall not prevent the Transferee from allowing the
storage of aircraft in the nonnal course of its business operations on the Servient Lands.
7. The Transferee covenants that it wm not conduct any business activity on the Servient Lands in direct
competition with services provided by or business conducted by the Transferor or the LSRAC (without
their prior written consent which consent may be unreasonably and arbitrarily withheld) and which the
Transferee acknowledges may include, with limitation, outside aircraft storage and tie down amd freight
handling including air sufferance and/or bonded warehouse activities,
8. The Transferee covenants and agrees that it win not engage in any activities on the Servient Lands which
do not comply in an material respects with the requirements of Federal or Provincial legislation applicable
to the operation of the LSRAC as wen as any Airport Operations Manual in force from time to time or any
other airport policies as implemented from time to time.
9. The Transferee covenants that it shall not prevent entry onto the Servient Lands by the Transferor, the
LSRAC and/or their respective personnel at reasonable times and at reasonable intervals to ensure
compliance with the pennirted uses, Federal, Provincial and/or municipal law including environmental
protection legislation or in the event of an emergency. The Transferee covenants that it will not prohibit
access by the Transferor, its agents or servants from entering upon the Servient Lands in order to conduct
Phase I, Phase n and Phase ill environmental audits at their discretion and at such time or times as they
may detennine. The Transferee covenants that it will not use or store on the Servient Lands any
hazardous material or environmental contaminants except in accordance with governmentally approved
procedures and agrees to keep the Servient Lands free of all environmental contaminants as required by all
applicable laws. The Transferee shall be responsible for the cost of clean up and for any costs, losses or
damages suffered by the Transferor and the LSRAC arising from a breach of this covenant.
.c:lwindowsltemolrev sale aQreement 09maV02.docm:\mlawlwQrk\jimlactj'le filet'.eorj3eFate mattersllera mattero'lanG sale
agreement\re" sale agreement Q8may02.GQG
CltyofcBarrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05lO9!02 9:15 J'.MPAGE 21 OF 1
b C\ - ~d...
10, The Transferee, for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, further covenant, promise
and agree with and to the Transferor, its successors and assigns, that the Transferee his heirs, executors,
administrators and assigns, will not, at any time and from time to time, sell, mortgage, lease, license,
franchise or otherwise part with possession or title of any part or all of the Servient Lands, without first
exacting from any person, finn or corporation so purchasing, mortgaging, leasing, licensing, franchising or
otherwise occupying the Servient Lands, similar covenants to those contained in these restrictive
covenants for the benefit of the Transferor, its successors and assigns.
11. Each covenant and agreement contained herein shall be construed to be a separate and independent
covenant and agreement. If any tenn or provision contained herein or the application thereof to any
person or circumstance shall to any extent be invalid or unenforceable the remainder of these covenants
shall not be affected thereby and each tenn and provision shall be valid and shall be enforced to the extent
pennitted by law.
c:lwindowsltemp\rev sale aareement{)9mav02.dOcm:l,mlaw\w9r1<'JimlaGtive files\C9rper-ate matterol,lsr-a matters\lana sale
agreemenl'rev sale agreement g8~
City of Barrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05/()9~PAGE 22 OF 1
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE, THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ORILLIA and THE
CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
and
*
Agreement of Purchase and Sale
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. DESCRIPTION AND PURCHASE PRICE........................................................ 5
2. DE P~S IT ................................. ......... ................................... ................ ............. 5
3. PRICE ADJUSTMENT AND SURVEy............................................................. 5
4. ACCEPTANCE AND CLOSING DATES .......................................................... 6
4.1. 1 rrevoca ble D ate............................................................................................................................... 6
4.2. A ccePta nce C ondi tio na I................................................................................................................... 6
4.3. Completion Date .............................................................................................................................. 6
5. MUNICIPAL/INTERNAL SERVICING ..............................................................6
6. BUILDING PERMITS AND SITE PLAN ........................................................... 6
6.1. Genera!.............................................................................................................................................. 6
6.2. Si te Plan ............................................................................................................................................ 6
7. PURCHASER'S CONDITIONS ........................................................................ 7
7.1. Zonin\!. Use and Restrictions ..........................................................................................................7
7.2. Soil Conditions and Environmental Tests......................................................................................7
7.3. Notice re Conditions ........................................................................................................................7
8. PURCHASER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND COVENANTS ..................... 8
8.1. Acknowled!!ement Re!!ardin!! Re!!istered Title ............................................................................. 8
8.2. Acknowled!!ement Re\!ardin!! Mana!!ement and Covenants........................................................ 8
8.3. Land Sale Policy ............................................................................................................................... 8
8.4. Purchase "AS IS" ............................................................................................................................. 8
8.5. Airport Operational Policies and Liabilitv ....................................................................................9
8.6. User Fees........................................................................................................................................... 9
8.7. Capital and Opera tin!! Improvements ........................................................................................... 9
9. PURCHASERS DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND SECURITy................. 9
9 .1. General.............................................................................................................................................. 9
9.2. Securih' ........................................................................................................................................... 10
9.3. Def a ul t............................................................................................................................................. 11
c:\windows\temp\rav sala aQreemant 08mav02.docm;\mIaw\w<>r.kiiimlacti"e.fiIes\GGrPGfate.mattefslJsra
mattars\land sale aQreement'.rev sale aQreement Cl8rnav!J2.oosm:\mI:a'#',work'Jimlasti\'e files'sorporate ma~eR>\lsra
~"""....<'>o_\'''''_''' -c;...I.......graSmoRt\:-9". ,&318 ,3are9mBAt15feb02~doc
.....,..1"'''''_''''..<')'')..
~ ct - ;;(3
10. TITLE MATTERS ........................................................................................ 11
10.1. ReQuisition Date......................................................................................................................... 11
10.2. Title ............................................................................................................................................. 11
10.3. Documents of Title ..................................................................................................................... 11
11. GENERAL PROVISIONS ............................................................................ 12
11.1. Realty Taxes ............................................................................................................................... 12
11.2. Conditions...................................................................................................................................12
11.3. Time of the Essence.................................................................................................................... 12
11.4 . Tender ......................................................................................................................................... 12
11.5. Family Law Act Compliance..................................................................................................... 12
12. AMENDMENTS AND OTHER GENERAL MATTERS ................................ 12
13. NON ASS IGNMENT .................................................................................... 13
14. NON.MERGER AND SEVERABILITY OF COVENANTS........................... 13
15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS .................................................................. 13
16. SCHEDULE "A" .......................................................................................... 15
17. SCHEDULE "B" .......................................................................................... 21
1. DESCRIPTION AND PURCHASE PRiCE........................................................ 4
2. DE PO SIT... ........................................................................... ............................ 4
3. PRICE ADJUSTMENT AND SURVEy............................................................. 4
4. ACCEPTANCE AND CLOSING DATES ..........................................................5
4.1. Irre"o ca ble Da te............................................................................................................................... 5
~ .2. . '\ cc ellta n cc ConI! itio nal................................................................................................................... 5
1.3. Comllletion Date .............................................................................................................................. 5
5. M U N ICIP AL SE RVICING ................................................................................. 5
6. BUILDING PERMITS AND SITE PLAN ........................................................... 5
8.1. C en era I.............................................. ................................................................................................ 5;
8.2. Site Plan ............................................................................................................................................ 5
7. PURCHASER'S CONDITIONS ........................................................................ 6
7.1. Zoning. Use and Restrictions ..........................................................................................................8
7.2. Sail Conditions anI! Em'ironmental Tests...................................................................................... 8
8. PURCHASER'S ACKNO'NLEDGEMENTS AND COVENANTS ..................... 6
c:\wlndowsltemD\revsale aoreement 08mav02,dOcm.lmlawlwork'iim\aGti"e files' GGrpOFate matters\ls.Fa
mattefs\Iarn:I 5310 aQreo~ale aQreemont 08maV02,90Gm:'mla'll\woFkJ.jim\aGt~.e files>.GorpOFale maliters\lsFa
malteF!!\laRQ saleaI!FeemeAt'"." saleal!l'8omeAt15feb02.GOG
Cityof'Barrie and,.~;05110/02 1 :16PM05I09Io>>~~gS'08'g2 5:12 PM "PAGE 3 OF ~
bC\-~'1
8.1. J'.ekno'\'ledgemcnt Regardillg Registered Title ............................................................................. Ii
8.2. .\clmowledgemellt Regardin;; l\Iallagemcnl ane Co.'enallts........................................................ 7
8.3. La n II Sa Ie Polie:; ............................................................................................................................... 7
8.1. Pllrebase "AS IS" .....................................,.......................................................................................7
8.5. .".irporl Operatlollal Policies ane Liability ....................................................................................8
8.0. L'ser Fees ........................................................................................................................................... 8
8.7. Capital and OJ3eraling Improyemenls ........................................................................................... 8
9. PURCHASERS DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND SECURITy................. 8
9.1. C en era I............................................................... ............................................................................... 8
9.1. Seell ri Iy ............................................................................................................................................. 9
9.3. Del'a 1111.......................................................................................................................... ..................... 9
10. TITLE MATTERS ..................................................................,..................... 10
111.1. Reqllisition Date ......................................................................................................................... 111
111.2. Ti lie ............................................................................................................................................. 111
111.3. Docllmenls of Title .....................................................................................................................111
11. GENERj\L PROVISIONS ............................................................................ 10
11.1. Reali)" Taxes ............................................................................................................................... 111
11.2. C oRllitl 0 ns ................................................................................................................................... 111
11.3. Time of IlIe EsscRce....................................................................................................................11
11.4. TeRde!" ......................................................................................................................................... 11
11.5. Family' Law :\et CompliaRee..................................................................................................... 11
12. AMENDMENTS AND OTHER GENERAL MATTERS ................................ 11
13. NON ASSIGNMENT .................................................................................... 11
14. NON MERGER AND SEVERABILITY OF COVENANTS ........................... 11
15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS .................................................................. 12
16. SCHEDULE "A" .......................................................................................... 14
17. SCHEDULE "B" .......................................................................................... 19
c:\windows\temp\rev sale ...g,..,el'lient08maV02;do~~~oorl>oratEl matteF5\lsFa
motters'.land sale af/reement'.re'/ sale-aG~maV02.docm:)mla'..'.work'Jim\acti"e files'.GorpOF3tEl mattElI'&'.lsF3
'matters\lal'ld, sale~9reeme~\:"~v sale agFeElmeRI15fe1302.dot
. - ~---'-_._" --~"' -..
"At::!:: 4n~ 12M
0C{,;2S
b Ci .. ~b
THIS AGREEMENT made
,2002
BETWEEN
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ORILLIA
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF
ORO-MEDONTE
(the "Vendors")
- and -
*
(the "Purchaser")
1. DESCRIPTION AND PURCHASE PRICE
The Purchaser hereby offers to purchase from the Vendors the property located in the Township of
Oro-Medonte consisting of
( ) commercial airport development lot(s) located within
the South-West Commercial Development Area (Airside) of the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport more
particularly described as Part of Lot 19, Concession 7, fonnerly in the Township of Oro, now in the
Township of Oro-Medonte designated as Part(s) _ on Plan 51R-
and comprising
approximately
( ) acre(s) in area (the "Property") at a purchase price of
Dollars ($
Cdn,) calculated at the rate of
Dollars ($
Cdn.) per acre, in accordance with the tenns
contained herein.
2. DEPOSIT
The Purchaser submits herewith the sum of
Dollars ($
Cdn.) by cheque payable to the
Vendors' solicitor, upon acceptance, as a deposit to be held in trust, pending completion or other
tennination of this Agreement and to be credited towards the purchase price on completion, and the
Purchaser further agrees to pay the balance of the purchase price, by cash or certified cheque, on
closing, subject to the adjustments contemplated herein.
3. PRICE ADJUSTMENT AND SURVEY
The Vendors and Purchaser agree that the purchase price is calculated at the rate of
Dollars ($
Cdn.) per acre and the Vendors agree to provide to the Purchaser, at the 'lendors'Purchaser's
expense, a surveyor's certificate as to the precise acreage of the Property, at least thirty (30) days
before the closing date, whereupon the purchase price to be paid shall be adjusted accordingly. Such
certificate shall be final and binding upon the Vendors and the Purchaser. If required, a reference plan
describing the property being purchased shall be prepared at the 'lendors'Purchaser's expense prior to
closing.
,c:\windows\temolrev sale aQreement08mav02.do~Gl'k\jimlaGth'e files\oorserate matter.s'lsra mat!ers\laRg Gale
aQreemeRt\rev sale aareemeRt OSmav02.gesm:\mla'll'm9rk\jimlaGti>lo file6',G91'p9Fate mattel'6\lSFamattoF6\1aRd sale
agreemeRtlre" 6ale agreemeRt 15fob02.d9G
City of Barrie and', 05/10/02 1:16 PMOS/W'02 9:11-AMOS'OS'02 5:12 PM PAGE 50F 1234
4. ACCEPTANCE AND CLOSING DATES
4.1. Irrevocable Date
The Purchaser agrees that this offer shall be irrevocable by it until 5:00 p.m. on the
day of
, 2002, after which time, if not accepted, this offer shall be null and void and the deposit shall be
returned to the Purchaser without interest or deduction.
4.2. Acceptance Conditional
The Purchaser acknowledges that any acceptance of this offer by anyone or more of The Corporation
of the City of Barrie, The Corporation of the City of Orillia or The Corporation of the Township of
Oro-Medonte is conditional upon acceptance and approval of the terms of this offer by each of the
respective Councils for the Vendors.
4.3. Completion Date
This Agreement shall be completed on the
day of
, 2002. Upon completion, vacant
possession of the property shall be given to the Purchaser.
5. MUNICIPAL/INTERNAL SERVICING
The Purchaser acknowledges that the Property is a serviced lot for which all municipal services or
privately owned and maintained services including paved roads, hydro, water, sanitary sewers and
storm drainage ditches will be available on or before closing or which the Vendors shall provide
within a reasonable time following closing. The Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that it will be
responsible for any fees to install and connect laterals to existing sanitary sewers, water, hydro and
natural gas supply at the standard charges imposed by the Vendors, the Township of Oro-Medonte
and/or other utility suppliers providing electrical and/or similar service connections. Such standard
charges are in addition to any other applicable charges that the Vendors. Lake Simcoe Regional
Airport or governmental authorities or agencies are entitled to or required to collect in connection
with the development and use of the Property by the Purchaser.
6. BUILDING PERMITS AND SITE PLAN
6.1. General
The Purchaser agrees to comply with all ~ building codes, land use or other municipal by-laws
of the Township of Oro-Medonte, any other statutory requirements and payment of the fees as would
be applicable to the owner of a property not related to aeronautics located within the Township of
Oro-Medonte~ in accordance with relcyant municipal by laws or other applicable legislation.
6.2. Site Plan
The Purchaser agrees that it will apply, at its cost, for site plan approval and a building permit for
construction of all buildings or other structures to be located on the ff'roperty. The Purchaser shall
provide to the Vendors and the Township ofOro-Medonte's Planning and Development Department a
site plan showingin con1Pliance with the Township of Oro-Medonte's site plan requirements and.
c:lwindowsltemplrev sale aareement 08may02.do~\wGfkli.~les\GOI'DGFate-matte~atters\laml-sale
<lpreem.RI're'i &31. apreement98m3y()2.docm:'.mJa\...'......eFl<'jimlaGt.\'.fjles\GerpeFate matteF&'.lsFa matter&\laR9 sale
asreemeRt\:'e-" sale as.eemeRt 15feb02.9GG
City of Barrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05IOOIQ2 9'11 .I\M05'08'02 5:12 PM PAGE 6 OF ~
0C1-d.7
o ct-~~
without limiting the generalitv of the foregoing. wi]] sho\\' on such plan the location of the b uilding(s)
and outside storage, the front elevation of the building(s), the exterior building materials, the
landscaping treatment and the screening of outside storage parking areas, access point for gToundside
and airside access, signage, outside lighting, lot grading and details regarding all proposed materials
to be used in connection with construction of driveways, parking areas, taxiways, and aprons, all in
accordance with municipal zoning regulations and the Vendors development regulations.
7. PURCHASER'S CONDITIONS
This Offer shall be subject to the fulfiHment of the foHowing tenns and conditions on or before the
day of , 2002:
7.1. Zoning, Use and Restrictions
The Purchaser satisfying itself that the J:rroperty is zoned so as to pennit the construction and
operation of airplane hangar buildings on each of the lots and there are no restrictive covenants
running with the property that would in any way derogate from the zoning, use or the construction of
airplane hangars and related facilities (save and except as set out in Schedules "An and "B"). For
greater certainty, the pennitted uses shaH include those related to commercial aviation pennitting
aircraft storage, maintenance and repair, aircraft finishing, sales, fixed base operations, commercial air
services, charter flight services and flight training but not including ultra light aircraft.
7.2. Soil Conditions and Environmental Tests
The Purchaser conducting shall have lmtil 5:00 p.m. on the
day of
, 2002 to conduct soil
and environmental tests and investigations on the J:rroperty f.tfTGin order to satisfY itself as to the
environmental condition of the Property and that the results of such tests are tmacceptable to the
Purchaser in its sole discretion. The Purchaser shaH, at its cost, supply copies of aH test results and
reports to the Vendors upon receipt of same and agrees to secure any consents for use by the Vendors
that may required in this regard.
7.3. Notice re Conditions
In the event the Purchaser is not satisfied with the results of such investigations conducted pursuant to
Sections 7.1 and 7.2 above, the Purchaser may, by written notice to b8RAthe Vendors, delivered on or
before 5:00 p.m. on the
day of
, 2002, tenrunate this Agreement. In such event, the
deposit shaH be returned forthwith to the Purchaser, without interest or deduction and the Vendors and
the Purchaser shaH be released from their respective obligations hereunder. For purposes of such tests
and investigation, the Vendors hereby grant to the Purchaser and its agents access to the J:rroperty and
the consent necessary to conduct all reasonable soil and environmental tests thereon.
c:\windows\temp\rev sale aQreement 08mav02.doCJw.\mJawlwe<k\iim~I"&\GOr~_er.s\lsfa-matt&F&\lafld-5aI"
.aQreement>'"e'l sale a!1reement {)8rnavQ2.aoGm:'mlaw>'wol'k'Jim\aGtivo fjl@!;'Go~oFate matteF6'lsFa mattero\lana sale
"greementlr&>l sale agreement 15fobQ2.doe
,City of Barrie and', 05110/02 1:16PM05I09ro~ 'lMQ5.'QS.'Q2 5:12 PM PAGE 7 OF 12M
8. PURCHASER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND COVENANTS
8.1. Acknowledgement Regarding Registered Title
The Purchaser acknowledges that title to the Property is registered in the name of The Corporation of
the City of Barrie as trustee in accordance with the tenns of an Agreement made between The
Corporation of the City of Barrie, The Corporation of the City of Orillia and The Corporation of the
Town of Oro-Medonte which Agreement is dated the day of _' 2002 and registered on
title as Instrument No.
8.2. Acknowledgement Regarding Management and Covenants
The Purchaser acknowledges that the Vendors have established the Lake Simcoe Regiona] Airpor1
facility (the "Airport") as an aerodrome in accordance with the Airports Act and the Municipal Act
and have empowered a commission incorporated as Lake Simcoe Regional Airport ("LSRA!::") to
operate and manage the Airport in compliance with the Air Regulations (Canada). In accordance
with the tenns of the Agreement referred to in paragraph 8.1 above, the LSRA!:: is authorized to
manage, operate, maintain and improve the airport facility including the establishment and
enforcement of all rules and regulations relating to the use and operation of the Airport. In addition,
the Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that LSRA!:: has authority, as manager of the Airport, to
enforce the tenns of all agreements and covenants entered into with, or imposed for the benefit of, the
Vendors. In furtherance of this, the Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that the title to the pf3roperty
will be subject to the Agreement set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto and the covenants in the
fonn attached hereto as Schedule "B". The Purchaser agrees to execute copies of the covenants in
fonn suitable for registration on title to the pf3roperty at the time of closing.
8.3. Land Sale Policy
The Purchaser acknowledges that the ptJroperty is being sold by the Vendors pursuant to the Land
Sale Policy and Airport Development Regulations in effect at the date of this Agreement and the
Purchaser acknowledges having been provided with copies of these documents prior to execution of
this Agreement. The Purchaser agrees that it shall be bound by the tenns of the Land Sale Policy and
Airport Development Regulations and shall execute an acknowledgement to this effect for delivery on
closing.
8.4. Purchase "AS IS"
The Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that it is purchasing the PtJroperty in its present condition,
"as is" and, subject to the tenns contained herein, has conducted or shall conduct all inspections
during the conditional period set out in Section &27.3-that it reasonably requires to detennine if the
pf3roperty has been used as a waste disposal site or contains waste as that tem1 has been defined
and/or designated pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario) or any federal legislation of
similar type or nature and that the Vendors make no representation or warranty concerning the soil
and/or environmental condition of the pf3roperty at the time of sale. The Purchaser further
c:\w indows\!emp\rev sale ap reemen! 08mav02.doeo;;\m!awlwGrk\iim""'liw;-file$\oori><>r<ll&-matte.-s\!Sf<I-matlem\lanG-saJe
"weemeRt'.rev sale awee",e"! 08mav02.decm:\mlaw\u'erk\jimlacti'le files\cer.paFale mattel'6\lsFa malteF6\laRd sale
agreemeRt're" sale "groemeRI 15feb02.doc
City of Barrie and', 051101021:16 PM05Im1m~ PAGE 8 OF 12M
(P C( - ~q
b'1...30
acknowledges and agrees that it has conducted or shall conduct such tests as it deems necessary to
determine to its satisfaction, that the soil conditions for the ~property are satisfactory to support the
development and construction of the building and other structures contemplated for its proposed use
of the Eproperty.
8.5. Airport Operational Policies and Liability
The Purchaser acknowledges that the LSRA may be required to temporarily close certain portions of
the Airport facility for maintenance, security and safety purposes or in accordance with any
operational policies that may be invoked from time to time which the LSRAh deems necessary for the
safe and responsible operation of the airport. In addition, the LSRAb: may deem it expedient to
impose noise abatement requirements, operating curfews and other measures to minimize impact
from airport operations on the surrounding area. The Purchaser agrees that the Vendors and LSRAh
shall not be liable for any loss or damage claims arising from the interruption or restriction of the
Purchaser's business operations as a result Q.[.such temporary closure or the imposition of such
requirements provided they are consistent with the normal operation of an airport facility.
8.6. User Fees
The Purchaser acknowledges that the LSRAh reserves the right to implement user fees for land, use
of ramps, airport parking facilities for aircraft and motor vehicles as well as after hour call-out
charges. The Purchaser agrees that it shall be responsible for payment of any such fees that may be
imposed from time to time provided they are reasonable and in keeping with the normal operation of
an airport facility.
8.7. Capital and Operating Improvements
The Purchaser acknowledges that the Vendors or the LSRAh shall not be required to make any capital
or operating improvements to the airport facility to accommodate any increase in traffic arising from
the Purchaser's business operation. The decision regarding capital or operational improvements to
the airport facility rests solely with the Vendors and the LSRAh and it shall not be liable for any
claims of loss or damages arising from any decision by the Vendors and the LSRAh not to make such
capital or operating improvements.
9. PURCHASERS DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND SECURITY
9.1. General
The Purchaser covenants with the Vendors that the Purchaser shall, at all times during and subsequent
to the construction of the airplane hangar buildings to be constructed on the Eproperty as
contemplated in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, comply with and adhere to the
following requirements which shall be implemented and/or enforced on behalf of the Vendors by the
LSRAh:
c:\windows\temolrev sale a'Qreement 08maV02.docm.\mla...."..ork\jjm\3Gti./o files'corporate matters\lsr<HRatterfi\land &ale
aQreement\:e\' sale aQreement08ma'AJ:l.decm:'.mla't'\work\jimlaGtA'e Iiles!.eeFJIORlte matler-s\lsRI matlers\landsale
3groemenP"e'l sale agr~emeRt 15fe1302.doe
City of Banie and', 05/10102'1:16 f'M05/OQI029:11 AM05/0SIO:! 5:12 PM PAGE 9 OF llit
/
f..o q -31
(a) all lot grading shall be maintained in accordance with plans approved by the LSRA~ I
and the Township ofOro-Medonte;
(b) all construction debris and rubble of any kind shall be promptly removed from the
Property and disposed of in accordance with applicable Federal, Provincial and
municipal laws as soon as possible during each phase of the construction of any
improvements made to the .!:vroperty;
(c) no construction material which is umelated to construction of the airplane hangar
buildings and related improvements as approved by LSRA!;: shall be stored on the
.!:vroperty;
(d) all construction shall be carried out with minimal disturbance to adjacent lands and the
Purchaser shaH take all necessary steps to ameliorate and rectify any such disturbance
immediately upon request by LSRAL
(e) all measures reasonably necessary to ensure adequate siltation control is maintained
throughout the construction phase shall be implemented to the satisfaction of LSRA~
and the Township of Oro-Medonte until such time as construction and landscaping
work have been completed in accordance with the approved site plan.
The Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that the foregoing covenants are in addition to any
requirements for site plan approval that may be imposed by the Township of Oro-Medonte for
development of the Property.
9.2. Security
On closing, the Purchaser shall deposit with LSRA~ a letter of credit issued by a Schedule 1
Canadian Bank in a fonn reasonably satisfactory to LSRA~ to cover the cost of any action that LSRA
may reasonably be required to take to enforce or remedy the breach of any of the covenants set out
above. The security shall be deemed to include provisions for the liability of the Vendors and
LSRA~:
(a) for holdback(s) pursuant to subs 17(4) of the Construction Lien Act, 1990; and,
(b) for the estimated costs of all the Purchaser's obligations under Section 9.1 abovefuts
paragraph.
During construction of the building and improvements on the property, LSRA~ may, if so requested
by the Purchaser, and as elements of the construction are completed, reduce the amount of the security
and LSRA~ may cause the security to be reduced to such amount as LSRA~ detennines is reasonably
necessary to ensure that the Purchaser's covenants set out above are fulfilled to the satisfaction of
LSRA~. The Purchaser acknowledges that the security required pursuant to this paragraph shall be in
addition to any security required by the Township of Oro-Medonte in connection with approval for
development ofthe Property.
c:lwindo'Nsltemp\rev sale aQreemem08rriav02.d6~lwGfkIiim\aG~es\GGfI>OOIte-matten;\lsra matterSll:iAd saki
3Qreementlrev s31e agreement OBmay()2.sesm:'mla..II'....erJ<'JjmlaGli...e files'cerpeFate mattero'.lsFa mattel'6\1aAd sale
3greemeRtlF&v sale agreement 111eo02 dec
City of Barrie and'. 05110/021:16 PM05lO9~MOfj/08'02 5:12 PM PAGE 10 OF 1234
9.3. Default
If, in the opinion of LSRAS:;, the Purchaser shall be in breach of any of the covenants set out in
paragraph Section 9.1 above, then, in addition to any other remedies that LSRA.c may have, LSRA.c
shall promptly notify the Purchaser, and its surety, in writing of such breach. If such breach is not
remedied within seven (7) clear days of such notification, then LSRAS:; shall be immediately entitled
to draw upon the security and take such other actions as in the opinion of LSRAS:; are required to
rectify such breach, including the right to enter on the Property, the right to purchase materials and the
right to employ workers, all at the expense of the GwfiefPurchaser, its surety, or both. The cost of
such work shaH be calculated by LSRAS:; and its decision in this regard shaH be final. The cost of
such work shaH include a management fee not exceeding TWENTY PERCENT (20%) of all labour,
material and machine time charges incurred to complete such work. The Purchaser acknowledges
that the foregoing remedies are in addition to anv remedies the Township of Oro-Medonte may have
pursuant to its site plan agreement to be executed for development of the Property.
10. TITLE MATTERS
10.1. Requisition Date
The Purchaser shaH be aHowed until 5:00 p.m. on the
day of
, 2002 to examine the title
to the Property at the Purchaser's expense" and to bc satisfied that the airport commercial use
contemplated thercon is lawful.
10.2. Title
Title to the Property shall be good and free from all encumbrances, except as provided herein and
except for any minor easements to public utilities required for the supply of utility services to the
Property. If, within the time allowed for examining the title, any valid objection to title or to the fact
that a commercial use may not be lawful on the Property is made, in writing, to the Vendors, and
which the Vendors are unable or unwilling to remove, remedy or satisfy, and which the Purchaser will
not waive, this Agreement, notwithstanding any intennediate acts or negotiations in respect to such
objections, shall be at an end and all deposit moneys paid prior to tennination shaH be returned
without deduction except as specifically provided herein and the Vendors shall not be liable for any
costs or damages. Save as to any valid objections so made by such day and except for objections
going to the root of title, the Purchaser shaH be conclusively deemed to have accepted the Vendor's
title to the Property as provided herein.
10.3. Documents of Title
The Purchaser shaH not caH for the production of any title deed, surveyor any other evidence of title
to the Property, except such as are in the possession or control of the Vendors or as may be
specifically provided for herein. The Transfer/Deed of Land shall, save for the Land Transfer Tax
c:lwindowsltemplrev sale a!1reement ,08mav02,docm;.\mlaw\wGr~i~fles\oo_kHnatt&F&\lsr"-matten;IIaA<H;a1e
a!1reement're" sale agreement 08ma'102.eosm:'mlaw\war.k\jimlaGtive files..GaFpaFillemaIlOF5.ls....mallers.Jane sale
agreementlre" sale agreement 15#e902 lIaG
City of Barrie and" 05/10/021:16 PMOOIOO/02 9:11 AM05/0S/02 5:12 PM PAGE 11 OF ~
bet - ~ a.
~ q -33
Affidavit which shall be prepared and completed by the Purchaser, be prepared in registerable form at
the expense of the Vendors.
11. GENERAL PROVISIONS
11.1. Realty Taxes
Realty taxes shall be apportioned and allowed to the date of completion, the day itself to be
apportioned to the Purchaser.
11.2. Conditions
The Vendors and the Purchaser agree that there is no condition, representation or warranty of any
kind, express or implied, that the future intended use of the Property by the Purchaser, is or will be
lawful, except as may be specifically stipulated elsewhere in this Agreement.
11.3. Time of the Essence
Time shall, in all respects, be of the essence hereof provided that the time for doing or completing of
any matter provided for herein may be extended or abridged by an agreement in writing signed by the
Vendors and the Purchaser or by their respective solicitors who are specifically authorized in that
regard.
11.4. Tender
Any tender of documents or money hereunder may be made upon the Vendors or the Purchaser or
their respective solicitors on the day set for the completion of this Agreement. Money may be
tendered by a bank draft or cheque certified by a Chartered Bank, Trust Company, Province of Ontario
Savings Office, Credit Union or Caisse Populaire.
11.5. Family Law Act Compliance
The Vendors shall provide evidence on closing that the provisions of the Family Law Act relating to
matrimonial homes do not apply to this transaction and that spousal consent is not required.
12. AMENDMENTS AND OTHER GENERAL MATTERS
Notwithstanding any terms or conditions outlined in the typewritten portion herein, any provisions
handwritten into this offer shall be the true terms and shall supersede the typewritten portion in
respect to the parts affected thereby, provided they have been initialed by the parties hereto. This
Agreement shall constitute the entire Agreement between the Purchaser and LSRA save as aforesaid
and there is no representation, warranty, collateral agreement or condition affecting this Agreement or
the property or supported hereby other than as expressed herein in writing. This Agreement shall be
read with all changes of gender or number required by the context.
c:\windows\temp\rev sale aQreement 08mav02.doCR'H\mlaw\wGf1<\jim~les\GOri!GFat&-matt~""'att6l'&\laRd-&ale
aQreement're" s,,'e ""reeme,,! OS"""yQ2.do"",;I""'a,,,'\wGI'k\jimlaGlive filee\eerpGFate matteF6\lsFa matteF&\Jan9 sale
agr.eement'J'e" &ale agreement 15feb02.9Ge
City of Bame and', 05/10/021:16 PM05lQ9l0U~1 J'.M05/jj8JO~ PAGE 12 OF 1m
b ~-3Lf
13. NON ASSIGNMENT
This Agreement may not be assigned, transferred or otherwise encumbered by the Purchaser without
the prior written consent of the Vendors, which consent may be uilleasonably and arbitrarily withheld.
14. NON-MERGER AND SEVERABILITY OF COVENANTS
The covenants, obligations and agreements (the "Covenants") made in this Agreement and in any
schedule, document, certificate or other instrument delivered by Of on behalf of the Purchasef in
connection with the transaction contemplated hereby, shall be deemed to be Covenants made
pursuant to this Agreement and all such Covenants shall survive the date of execution hereof and
the completion of the purchase and sale contemplated herein and shall continue in full force and
effect following same. If any Covenants contained in this Agreement shall, to any extent, be
invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of such Covenants or the application thereof to such
parties, persons or circumstances, othef than those in respect of which it is held invalid or
unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and each of the Covenants made pursuant to this
Agreement shall be separately valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.
15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
This Agreement will enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the undersigned parties and their
respective successors and permitted assigns; no party may assign this Agreement except in accordance
with the provisions of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS the Parties have set their corporate seals under the hands of their authorized signing
officers.
*
P~ ch
Name:
Title:
I have authority to bind the corporation
Per: cis
Name:
Title:
I have authority to bind the corporation
c:lwindows Itemplrev sale aQreement 08may02,doc",*,,!awlw<>fl<\iimlat;tj__f~e&lGOI'PGI'a_atlef6\lsl'a_ef'6\I;IfIQ.&ale
aGFeemsnt'Fe" sale a!:lreemenI08m",AJ2.deem"mla",\weri<>jimlaeli'Je file6\eel'pGFate ma"eF6\lsFa matters\land sale
agreemeFlt'.e" sale agreement 1IifobQ2,dee
City of Barrie and', 05/10/02 1:16 PMQ5I.Q9~ PAGE 13 OF ~
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
Mayor
Clerk
We have authority to bind the corporation.
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ORILLIA
Mayor
Clerk
We have authority to bind the corporation.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF
ORO-MEDONTE
Mayor
Clerk
We have authority to bind the corporation.
c:lwindowsltemplrev sale aQreement 08mav02, docm7\m1aw\w<)Fk\iim\aGtiw;..filesIGGr~ttefS\lsr<l-ffiattel'SllaAd-6aIe
aaree,mentlre," sale alleeement 08ma...o2:GeGm:\ml~'f)workljim\aGti':e files\eorporate matteF6\lsra matteF6\1aRG sale
ag"eementlF&'/ eale,agRlemeRt 15feb02.doG '
Cityof,Barrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05I.o9I02 9:11 AMOS'Oa'02 5:12 PM PAGE 14 OF 1~
~C\-3S
I ";2/
tQ'1........1&:>
16. SCHEDULE "A"
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT dated as of the _ day of
,2001.
BETWEEN:
[0] [insert correct legal name of the three municipal owners ofthe lands]
(coHectively the "Transferor")
- and -
[ 0] [insert name of Purchaser]
(the "Transferee")
WHEREAS:
A. The Transferor and the Transferee entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale dated
, 200~+ (the "Purchase Agreement") in respect to the acquisition by the Transferee of
the lands and premises described as [0] (the "Lands");
B. The Purchase Agreement requires the Transferee to execute an agreement setting forth the basis on which
the Transferee shaH develop the Lands; and
C. The Transferee and Transferor have agreed to the tenns and conditions hereinafter set forth.
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth in this
Agreement and the sum of $10 paid by each of the Transferor and the Transferee to the other and for other
good and valuable consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged), the parties
hereto covenant and agree as foHows:
1. The Transferee covenants and agrees that it wi11, within one (1) year of the date of registration of the
Transfer of the Lands iTom the Transferor to the Transferee, complete start construction thereon of an
airplane hangar building or buildings on the Lands, to cover not less than twenty (20%) percent of the land
c:lwindowsltemolrev sale aareement 08mav02.docm;\mIawlwOFk\iim\aGtive-fiIes\ooFl>Gf'ate-mattef&\lsr.l-matter&\IaRd-sale
aQreemenllrev sale 3Qreement OSm3':02.desm:\m13w'.work'Jimlastive files\sol'peRlte mattOF6\1SFa matteF6\13Rd salo
agreemeRtIr.e>' sale agreemeRt 15feb02 clos
City of Barrie and ',05110/021:16 PM05IOO/02-1M-1 A'~05((1alO~ PAGE 15 OF ~
(, C\ -31
area, in accordance with the municipal zoning,_building and other by-law requirements or approval I
processes of the Township of Oro-Medonte for the development of the Lands including a11 requirements
for the issuance of a bui1ding pennit and the granting of site plan approval by the Township of Oro-
Medonte. The Transferee also agrees to obtain the approval Lake Simcoe Regional Airport (the
"LSRA~"), to its plans for any construction to be undertaken on the Lands and to complete construction
of such bui1ding or buildings within one (1) year of the start of such construction. The Transferee
covenants to deliver to the LSRA~, in writing, at LSRA~'S management office in the LSRA~ Tenninal
Building a schedule of the times of commencement of construction and completion of buildings and sha11
keep LSRA~ infonned by ""TItten notice of any changes in the schedule and of any delay in construction
times which occurs or might occur.
2. If the Transferee does not start and complete construction of the airport hangar building or buildings on
the Lands, in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph I above, within the periods therein set out, the
Transferor shaH have the option of repurchasing the Lands from the Transferee at ninety (90%) percent of
the original purchase price, without interest, and free from any and aH encumbrances, and the Transferee
shaH provide to the Transferor aH cessations of charges and releases of other encumbrances and execute
aH transfers and assurances as may be requisite in order to transfer a good and marketable title to the
Lands to the Transferor within thirty (30) days of having been requested to do so by the Transferor. The
said option may be exercised by the Transferor on sixty (60) days notice in writing at any time, provided
that the Transferee may, at any time after three (3) years from the time of default, give notice in writing to
the Transferor at the [City Clerk's Office, City HaH, 70 CoHier Street, Barrie, Ontario], with a copy to the
Airport Manager at the LSRA~ at R.R. #2, Oro Station, Ontario requiring the Transferor to exercise the
option to repurchase the Lands as aforesaid. If, after receiving such notice from the Transferee, the
Transferor does not exercise its right to repurchase the Lands by giving notice in writing, mailed to the
address for service of the Transferee as shown on the Transfer, of such intention within ninety (90) days of
receipt of the said notice from the Transferee, then the Transferor's right to repurchase the Lands under the
provision of this paragraph shaH tenninate.
3. Construction of the buildings shaH be considered to be commenced when a building permit has been
obtained and the fonns for the footings are in place. The building shaH be considered to be completed
when substantial perfonnance has taken place, as such is defined by the Construction Lien Act, R.S.O,
1990 subject to any delays resulting from fires, strikes, floods. acts of God. or the Queen's enemies. or
c:lwindowsltemplrev sale apreemen! 08maV02.docm;.\mlawlwG<kliim\a<;tiv<Hiles\GOr~kHnatter-&\l&l'OHfla\tef&\laRd-sale
"\1reement\re', &,,10 "\1roement ()8ma'A}2,deem:'.mla'N',wel'i<\jimlaetive files'.eel'perate matters'.lsFa matters\lafnJ sale
agreement'"e" sale agreement 15fob()2.dee
City of Barrie and', 05/10/021:16 PMGSr09102 9:11 ^-,!g5'08/g~ PAGE 16 OF ~
be\..3~
lawful acts of Public Authorities, or delays caused by materia] suppliers or common carriers which cannot
reasonably be foreseen.
4. In the event that grading works are undertaken on the Lands prior to the issuance of a building penTIit and
preceding construction, the Transferee covenants to control erosion on or from the Lands by maintaining
vegetative ground cover or by instaning erosion control facilities to the satisfaction of LSRA.[ and the
Township ofOro-Medonte.
5, Unless the covenants in paragraph 1 have been satisfied, the Transferee covenants that it wiJl not sen or
transfer the Lands, or any part thereof, to any person, finTI or corporation, without first offering in writing.
delivered to LSRAh and to the Transferee [c/o City Clerk's office, City Han, 70 Collier Street, Barrie.
Ontario], to sell the Lands to the Transferor at a price equal to ninety (90%) percent of the original
purchase price paid by the Transferee to the Transferor, and free from any and all encumbrances. For the
purpose of this paragraph, if the Transferee is a corporation, the word "sen", in addition to its ordinary
meaning, shan be deemed to mean and include a sale or disposition of the corporate shareholding of the
Transferee by the person or persons who, at the date of the transfer of Lands by the Transferor to the
Transferee, holds or hold a majority of the corporate shares. The Transferor shall have ninety (90) days
from the receipt of an offer made by the Transferee, under the provisions of this paragraph, to accept such
offer. Such acceptance shall be in writing and mailed to the address for service of the Transferee as shown
on the Transfer. If the Transferor does not accept an offer to sen, made by the Transferee under the
provision of this paragraph, the Transferor's right, provided in this paragraph to repurchase the lands so
offered, shall tenTIinate. Provided however, that the Transferee may sell or otherwise transfer the said land
to a subsidiary or affiliate corporation as defined in the Business Corporations Act. R.S.O. 1990, without
first so offering to sell the Lands back to the Transferor provided such subsidiary confinTIs the acceptance
of the within building covenants and the offer of re-sale in this paragraph and expressly undertakes in
writing to comply therewith, by execution of such documents, in confinTIation thereof, as the Transferor
may require.
6. The Transferee covenants and agrees to pay an monthly airport maintenance charges and applicable user
fees that are applicable to penTIit airside access from the Lands. The airport maintenance charges shaH be
established concurrent with the transfer of the Lands and shall be adjusted annually based on the
Consumer Price Index subject to fun review every five (5) years. The failure to pay the monthly airport
maintenance charges and applicable user fees wiJl result in prohibition of airside access from the Lands to
c:\w i"doVls Itemp\rev sale aareement 08mav02.docm;.lmIaw\weFk\jim\.aGliv~les\GOFl>Gfate-mattef5\161'a-matteF&1IaAd-&ale
3preement\ro" sale apree",e"t 08"'3'AJ2.dos"':'mla",\werkljimlaGlI'J. fileslsel'pel'al. malters\lsr.l malteF&\laruj sale
3greeme"I'.,.-&" sale agreeme"t 15feb02.oeG
City of Barrie and., 05110102 1:16 PM~-'l-AM05'G8102 5:12 PM PAGE 17 OF ~
the airport lands retained by the Transferor and operated by the LSRA.c and, in additions. wiU result in
cessation of water and sanitary sewer service. Interest on delinquent amounts shall be calculated and
payable based on The Bank of Canada's Prime Lending Rate in force from time to time plus 3%.
7. The Transferee acknowledges that the LSRA.c has provided for the supply of water and sanitary sewer
services, The Transferee covenants and agrees that it shall be responsible for payment of user fees
assessed by the LSRA.c to provide these services, such fees to be established concurrent with the transfer
of the Lands and reviewed annuaUy thereafter. Failure to pay the monthly user fees wi11 result in cessation
of water and sanitary sewer service, Interest on delinquent amounts shaU be calculated and payable based
on The Bank of Canada's Prime Lending Rate in force from time to time plus 3%. In addition, the
Transferee agrees that any amounts outstanding with respect to user fees shall fonn a charge against the
Lands in favour of the Transferor until such time as the said amounts have been paid in full together with
aU interest accruing and costs of enforcement on a solicitor and client basis.
8. The Transferee agrees to maintain the Propertv and al1 buildings or improvements constructed thereon in
good condition and appearance in accordance with the requirements of a first cJass airport facility and as
mav be required to comply with property standards by-laws in force in the Township of Oro-Medonte
from time to time or such reasonable property standards and maintenance requirements adopted by the
LSRAC in the operation of the airport facility,
<he Transferee shalI, at any time and from time to time, in the event of the sale, mortgage, lease, ground
lease or other disposition of any interest in the Lands or any part thereof, obtain from any person so
purchasing, mortgaging, leasing or acquiring any such interest, their agreement in favour of the Transferor
to perfonn each of the covenants. obligations and agreements of the disposing party hereunder (incJuding
but not limited to those in this paragraph ) in the same manner and to the same extent as if originally
named in this agreement as the disposing party, and in consideration thereof the other party shall confinn
to the person acquiring such interest the benefits of this agreement; provided however that any such
agreement executed by any mortgagee shall provide that such mortgagee shall be obligated to perfonn the
covenants, obJigations and agreements of the mortgaging party hereunder only for so long as the
mortgagee shall be in possession of any of the mortgaged property (either directly or indirectly by way of
agent, receiver or receiver and manager) or shall have taken any steps to realize on its mortgage security.
c:\windows\temp\rev sale a!jreement 08mav02,docrw.\mlaw\wol'k\iim\a<;\ivef1lesIGoH'orate-mat\el'S\lsra-matt&F&\lafKl.5ale
agreemeAI\re.. s~le aareemeAt 08mav02.deGm:\mlaw'meri<\jim'.aGli'/e fjles'.GOFflORHe mattaAl'.lsI'a ma"eAlllaRd sale
agreemeRt're" sale agreemeRt 15feb02.dOG
City of Barrie and', 05/10/021 :16 PM05I.oo~ PAGE 18 OF 1m
~ ct - 3 q
-9-:lJL The parties shaH with reasonable diligence, provide to each other such further instruments or documents
or assurances and do aH such other things as may be necessary and expedient to effect the purposes ofthis
Agreement and carry out its provisions.
.w.:.!.L.Time shaH be of the essence of this Agreement.
++..LL. This Agreement shaH be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of
Ontario.
-hh1L- This Agreement shaH enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective
successors and assigns,
,g.,~This Agreement is conditional on compliance with the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 50, as may be I
amended from time to time.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have set their corporate seals under the hands of their
authorized signing officers,
[. ]
Name:
Title:
Name:
Title:
I/We have authority to bind the Corporation.
[. ]
Name:
Title:
c:\windows\!emp\rev sale aRreemen! 08mav02.docm:'.mlay'\work'.iim\3c!ive file","corporate matlers'ls"" matl&l'&ilaAd-sa1e
<JQreement\re'l"ahiB;Jreemem 08mil'l'll2.doGIiI :'m,'!I':J.\,.YPrk\jim\3Gtive 'files'.GoFpOFate matleF6'JSFBmatleFSlland sale.' ,
agreement'r.." 6ale Bereemen! 15teii02.deG '
City ofBarrieand',,05/10/021:16PMMI09!02 9:11J\M051081tJ2 5:12 PM ~.PAGE 19 OF 1234
to &\ -- ~O
Name:
Title:
JlWe have authority to bind the Corporation.
M:IMLA'NIWORK\lIMIACTIVE FILESICORPORATE MATTERS\LSRA MATTERSILAND SALE AGREEMENTlREV SALE AGREEMENT
15FEB02,DQC
C:lwindOwsltem~\rev sale aareement 08mav02.docm"mH>w\wor-l<\iimlaGtive-files\GOr~te-matler~\lSfiI-.matter~\laM-5a1e
~reement\re" saie-a>1reem;;"t 08ma';Q2.do~m:\mlaW'norkljim\aGti"e filo8'Gol'porate matter&'.lsFa mattero\land sale
agreement\re" sale agreement 15feb02,doG
City of Barrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05I~~5108/g2 5'12 PM PAGE 20 OF 1~
0~
4)
17. SCHEDULE "8"
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
1. The Transferee, to the intent that these covenants shall run with the lands hereinafter described as the
Servient Lands (and any part thereof) for itself, its successors and assigns covenants promises and agrees
with the Transferor, its successors and assigns of the lands hereinafter described herein as the Dominant
Lands, that the Transferee and its successors in title, from time to time, of all, or any part or parts of the
Servient Lands, will observe and comply with the stipulations, restrictions and provisions herein set forth,
and that nothing shall be done upon the said lands or any part thereof in breach or violation or contrary to
the fair meaning of the said stipulations, restrictions and provisions contained herein.
2. The Servient Lands are described as [e). The Dominant Lands are described as [e).
3. The Tranferee agrees not to commence construction of any buildings, structures, driveways, parking areas,
taxiways, aprons, or any other improvements upon the Servient Lands without first satisfying and
complying with the Township of Oro-Medonte's zoning, building and other municipal by-laws or
requirements and approval processes (including, without limitation, the submission to the Township of
suitable building and plot plans showing the exact location of all buildings (including elevations), outside
storage areas, building materials to be used, landscaping, groundside and airside access, signage, outside
lighting and grading) currently necessary for the issuance of a building pennit and site plan approval by
the Township of Oro-Medonte. The Transferee acknowledges and agrees that the Township of Oro-
Medonte's municipal requirements may be subject to amendment in the future and the Transferee agrees
to not commence any such construction in the future without first complying with such amended
municipal requirements, provided such amended municipal requirements are of general application and
apply to other properties located within the Township of Oro-Medonte.
4. The Transferee shall not commence any construction on the Servient Lands without first retaining the
services of a professional architectural finn satisfactory to the Transferor to design and ensure that the
construction of the development on the Servient Lands will be complimentary to the buildings in the area.
c:\wlndowsltemolrev sale aoreement 08mav02.docm:\mI3"A~'orl<lii~Ie~~sra,matter&\JaRd sale
_ent',AI'.' sale allreement08ma'lQ2 dOI;lJl;\mlawlworitljimlastivefilee\soFj:loFa!e malteFSlJeFa matteF8\land eale
agreement'l'e" sale agreement 15feb02.doG
City of Barrie and', 05110/021:16 PM05109'0211:11 MA05108'02 5:12 PM PAGE 21 OF, 1m
hct-4c;t
5. The Transferee agrees that prior to the commencement of construction on the Servient Lands, it wiJJ first
obtain the approval of the Lake Simcoe Regional Airport (the "LSRA[") to its plans for any construction
to be undertaken on the Servient Lands.
6. The Transferee covenants that it shall not dispense, seH or otherwise store aviation fuel or related products
on or within the Servient Lands and acknowledges that the Transferor reserves the exclusive right to store
and sell aviation fuel and related products to users of the airport. Failure to comply with this restrictive
covenant wi1l result in the prohibition of airside access from the Servient Lands in addition to any other
remedies that the Transferor may have. This prohibition shall not prevent the Transferee from allowing the
storage of aircraft in the nonnal course of its business operations on the Servient Lands.
7. The Transferee covenants that it wi1l not conduct any business activity on the Servient Lands in direct
competition with services provided by or business conducted by the Transferor or the LSRA[ (without
their prior written consent which consent may be unreasonably and arbitrarily withheld) and which the
Transferee acknowledges may include, with limitation, outside aircraft storage and tie down amd freight
handling including air sufferance andlor bonded warehouse activities.
8. The Transferee covenants and agrees that it wiH not engage in any activities on the Servient Lands which
do not comply in all material respects with the requirements of Federal or Provincial legislation applicable
to the operation of the LSRA[ as well as any Airport Operations Manual in force from time to time or any
other airport policies as implemented from time to time.
9. The Transferee covenants that it sha1l not prevent entry onto the Servient Lands by the Transferor, the
LSRA[ andlor their respective personnel at reasonable times and at reasonable intervals to ensure
compliance with the pennitted uses, Federal, Provincial andlor municipal law including environmental
protection legislation or in the event of an emergency. The Transferee covenants that it wi1l not prohibit
access by the TransferQ...rGR, its agents or servants from entering upon the Servient Lands in order to
conduct Phase I, Phase II and Phase III environmental audits at their discretion and at such time or times
as they may detennine. The Transferee covenants that it win not use or store on the Servient Lands any
hazardous material or environmental contaminants except in accordance with governmentany approved
procedures and agrees to keep the Servient Lands free of all environmental contaminants as required by all
applicable laws. The Transferee shan be responsible for the cost of clean up and for any costs, losses or
damages suffered by the Transferor and the LSRA[ arising from a breach of this covenant.
:c:\windowsltemDlrev sale aareement 08maV02,doCIW-lml3wlwGl'k\iimlaGtive-filesIcoFPor<I\&.matt&R;lJsfa-matter&\lancJ..sa1e
3!1reement\rev sale aQreement98ma'f02.!1!>Gm:lR1law',werkljimlaGtive files'.Gel1'eFate m3ttel'6~ISRl mattel'6\1aAd sale
agreemeAt\re'l sale agreement 15feb02.deG
City.olBarrie and', 05/10/021:16 PM05IQ9102 9,11 .N"05'QllI02ji'12 PM PAGE 22 OF 1234
to tt -43
10. The Transferee, for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, further covenant, promise
and agree with and to the Transferor, its successors and assigns, that the Transferee his heirs, executors,
administrators and assigns, will not, at any time and from time to time, if! tRe eveRt of a salesell, mortgage,
lease, license, franchise or otherwise partffit! with possession or title of any part or all of the Servient
Lands, without first exacting from any person, firm or corporation so purchasing, mortgaging, leasing,
licensing, franchising or otherwise occupying the Servient Lands, similar covenants to those contained in
these restrictive covenants for the benefit of the Transferor, its successors and assigns.
11. Each covenant and agreement contained herein shall be construed to be a separate and independent
covenant and agreement. If any term or provision contained herein or the application thereof to any
person or circumstance shall to any extent be invalid or unenforceable the remainder of these covenants
shall not be affected thereby and each term and provision shall be valid and shall be enforced to the extent
permitted by law.
c:\windows\templrev saleaQreement 08mav02,doCRH\mlaw\w9fk-\iim\aGtiwHilesl~er&'lsra matteF&\lanQ sale
3oreement\re" saleaoreement 9Sma'JQ2.Qesm:'.mla"1Y1Grk\jimlastj>.'G files\GGIj3Grate matten>\lSFa matten;\land sale
agreementlrev sale agreement 151eb02.dGG
City of Barrie and " 05/10/021:16 PMGIiI09I~1-1-AM05198'02 5:12 PM PAGE 23 OF 1234
~tt -L/f
~
Reo
RecYfling Councilof Ontario", , '~ n
2001 Ontario Waste Minimization Awards '~,
Thursday, April 25, 2002
Four Points Sheraton,St. CatharinesNiagara Suites
2001 Winners' and Finalists' Summaries
NunicipalAwatds
This category recognizes municipalities,iregional govern-
ments and groups of municipalities that divert a significant
percentage of municipal waste from disposal (landfill or
incineration). Both historic improvement in waste minimi-
zation performance over the past three years and overall
performance in the year 2001 (measured in kg of waste
disposed per capita) was considered. Municipalities were
recognized for their achievements with Platinum, Gold,
Silver and Bronze awards.
Platinum Award Winners
(Municipalities generating less than 85 kg per capita, an
80% reduction from the estimated provincial average)
Bluewater Area Municipalities
Gold Award Winners
(Municipalities generating between 86-150 kg per capita, a
40% reduction from the estimated provincial average)
County of Northumberland
Township of Zorra
Silver Award Winners
(Municipalities generating between 151-215 kg per capita, a
30% reduction from the estimated provincial average)
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio and the County of Simcoe
Muncipality of Brockton
Town of Georgina
Town of Hanover
Town of New Tecumseth
City of Orillia
The Corporation of the Town of Whitby
City of Windsor
Bronze Award Winners,
(MunicipalWes generating between 216-280 kg per capita, a
20% reduction from the estimated provincial average)
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
City of Brantford
The Region of Durham
Township of Essa
The Town of Innisfil
City of London
Town of Markham
Town of Newmarket
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte,
County of Simcoe I, ".:- /' "" ? \?j)
City of Ottawa (.VC. \.-F'" I'Y\E:... .I r-> .::::>
Town of Pelham p.. B Q.o tJ2E.. A wp..-u)
City of Pickering _
Township of Severn .IS G=.u1C, K:,ilW~t!"l:)
City of Toronto
,
-S~ - V):O
~(~
"
, , ,
-/0-1
REPORT
DEPT. REPORT TO: COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARED BY:
#ES2002-32 WHOLE Keith Mathieson
SUBJECT & FILE #: DEPARTMENT:
COUNCIL:
Buffering/Screening of Public Works
279 Line 4 South-
C.OFW.: Szczebior Property
DATE: May 13, 2002
MOTION #:
DATE: R. M. FILE #: D11-10307
At the Committee of the Whole Meeting held on February 27,2002, correspondence received by Ms.
Versha Szczebior dated February 18, 2002 was received and referred to staff for a Report.
As indicated in Ms. Szczebior's letter, which is attached for Council's perusal, she is not interested in
the construction of a berm by the Township on her property.
On page three of the correspondence, Ms. Szczebior has listed three possible solutions:
1) Amend the present Official Plan. This has been presented to Council at the Special Council
Meeting of May 8, 2002 for consideration.
2) Encourage Duncor Enterprises Inc. and Vandergeest Welding to plant trees along their south
property borders.
At the Site Plan Committee Meeting held on May 6, 2002, Vandergeest Welding presented their
Site Plan to the Committee for consideration.
At the request of the Committee, the berm across the south limit of this Site Plan and the
previously approved Site Plan has been raised from 0.6m to 2m high, with planting of 2m high
evergreen trees.
As previously indicated in Report #ES2001-48, the Duncor property is not an abutting property
and is not under Site Plan control.
3) Planting of two rows of mature evergreen trees along adjacent fence border.
The cost to plant approximately 20 trees along a 100 metre planting strip would be $6,600.00, plus
tax.
" ,,>
-I r
{b-~
1. THAT Council receives and adopts this report.
2. THAT Ms. Szczebior's request to amend the Official Plan be considered by Council during
revisions/amendments to the Official Plan.
3. THAT Vandergeest Welding constructs a berm with evergreen planting, as per their Site Plan.
4. THAT Ms. Szczebior be notified of Council's decision.
~IIY submitted,
Keith Mathieson
~ ..' ,.
ib-3
VERSHA SZCZEBIOR
R.R. 1, Shanty Bay, Ontario LOL ,_
(705) 487-7562 ~
February 18, 2002
The Corporation of the Township ofOro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Box 100
Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
Attention: Ian Beard, Mayor
Jennifer Zieleniewski, c.A.O.
Keith Mathieson
Mr. H. Hughes
Members of Council
'.....".....1~~o',;.;.."i
Gentlemen and Madams:
RE: BUFFERING/SCREENING OF 279 LINE 4 SOUTH, ORO
Further to your letter of November 20, 2001 I offer the following response.
1. Regarding the "present Official Plan policies requirement" and "present controls"
in place, I suggest that these policies be amended to protect a residence or
agricultural enterprise from the effects of industries/commercial businesses, both
for existing and future businesses, as soon as possible
2. Regarding Duncor Enterprises Inc. and the Township not having means to require
them to contruct buffering/screening at "this present time", Council mayor may not
be aware that Duncor surrounded their industry with a see-through wire mesh-type
fencing with barbed wire on top at the end of December 2001. Needless to say, in
spite of their previous dialogue with Council members about my concerns, this
type of fencing does not afford any buffering/screening whereas a solid type of fencing
along the south side (such as the Drive-In has) if encouraged by the Township, would
have. IfDuncor now planted two rows of mature (7-8') evergreen trees along the
south side of the mesh fence this spring, this would certainly be one solution. If
Vandergeest Welding then planted a similar two rows of mature evergreen trees in
alignment with Duncor, it would help solve the current problem.
3. I do not agree with your statements regarding loud beeping or any other type of
noise as being a temporary condition. I live there, you do not. Please
refer to my original letter to the Township as well as the notes on my personal
statement to Council. As for members of Council's comments that they did not
notice any noise, dust clouds etc., when they visited, there seemed to be an
almost uncanny ability of Vandergeest in particular to be quiet at these times
as if they knew ahead of time when a visit would occur.
, .
"
1 b --4
I W. Szczebior, 279 Line 4 South, Oro
-2-
It is obvious that the situation with noise, dust, etc. is not as bad when there is snow or
it is cold during winter when the enormous doors facing me are not open because of the
temperature, nor is there as much activity with trucks, etc. from both enterprises. It is
much worse from early spring to late fa)).
4. Regarding the berm on MY property solution which was brought forward by a
member of Council at the October 24,2001 meeting, this did not cross my mind as a
possible solution. I had hoped instead that Council would either encourage the
industries in question to build a berm with trees on top or similar landscape
screening/buffering to protect me, or would amend the plan/policies/controls in
place to be able to enforce an industries to comply with new policies.
Your letter states the "Township is wil1ing to assist me....when projects allow the
opportunity". This is a very nebulous statement.
This is not a good solution from my point of view for the fonowing reasons:
a) There are no details regarding the where, when, what material, how long,
the costs involved, the completion, the trees on top, etc.
b) Two years ago I spent over $550 adding gravel and grading my 300' long
driveway. Large dump trucks going up and down would surely flatten
and rut the surface so that it would have to be done again at a substantial
cost
c) The berm would need to be very high and long in order to shield the view of
the very tall buildings involved - who would level offlcomplete the berm -
who would plant trees on top, at whose cost?
d) The field involved next to my driveway and house in which the berm would
be built would be unrentable and unusuable for planting/harvesting until the
work was completed which at the meeting was suggested could take several
years, thereby decreasing both rent and crop production
e) What would the content of the berm material be, from what sources, what
assurances would there be that the soil was not weedy, contaminated or
toxic in nature
f) At the beginning of the construction/expansion of the three industries in
question, two springs ago I planted 50 seedlings along the separating fence
line spaced 5' apart. Theseseedlings would of course be killed in the process
of creating a berm
..... l"
---I b ,~
I W Szczebior, 279 Line 4 South, Oro
- 3 -
Council's proposed solution of a berm on my property could create even more problems
for me. A better solution would be as above #1, #2:
1) Amend the present official plan and present controls to protect residences and
farms a specific number of feet away (example, within 1200' of an adjacent
border) with buffering/screening guidelines - have it apply to aU existing
industries as we11 as future ones
2) Encourage Duncor and Vandergeest to plant at least two rows of mature
evergreen trees along the south side of Dun cor's recently erected wire mesh
fence continuing along the south border of Vandergeest's property and any
future industrial growth adjoining my borders
3) If the above two are not possible within a reasonable length oftime (by the
faU of2002) then I would suggest financial and physical planning and
assistance from Council in planting at least two rows of mature i.e. 7-8'
evergreen trees along the adjacent fence border on my side taking into account
the seedlings already planted there. This may be the most cost effective and
environmenta11y friendly solution.
Since no other possible solutions relating to the buffering/screening being placed on my
property were considered by me or discussed at the meeting, I would suggest the berm
being built on my property be put on hold for now and two or more rows of mature
evergreen trees be planted along the fence border (between my property and EricAnna)
on my side beside the existing seedlings (40 are left and are about one foot high) with
Oro's assistance.
Of course I would be open to other solutions as they pertain to being placed on my
property to protect my residence and agricultural land from the offending industrial
properties.
Sincerely,
c:RJcMW J 4Lr~
Irena-W. (Versha) Szczebior
liws
16-0
REPORT
TO: Council
PREPARED BY:
Keith Mathieson
SUBJECT & FILE #:
DEPARTMENT:
COUNCIL:
C. OF W.
Follow-Up to Verbal Report - Public Works
Versha Szczebior - 279 Line
4 South - Request for
Screening/Buffering
MOTION #:
DATE:
DA TE:
October 19, 2001
:BA€4RGROU
Ms. Szczebior's property is located on Line 4 South and has requested buffering/screening from her
three (3) adjacent properties. These three properties are Ericana Industries Inc., which abutts her
property, Duncor Enterprises Inc., which is located north of her property at Line 4 South and Winstar
Road, and Jess-Cor Holdings Inc. (Vandergeest), located on Winstar Road, within the industrial
subdivision. Attached is a map showing the locations of these four (4) properties.
The Township's Official Plan policies require buffering for industrial/commercial properties abutting
residential properties. Ericana Industries Inc. is not subject to a Site Plan Control Agreement and
therefore, were not required to construct buffering/screening. As Duncor and Jess-Cor are not
abutting to residential properties, there is no requirement to construct buffering/screening. Mr.
Vandergeest, owner of Jess-Cor Holdings Inc., which is under Site Plan Control, has agreed to plant
trees along the south limit of his property, which over time will provide screening of his property.
Council and Township staff have visited the site on several occasions and noise, visual and
environmental pollution was deemed acceptable.
1. THAT the draft correspondence attached from Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering and
Environmental Services, be sent to Ms. Szczebior.
2. THAT Council receives and adopts this report.
Rp~nt2tfullv submitted.
/\0 . G~
~. JC:~ ,(,\(;\
REPORT
IC -I
DEPT. REPORT TO: COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARED BY:
#ES2002-33 WHOLE Keith Mathieson
SUBJECT & FILE #: DEPARTMENT:
COUNCIL:
Jess-Cor Holdings Inc. - Site Public Works
Plan Agreement - Parcel
21-14, Section 51-0ro-5,
C.OFW.: Being Part 2, 51 R-19930,
Being all of PIN #58550-0132 DA TE: May 13, 2002
MOTION #: (Lt), Line 4 South
DATE: R. M. FILE #: L04-10308
Mr. Paul Vandergeest and the Township of Oro-Medonte entered into a Site Plan Agreement in
October, 2000 to construct a welding shop in the Guthrie Industrial Park located on Line 4 South.
Mr. Vandergeest is now proposing to expand the existing shop by 1,021 m2 and to extend the office
space by 334 m2.
Mr. Vandergeest's Site Plan was presented to the Site Plan Committee on May 6, 2002, at which time
revisions were required to the Plan to increase the height of the berm along the entire southerly
property boundary to 2m in height, as well as the planting of 2m evergreen trees on top of the berm.
Additional width of the proposed parking spaces was also required.
Mr. Vandergeest's Site Plan has been revised to satisfy the Committee's concerns and the required
Letter of Credit has been posted.
Township staff have been circulated and there are no concerns with the proposed addition.
1. THAT Council receives and adopts this report.
2. THAT the Township of Oro-Medonte enters into a Site Plan Agreement with Jess-Cor Holdings
Inc., Parcel 21-14, Section 51-0ro-5, being Part 2, 51R-19930, being all of PIN #58550-0132 (Lt),
Township of Oro-Medonte, to construct a 1,021 m2 shop addition and 334 m2 office expansion.
3. THAT the Clerk prepares a By-law for Council's consideration.
Keith Mathieson
~~\\\i,Jy
May, 2002
By-law No. 2002-
APPENDIX uB"
SITE PLAN AGREEMENT
- between -
JESS-COR HOLDINGS INC.
- and -
THE CORPORATION OF THE
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
DESCRIPTION OF LANDS
Parcel 21-14, Section 51-0ro-5
Being Part 2, 51R-19930
Being all of PIN #58550-0132 (Lt)
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
1 c,-.- ~
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
Section 5
Section 6
Section 7
Section 8
Section 9
Section 10
Section 11
Schedule "A"
Schedule "S"
Schedule "C"
Schedule "0"
Schedule "E"
THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
SITE PLAN AGREEMENT
T ASLE OF CONTENTS
Covenants by the Owner
Covenants by the Township
Covenants by the Owner and Township
Development Restrictions
Development Changes
Security
Compliance
Co-operation
Sinding Effect
Severability of Clauses
Save Harmless
SCHEDULES
Legal Description of Lands
Site Plan
Deeds and Easements to be Conveyed
Itemized Estimate of Cost of Construction
Standard Township Letter of Credit
2
1[-3
7 c.,. Lf
SITE PLAN CONTROL AGREEMENT
This Agreement made in quadruplicate this day of
accordance with Section 41 of the Planning Act.
2002, in
BET WEE N : JESS-cOR HOLDINGS INC.
Hereinafter called the "Owner"
PARTY OF THE FIRST PART
-and-
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
Hereinafter called the "Township"
PARTY OF THE SECOND PART
WHEREAS the Township and Jess-Cor Holdings Inc. have, pursuant to Section 41 of the
Planning Act, entered into a Site Plan Agreement regarding development on the subject
lands and additional lands described as Parcel 21-13, Plan 51-0ro-5, Part Lot 22,
Concession 5, Part 1 on Plan 51R-19930, being all of PIN #58550-0131 (Lt) (hereinafter
the "first Site Plan").
AND WHEREAS the Township has approved, pursuant to Section 41 of the Planning Act,
Site Plans regarding development, as described in Schedule "A" attached, for a 1,021 m2
addition to the existing shop and a 334 m2 office extension.
AND WHEREAS the Township intends for the within agreement to supersede the first
Site Plan, only insofar as it relates to the lands described in Schedule "A", which formal
approval and agreement shall otherwise remain in full force and effect.
AND WHEREAS the Owner has applied to the Township of Oro-Medonte to permit a
1,021 m2 addition to the existing shop and a 334 m2 office extension on lands described
in Schedule "A", attached hereto;
AND WHEREAS the Township has enacted a By-law to provide for the designation of the
lands as a "Site Plan Control Area";
AND WHEREAS the Owner intends to develop the lands in accordance with the Site Plan
attached hereto as Schedule "B";
NOW THEREFORE This Agreement Witnesseth THAT in consideration of the mutual
covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto hereby covenant and agree as
follows:
3
7C-5
1. COVENANTS BY THE OWNER
The Owner covenants and agrees as follows:
a) The Owner owns the subject lands described in Schedule "A", attached hereto,
and has provided the Township with a Registered Deed containing the legal
description of the subject lands.
b) This Agreement may be registered against title to these subject lands and shall
take priority over any subsequent registrations against the title to the subject lands.
c) No work shall be performed on the lands nor any use made of the subject lands
with respect to the proposed development except in conformity with all the
provisions of this Agreement.
d) The Owner shall, prior to the execution of this Agreement, obtain all necessary
permits and approvals from the Township and from all Ministries and Agencies.
e) The Owner shall, prior to the execution of this Agreement, pay all Municipal taxes
and charges related to obtaining the approval of these lands for the intended use.
f) The Owner shall pay a refundable deposit for such reasonable costs as may be
involved to the Township in having its Solicitor, Engineer, Planner and staff,
perform any work in connection with this Agreement, including the preparation,
drafting, execution, and registration of this Agreement. The Owner acknowledges
and agrees that the Owner shall be responsible for the cost of performance of all
the Owner's obligations hereunder unless the context otherwise requires. Every
provision of this Agreement, by which the Owner is obligated in any way, shall be
deemed to include the words "at the expense of the Owner" unless specifically
stated otherwise. The refundable deposit for expenses and actual cost shall be
$200.00. The Owner shall replenish the refundable deposit, to its full amount,
when the expenses and actual costs are submitted by the Township.
g) The Owner shall have delivered to the Township, all Transfers/Deeds, Discharges
and Easements or other documents required by Schedule "C", as well as
certification from the Owner's Solicitor that the Transfer/Deeds and Easements
shall provide the Township with good title, free and clear from all encumbrances.
2. COVENANTS BY THE TOWNSHIP
The Township covenants and agrees as follows:
a) That the Township has enacted a By-law to permit a 1,021 m2 addition to the
existing shop and a 334 m2 office extension described on the Site Plan.
b) That the Township agrees that subject to compliance by the Owner with all
relevant Municipal By-laws and Provincial Statutes and Regulations, the Owner
may proceed to develop the subject lands as indicated on the Site Plan attached
hereto as Schedule "B", subject to the development restrictions contained herein.
3. COVENANTS BY THE OWNER AND TOWNSHIP
The parties agree that the within agreement and the Site Plan approval of the Township,
pursuant to Section 41 of the Planning Act given on May 6, 2002, shall supersede the
Site Plan approval, pursuant to Section 41 of the Planning Act, provided by the Township
on September 25, 2000 and the Site Plan Agreement dated October 11, 2000, insofar as
it affects the subject land only. In all other respects, the former Site Plan approval
continues to apply.
4
7o-/P
4. DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS
The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that any use of the subject lands by the
Owner shall be on and subject to the following terms and conditions:
a) Site Plan
The use and development of the subject lands shall be
in accordance with and as set out on the Site Plan
attached hereto as Schedule "S".
b) Lighting
All lighting systems installed outside, such as floodlights, shall be
directed away from any adjacent residential use and/or roadway, not
to cause interference in any way.
c) Parking Areas and Driveways
All parking areas and driveways shall be constructed, in conformity
with Sections 5.19 and 5.20 of Sy-Iaw No. 97-95, as amended, and
the Ontario Suilding Code Regulation #419/86 and such. parking
areas, loading and access areas shall be kept free and clear of snow
and ice and kept adequately drained. All entrances shall be
constructed as in Schedule "S", attached. The Owner agrees to
obtain all necessary approvals from the Ministry of Transportation,
County of Simcoe and Township of Oro-Medonte.
d) Outside Storage
No outside storage shall be permitted between any buildings on the
premises and any street. Any other outside storage shall be
contained in the fenced compound, as identified on Schedule "S".
e) Garbage Storage
The Owner agrees to provide suitable storage areas for garbage and
waste as shown on the Site Plan and to install and maintain litter
containers in and around development on the lands. All metal scrap
and associated refuse contained in the fenced compound shall be
removed on a weekly basis.
f) Landscaping
The Owner shall complete all landscaping and landscaped areas
shown on the Site Plan, attached as Schedule "S", as soon as
weather permits and all grading and sodding required, according to
any Engineering drawings submitted, shall be done on all lawn
areas.
5. DEVELOPMENT CHANGES
The parties acknowledge and agree that there shall be no changes to this Agreement or
the Schedules attached hereto unless and until such changes have been approved, in
writing, by all Parties.
6. SECURITY
Prior to signing the Agreement, the Owner will deposit with the Treasurer of the
Township, to cover the faithful performance of the obligations of the Owner arising under
this Agreement, including but not limited to the construction of the works and services
identified in Schedule "0" to this Agreement (the "said Work"), the following securities:
5
-, 0- 1
a) Cash in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) ofthe estimated cost of the
said work, as approved by the Township Engineer and Township Council, or:
b) An irrevocable Letter of Credit from a Chartered Bank, issued in accordance with
the requirements of Schedule "En, with an automatic renewal clause in the amount
of one hundred percent (100%) of the estimated costs of the said works, and as
approved by the Township Engineer. The Letter of Credit shall be for a minimum
guaranteed period of one (1) year or such time as the Township decides and shall
be renewed automatically, as necessary, thirty (30) days prior to expiration.
c) The Township reserves the right to accept or reject any of these alternative
methods of providing securities. Prior to depositing the securities, the Owner's
Engineer shall submit an estimate of the cost of the works to the Township
Engineer for approval. When the cost estimate has been approved, it will be set
out in Schedule "0" of this Agreement and will become the basis for the limits of
the securities.
d) Any Letter of Credit or security filed with the Township is based upon the estimated
cost of completing the various matters prescribed by this Agreement. However, all
Letters of Credit and Security received by the Township may be used as security
for any item or any other matter which, under the terms of this Agreement, is the
responsibility of the Owner, including without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, payment of engineering, legal, planning or other costs incurred by the
Township, which are the responsibility of the Owner, under the terms of this
Agreement.
- e) Upon written notification by the Owner's agent, certifying that all required works
for which the Letter of Credit was submitted have been completed in accordance
with the plans submitted and upon confirmation by the Township or its agent that
the Owner's obligations under this Agreement have been completed, the
Township will return said Letter of Credit.
f) If in the event of default of the Owner under any of the provisions of this
Agreement, it becomes necessary for the Township to realize on its security or
deposits, then the Township shall give, by registered mail, twenty-one (21) day's
notice, its intent to draw down on the security or deposit.
7. COMPLIANCE
Any action taken by the Township or on its behalf, pursuant to this Agreement, shall be in
addition to and without prejudice to any security or other guarantee given on behalf of the
Owner for the performance of its covenants and agreements herein and upon default on
the part of the Owner hereunder, the Township shall, in addition to any other remedy
available to it, be at liberty to utilize the provisions of Section 325 of the Municipal Act,
R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 302, as amended.
8. CO-OPERA TION
The Owner consents to the registration of this Agreement by the Township, upon the title
of the subject lands, at the expense of the Owner and agrees to execute such further and
other documents, consents or applications as required for the purpose of securing
registration and giving effect to the provisions of this Agreement.
6
7o-'f
9. BINDING EFFECT
This Agreement, and everything contained herein, shall be binding upon the successors
and assigns of the Parties hereto and upon the lands described in Schedule "An, attached
hereto, such Schedule being a legal description of the lands, and it is further agreed that
this Agreement shall be prepared, approved and registered on title.
10. SEVERABILITY OF CLAUSES
Should any Section, Subsection, Clause, Paragraph or Provision of this Agreement be
declared by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall not affect the
validity of the Agreement as a whole or any part thereof, other than the provision so
declared to be invalid.
11. SAVE HARMLESS
The Owner, on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, agrees to indemnify and save
harmless the Township from and against any and all claims, suits, actions and demands
whatsoever which may arise either directly or indirectly by reason of any work or service
performed by the Township, its servants or sub-contractors in order to complete the work
or services required to be completed under this Agreement, provided the subject matter
of such action, suits, claims or demands was not caused intentionally or through gross
negligence on the part of the Township, its servants or agents or sub-contractors.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereunto have affixed their respective seals
under the hands of their proper officers duly authorized in that behalf.
SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED
)fJ(J-J~
) Owner: Paul Vandergeest
) Have the Authority to Bind the
) Corporation
)
}
}
) The Corporation of the
} Township of Oro-Medonte
)
} per:
}
)
)
) J. Neil Craig, Mayor
}
}
)
) Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk
)
7
. .. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . ., . .
'" . . . . . .. .
.. . . . . . . . . .
z.
..-
:DC)
ntZ
., . . . . . . . . .
.. . .. . . ., . .
~""""""""""
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. " . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .. .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. " . . . . . . . .
{crq
SCHEDULE "B"
NOTE:
It is understood and agreed that this Schedule forms part of the Site Plan
Agreement between the Township of Oro-Medonte and Jess-Cor Holdings
Inc.
SITE PLAN
Site Plan is not in a registerable form and is available from the Township of Oro-Medonte.
Prepared by Dearden and Stanton Ltd., Drawing #E-1113, revised May 6,2002.
9
l()- to
SCHEDULE "C"
NOTE:
It is understood and agreed that this Schedule forms part of the Site Plan
Agreement between the Township of Oro-Medonte and Jess-Cor Holdings
Inc.
DEEDS AND EASEMENTS TO BE CONVEYED
All title documents shall be properly drawn and executed by the parties, with the
appropriate Lot or Block Number inserted in the description of the document, and the
registered Plan Number shall be left blank, to be inserted by the solicitors for the parties
after the Plan is registered and a Plan Number assigned.
The consideration for all conveyances shall be the sum of Two dollars ($2.00) and the
cost of preparation, execution and registration thereof. shall be borne by the Owner.
All documents to be registered, shall be prior approved by the Solicitor for the
Township.
The following land and easement shall be conveyed:
1.0 LANDS TO BE CONVEYED TO THE TOWNSHIP
N/A
2.0 DRAINAGE EASEMENTS TO BE CONVEYED TO THE TOWNSHIP
N/A
10
-, 0 -II
SCHEDULE "D"
NOTE:
It is understood and agreed that this Schedule forms part of the Site Plan
Agreement between the Township of Oro-Medonte and Jess-Cor Holdings
Inc.
ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF COST OF CONSTRUCTION
1. ITEMIZE CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
AMOUNT
Construction of berm and tree planting along
southerly limit of Plan 51R-19930, Parts 1 and 2,
Township of Oro-Medonte.
$7,500.00
2.
LETTERS OF CREDIT
AMOUNT
Letter of Credit to be provided by the Owner
to ensure completion of all works required
under the terms of this Agreement, as noted
in Section 6 herein.
$1,680.00
Letter of Credit to be retained by the Township
to ensure completion of all works required,
under terms of agreement between Jess-Cor
Holdings Inc. and the Township of Oro-Medonte
dated October 11, 2000.
$5,820.00
$7,500.00
II
The Township of Oro Medonte
Oro Station, Ontario
LOL 2EO
,-
70-:f~"- "',
...---'-...,." ",
, ,.,. -',,,
. /. '-', '-,
J
:
{
{
\
.
\
'\,
"
i'
IH8ED
MAY 13m
~~TE
HSBC ~
May 09, 2002
Dear Sirs:
,
RE: STANDBY LETTER OF GUARANTEE NO. 172-02-002
f'-A'
1. We hereby issue in your favour our Standby Letter of Guarantee No. 172-02-002 in the amount of CAD
$7,500.00 (CANADIAN DOLLARS SEVEN lliOUSAND FNE HUNDRED) for the account of our
customer, Jess-Cor Holdings Inc (the "Customer") at Lot 22 Concession 5, Parts I and 2 on 51R19930
township of Oro Medonte.
LJ
U2. This Standby Letter of Guarantee is in replacement of Standby Letter of Guarantee No. 172-01-
003 which is hereby cancelled.
= <
~
03.
This Standby Letter of Guarantee is available effective May 09, 2002 for drawing in part or in full unti
its expiry against your presentation to us, at 33 Bayfield Street, Barrie, Ontario to the attention of the
Branch Manager, of:
UU
!!\
[--
~
~
I
14.
c:::
a. A Letter of Demand signed by an authorized signing officer of the Township ofOro Memnte; and
b. This original Standby Letter of Guarantee No. 172-02-002 for endorsement or payment thereon.
It is understood that we are obligated under this Standby Letter of Guarantee to th: payment of monies
only and not the performance of service or otherwise.
-=;;;:
-
Partial drawings are permitted.
.a" 5 .
f~
""-6.
V
CO
V'\
-,-7.
......
We will honour drawings under this Standby Letter of Guarantee without enquiring whether he holder
hereof has a right as between it and the customer to make such drawings.
This Standby Letter of Guarantee expires on May 09, 2003 at our counters. It is a condition of this
letter of credit that it shall be deemed to be automatica11yextended without amendment from year to
year from the present or any future expiration date hereof, unless, at least 30 days prior to the present
or any future expiration date, we notify you in writing by registered mai!, that we elect not to renewfor
any additional period,
Yours truly,
HSBC Bank Canada
~~~~
Manager Customer Service
HSBC Bank Canada
33 Bayfield Street, P.O, Box 368, Barrie, Ontario lAM 4T5
Tel: (705) 726-6403 Fax: (705) 728-4530
~
'\
\
',,-~
".
--.......
"./
REPORT
-, f
/ u- ,
DEPT. REPORT TO: COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARED BY:
#PWS2002-05 WHOLE Jerry Ball
SUBJECT & FILE #: DEPARTMENT:
COUNCIL:
Request by Horseshoe Valley Roads
Property Owners Association
C. OF W.: for "News and Events"
Notice Boards DA TE: May 16, 2002
MOTION #:
DATE: R. M. FILE #: A01-10963
At the Council Meeting held on Wednesday, April 3, 2002, correspondence dated March 22, 2002
was received by Council from Mr. Glen Taber of Events and Recreation for the Horseshoe Valley
Property Owners Association, requesting permission to construct and erect "News and Events" Notice
Boards at the following locations:
. Highlands Drive and the 4th Line
. Highlands Drive and the 3rd Line
. Birch Grove Drive, across from the 9th hole
. Alpine Way and the 4th Line
. Pine Ridge Trail
. Oro Hills
Each of these locations are the sites for the community mailboxes and in discussions with Mr. Taber,
he advised that these Notice Boards would not present a problem for road maintenance or obstruct
the sight line at these intersections. As mentioned in the correspondence, these Boards would
reduce notices being taped to mailboxes and also reduce the litter that occurs at these locations. The
proposed size of the Notice Boards would be 48 inches x 30 inches and will be mounted on two 4 x 4
posts set in concrete approximately 42 inches above finish grade. A copy of the preliminary design
proposal is attached.
As all costs for materials, construction and maintenance of the Notice Boards will be the responsibility
of the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association, it is recommended that the Association
proceeds with this project, once a location for each Board is approved by the Public Works
Department.
j'" ^
r 7d-~
A Memorandum of Understanding has been prepared between the Township of Oro-Medonte and the
Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association and is attached for Council's perusal.
1. THAT Council receives and adopts this report.
2. THAT the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association be authorized to erect the Notice
Boards once a location for each Board is approved by the Public Works Department.
3. THAT all costs be borne by the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association.
4. THAT the Township of Oro-Medonte and the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association
execute the Memorandum of Understanding for future maintenance and removal of the Notice
Boards.
5. THAT the Public Works Superintendent notifies the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners
Association accordingly.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
r : Jerry Ball
~
~~O - \D~
~\'\l
rc(-3
HORSESHOE VALLEY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION
Box 51 , RR#l , Barrie, Ontario, L4M4Y8
March. 22, 2002
Ms. M. Pen nyc ook, Clerk,
TWP. Of ORO-MEDONTE
148 line 7, South, Box 100,
ORO, Ontario, LOL 2XO
Dear Mrs. Pennycook;
..
RE: PROPOSED "NEWS & EVENTS" NOTICE BOARDS
I am writing on behalf of the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners' Association to request
permission to erected, one "News & Events" notice board at each of the mailbox
locations listed below and as illustrated in the attached documents indicated as
"Preliminary": final design will be determined through consultation and confirmation of
material costs. All labour has been offered free of charge.
1 . corner of Highlands Drive and the 4th Line
2. corner of Highlands Drive and the 3rd line
3. corner of Alpine Way and 4th Line
4. Birch Grove across from the 9th hole
5. Pine Ridge Trail
These boards would be available to display notices by any resident in the immediate
Horseshoe Valley area, subject to review by a person or persons chosen to monitor
and maintain these, and would not be restricted solely for use by H.V.P.O.A. Members.
As notices being taped to the fronts of the mail boxes are unsightly and possibly not
even considered legal by Canada Post, we are of the opinion that the provision and
maintenance of properly-designed structures would be a visual as well as a convenient
asset to the community.
Your review, consideration and subsequent approval of this proposal would be
appreciated. I am available to meet with you at your convenience and may be
reached at 835-3351 or FAX: 835-2567. Thank you.
Yours truly,
Bien R. Taber
Events & Recreation
CC. Mr. G. Ball ~
--- -
,. c~-~""
/. ~.
- .;::--:::-1d-4
HORSESHOE VAllEY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOff!lON
Box 51, RR#l, Barrie, Ontario, L4M 4Y8 l~ ~.~
ril il
./
,I
April 9, 2002 ~ ,.,/
'"'... "
~",~."",,-----
..->',,.-'
---...
Mrs. M. Pennycook, Clerk,
TWP. OF ORO-MEDONTE
148 Line 7, South, Box 1 00,
ORO, Ontario, LOL 2XO
Dear Mrs. Pennycook;
RE: PROPOSED "NEWS & EVENTS" NOTICE BOARDS
Further to my March 22nd letter to you, I wish to advise, following a meeting of the
H.V.RO.A. Board last night that it would be our intention to include a notice board at
the entrance to the "Oro Hills" residential area in addition to the five locations
noted previously; this was an omission made in error on my part.
Would you kindly advise those involved in the staff review of our proposal accordingly;
thank you.
Looking forward to a favourable reply, I am,
Yours truly,
Glen R. Taber
Events & Recreation
'A'pr" 2'~ 02 '09: 25a
1"
to
U)
('\I,
. '
Lt)
M.'
CO ..
.
Il)
o
I'
..
~.,
LL .
.
1:'
o
+:i
C\'S.
CP:
a.. "
(.)'
CP
;....
\D'
en
..... ,--
C ,.
G)
>
CP
...
CD
.c
a:I
....
C
CD -
-
tn'
Ruth L. Taber
705 835-2567
p. 1
j ~
--; /I _ ir\
{ (,/{ .........,
DATE: April 23, 2002
TO: lWP. Of ORO-MEDONTE
att: Mr. G. Ball
FAX: 487-0133
PAGES: 3
(including cover page)
RE: IINEWS & EVENTS" NOTICE BOARDS
as requested: *
for review:
pis. reply:
for info. only:
MESSAGE: As requested this morning, herewith shee1s "1 of 2"
and "2 of 2" showing a very preliminary proposal
for the above.
':~~"
.-. --,
:". ~:.i
.. _.
I'm pleased to hear that the Township may nothave any
problem with our providing and erecting these items, and
look forward to hearing your specific comments you and
staff may have ie; height or set-back requirements,
materials, etc.
If you have any questions regarding this proposal. please
feel free to contact me. Thank you.
~
k~_<
SIGNED: Yours truly,
Glen Taber
.-
o
-I
-
:0
bl N
r--..
~
(V)
---
.f;;
E
...........
b
~
//i
I
Section (not to scale)
1 \\ X 811
2\\ X 3" framing
le1tering
2\\ x 81/
plana hinge
glazing in wood frame
cork board
3/4" ext. grade plywood
suitable latch & lock
2" x 3" framing
4" x 4" Qost
set In concrete
poured
concrete
crushed
STone
4" (nom.)
t norseshoe vanev properry owners assoc'lfon
news and ~Y~O.v~
r--I-
i~D
1"'''___
L_- --I
~__.J
I 'I
I
I I
' ___.__ J
L.__
E lavation (not to scale)
t 1 . I
I I I I
I f I 1
I I ' I
1 I I I
I J I I
I 1 I f
1 I I I
t I I I
I I J I
PREUIMINARY DESIGN PRcDROSAL
HORSESHOE VALLEY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION
"News & Events" NOTICE BOARD
1 of 2
prepared by
taber design & graphics
feb. 8/02
:D
. '."
. ,
'T\)
~w
o
I\)
o
CD
..
I\)
c.n
!II
iO
C
ct
:r
r
.
-I
!II
0-
lD
,
..J
0
c.n
CD
w
c.n
I
I\)
c.n
en
..J
-.\
~
I
\)' ."
.
I\)
, ..
~^'\.
. '
",i,,,~"'i,,,
PROPOSED LOCATIONS:
1. Corner of Highlands Dr. And 4th Line
2. Corner of Highlands Dr. And 3rd Line
3. Corner of Alpine Way and 4th Line
4. Birch Grove across from the 9th hole (Valley)
5. Pine Ridge Troll
,,,~o Hr((~
Proposed notice board superimposed
over photograph of existing mail boxes
PRELIMINARY DESIGN PROPOSAL
HORSESHOE VALLEY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION ~
"News & Events" NOTICE BOARD ~
2 of 2 ,.
prepared by -J
taber design & graphics
march 20102
--; I .-,
/0-6
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Made this
day of
,2002.
BETWEEN:
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
- and -
HORSESHOE VALLEY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS both parties are desirous of forming a partnership to reduce the litter
associated with advertising by promoting "News and Events" Notice Boards at the
following locations in Horseshoe Valley:
. Highlands Drive and the 4th line
. Highlands Drive and the 3rd line
. Birch Grove Drive, across from the 9th hole
. Alpine Way and the 4th line
. Pine Ridge Trail
. Oro Hills
THEREFORE, the parties here signed do agree to the following conditions:
TERM OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING:
1. The Term of this Memorandum of Understanding shall remain in force until
such time as it is deemed necessary to remove the Notice Boards by either
the Township of Oro-Medonte or the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners
Association, within 15 days of receipt of written notice by either party.
CONDITIONS:
1. The Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association agrees to borne all costs
associated with this project.
2. The Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association erects the Notice Boards
once a location for each Board is approved by the Public Works Department.
3. The Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association agrees to maintain the
Notice Boards.
4. The Horseshoe Valley Property Owners Association agrees to remove the
Notice Boards within 1 5 days of receipt of written notice by either party,
with all costs to be borne by the Horseshoe Valley Property Owners
Association.
id-q
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereto executed this Memorandum of
Understanding:
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
J. Neil Craig, Mayor
Date
Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk
Date
HORSESHOE VALLEY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION
Glen Taber
I Have the Authority to Bind the Corporation
Date
gQ-/
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
FROM THE TOWNSHIP PLANNER
IREPORT TO COUNCIL
I
REPORT NO.:
PD2002-24
COUNCIL
PREP ARED BY:
Andria Leigh
C. OF W.
DATE:
May 16,2002
MOTION
SUBJECT:
Committee of Adjustment
Decisions for May 16, 2002
DATE
R.M. FILE # Cll1l680
I SUMMARY
I
Attached are the PI arming Reports and Committee of Adjustment Decisions for the Consent
and Minor Variance applications that were heard at the Committee of Adjustment meeting held
on May 16, 2002. The last date for receiving an appeal to the above noted decisions is
Wednesday June 5, 2002.
Consent AppJications
Minor Variance Applications
B-12j02 Royal Bank of Canada (Gullett)
Con 1, Plan M-22, Lot 46, (Orillia)
Maplewood Parkway
A-7 j02 Dr. Rob Mason
Plan 819, Lots 1&2, Con. 4 (Ora)
9 Brambel Road
B-IOj02 Norman and Janet Langman
Con. 13, Lot 13 (Ora)
A-8j02 Derek & Cindy-Lou Greene
Con. 9, Part of Lot 8 (Medonte)
4427 Line 9 N.
B-llj02 Carl and Eric Cumming
Con 5, Part of Lot 20 (Ora)
Line 5 North
B-13 j 02 Debra London
Con. 3, Part of Lot 28 (Ora)
1256 Line 3 S.
B-14 j 02 John Strimas and Jane Burgess
Con. 8, North Part Lot 12 (Medonte)
4910 Line 8 N.
3q-~
Consent Applications
B-15j02 Cameron Clarke Wardlaw
Con. 3, Part of Lot 28 (Ora)
1901 Ridge Road West
Respectfully submitted,
---1J~
Andria Leigh, Hans B.A.,AMCT, MCIP,RPP
Senior Planner
C.A.o. COMMENTS:
DATE:
d~ fi~nl.'v
DEPT.HEAD l~
C.A.o.
,--.
c)q-~
, -.......,.I
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
REPORT NO.: COF A2002-07
PREPARED BY: Todd Weatherell
DA TE: May 8, 2002
APPLICANT: Dr. Rob Mason
APPLICATION NO.: A-7/02
ROLL NUMBER:
4346 010 008 09300
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Plan 819, Lots 1 and 2, Con. 4 (Oro)
'PROPOSAL
,
The applicant is requesting relief from the maximum height requirement for a boathouse
from 4.5 metres (J 4.7 feet) to 5.2 metres (J 7.06 feet). The applicant is also requesting relief
from the minimum exterior side yard for the boathouse from 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) to 4
metres ( J 3. J 2 feet)
IAGENCY COMMENTS
I
BuiJding Department: Location of septic system to be verified for setback to structure.
Roads Department: No Concerns
rm-Lf
DOES THE VARIANCE CONFORM WITH THE
GENERAL INTENT OF THE OFFICIAL PLAN?
The subject property is designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan. The general
intent of the policies is to preserve the character of the shoreline residential area and to
protect the natural features of the shoreline. The proposed construction of the boathouse
would not appear to impact on the character of the shoreline residential area. 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 Limited Service (RLS) in the Township's
Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended which recognizes that Brambel Road is a private
Road. The intent of the By-law is to establish setback requirements, which assist in
preserving the natural shoreline and maintaining the residential character. The proposed
boathouse would not appear to affect the surrounding neighbours; therefore the proposed
variance would appear to maintain the intent of the Zoning By-law provisions.
IS THE VARIANCE DESIRABLE FOR THE
APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT OR USE OF THE
LAND?
Upon site inspection it is evident that the boathouse would not appear to affect any of the
surrounding neighbours. There is currently vegetative buffering along the East property
line, and with the lot sloping towards the Lake the height of the boathouse will be hidden
from any of the surrounding neighbours, therefore the variance would be desirable on the
lot for the boathouse.
I
lIS THE VARIANCE MINOR IN NATURE?
The proposed variances for the boathouse are considered minor in nature on the basis that
the variances would not appear to negatively affect any surrounding neighbours.
3q -:5
I RECOMMENDATION
,
It is recommended that Minor Variance Application A-7/02 be approved subject to the
following conditions:
] . That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance
with the Committee's decision by J) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing
prior to pouring of the foundation by way of surveylreal property report prepared by
an Ontario Land Surveyor.
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application, as
submitted;
3. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approve of the application, in
writing;
4. 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. ] 990, c.P. ] 3;
5. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte.
Submitted by,
Todd Weatherell, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
""--) b
?)Cl-
'--__ t
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Dave Edwards seconded by, Ken Robbins
"That the Committee hereby GRANT Minor Variance Application A-7/02 subject to the
fo11owing conditions:
1. That the building department verifies the height and building area approved by the
. .
mInor vanance.
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application,
as submitted;
3. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approve of the
application, in writing;
4. 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;
5. That a11 municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte
... ..Carried."
~ " T 2!f
C ",VCESS..".V 4
,. ..,.....c II., '1." ......
....., .... s.' ....
~..~:. W...I
....
""> G, ... ,. ~
1<) -, LOT " ~ "
.; ~ .. " ~
.. ,.., .. ii G,
0; ,
v, 10
,; ~
.. "
"
~ .... .... ..... .....
.. "ae. I" 2'''' 110... ......1
~
oi
.,
.,
, ~ I/') ,
..
.. I<) >:
.
.. >:
, >-
.. ~ ~
>
.. '?
~
" Q,"
::
..
I, ... "
"
I:) . I~
h. '"
.J . '"
>. I, . C)
..
J I:) I.: :.... ..J
~ .J '. ..
~
:: .
"
Il)
...
'N
II !)
:=:
"t
; 'II:
~~
: .
. .
If)
:=:
1::1
--
If)
If)
lu
!)
. >-
_u 1::1
-. I)
-.
- .
!:
.
.
:=:
lu >-
. lu
0 ~ 1::1
~;o
;0 I- If)
lu If)
. ro IoJ
'-:>
>-
1::1
,)
IoJ
()
:=:
"'\
~
1::1
-J
-J
"'\
'rC;-=, cc:.-.
~...
tr) "'-I
"
,.
"
~
..
:;>:...4N
ILL..5. ~AiE:;
\..."'..,...fI'5
LAKE
S:"W~OE
1Z (t iS7.vh/l5)~ 5~
)
(/
C)
"'\
1::1
CI;.
~1-7
SURVEYOR'S RE-.L PROPERTY REPORT
PART I- PL-.N
Of AU, or
LOTS '.2 AND 35
REGISTERED PLAN 819
TO'ftN$MIP OF 0,.,0. nu. 'n ttlt
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
SCALE I'~OO
~ --
RAIKES SURVEYING LTD.
IUT
CI ".'.(1 SIIJtvt'UIIC \.TO. II"
........
I
SI/RVE'YOR'S CERTIFtCA TE'
ttllllt.r, TM"f",
'M" hIlW("! ..0 ..\.... A1II( COlllltt(,. ".0 It. ..(tOIllO.IIC(
.nM "M( SUllvt'$ AC', 'nit I\I',,(YO.. Act "'''0 'M(
JII{.If'un .ACT ....P ".1 _15U\....'IO.' 'u,OI U.O(II 1101(111.
'"1 SUIIV(' ,,&S c.o....\,,(,(o 0" '"1 'h.. 0&'- or
1I0vhlUfI. ....,.
a""('orc''''!:II :t,".'
a.I. C rf!.:L
1I00III{7';. ..."us
011'''''10 \"""0 SUII",'0111
!!2.Ill.
.(..II'"U "'flt ",1110_01Ilt ....e ""E fI(Hflllto 101M! .U,EfI\.. 'r
\"1"''' or '"1 IIIO"'C "LLOwJr.IIICt ,('.IEIt COIICEI'IOIII$ . ....0 ~,
,,"OW II Jr.S .)0""00'. ON 11115'$1111[11 ,"1"..11 51t.
.
o
...
,.
.
ou
no
"
""
0[1I01U 'UIIIV(Y WOIIVIII[.1 'OUIIIO
SUIIIV(T ..O_VII(..' "\....III'(C
s'.....O.UlO fIIO..- ....111
~III::,,:'"
OIll'GI" UIII._O'llll
..~..'III.Jr."III't",O.\".S.
1II[."1("tO..\..III....
"TD"'CI "01,,[
NOTE
~ or La.r "MCO[ ., ,"OW- NE"lIItOW .S 1'Nf" erST
.V&'\.&IM,.I (V'O("C( or 'tM( OII.SI"'.l ..Tt"', [Oot" \!:XISTH..
.'r 'h" 'r. or TNt: CIA"'''''L "-'''V(T Of' 'rot[ IItrOI$TE"t:C
11"\".1'1 .,e.
NOTE
nus "("011' ...S ",U;""I'I(O rOil COOl" ""0 .1.11'1 1t0"ITT ""b
'r"1 UNO!II"'''IO "Ct.t'TS NO JlIS"OJlSlIll''fT rOil ust ''1'
01'"111; """'tItS.
~
'"'''1 ..."'1 110 III;:I1S1(IIICO '.UIII(IITS 011 TII( ...."C(L.>
D"[LL'''~.T'WO..tuoonUlwlTMlI,,"[~._tso' ,.., ...."I:I:1....'"t
OVt:"''''t..c I'ITOIIO LM ..ftt ,.11"''''[ :noa-.ot "l.~-'1.,.1t PJI,"'''u.u..'' OfItI.,.O' ,~
"WE c:_ot JfIACJI !..ltS OOoILC1n.''''~.''''''f:f4 S~un"""""L"OIU:Ir'f
COIl,"\.'''_U: "\Till IIIUlllt"""L tOltlltG '''~I..''S Jl01 tl.,,,I[O
.,. 'tillS "1,"OIlT.
METRIC
DI11..tlt $110_" 011 't1ll1$ "..". .."t .. IIIt1"'S "1110 c... .t
t01tVU1U 10 'U' n olY'Ollle n 0.:)0_'.
ASSOt,,t.1W'tlO'OMlAIUO
WO SUl'lVtTDRS
1JUJIf-WJMIt....,...
1\ 53956
-&-
TIIC......II tICI'I......
IIII&\.ln11 UPI"'ssn
...... "'"
~D'::'::'~
..."'......ml.~ItI1'
RAIKES SURVEYING l TO.
25 BERCZY STREET
'OX 1150 BARRIE, ONTARIO
T05-T28-UU
A, A, PROJECT NO. 5748
II !of 44' 55' t
~
\1\
Ef7
\
..
Ig
':;;:
~
..
..
's
~
...
~
""
1I!>7,,.'j,O"t
30.46
,
,
\
,
\
\
\
.
\
,
\
.
\
.
,
'II"
\
\
,
\
,
.
\
lit,
\$
,
.
"$)~
\
\
\
\
,
,
\
\
.
,
\
\
,
\
,
,
\
,
,
\
\
.
.
\
\
.
\
,
\
,
.
0\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\\
5.,\
'"'\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
r::--
~
'"'
..
'S
:0:
.
"s
...
~
'"'
\.A\ZE S\,,^COE
~q-cr
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
REPORT NO.: COF A2002-08
PREPARED BY: Todd Weatherell
DATE: May 8, 2002
APPLICANT: Derek and Cindy-Lou Greene
APPLICATION NO.: A-8/02
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 020 003 10601
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Con. 8., Part of Lot 8, (Medonte)
I PROPOSAL
,
The applicant is requesting relieffrom the minimum rear yard setbackfrom 8 metres (26.2
feet) to 73 metres (24 feet) to allow for a dwelling that was constructed in 2001 and relief
from the minimum rear yard setback to 4.84 metres (15.9 feet) to permit the construction of
a 8.9 square metre (96 squarefoot) deck.
IAGENCY COMMENTS
I
BuiJding Department: No Concerns
Roads Department: No Concerns
?Sq -IU
DOES THE VARIANCE CONFORM WITH THE
GENERAL INTENT OF THE OFFICIAL PLAN?
The subject property is designated AgricuJtural in the Township's Official Plan. The
general intent of the policies is to preserve the agricultural lands of the Township and to
maintain the open countryside. The proposed deck addition to an existing building would
generally conform to the intent of the Official Plan policies, given the location of the
property to agricultural lands. 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 AgricuJtural/Rural (NRU) in the Township's Zoning By-
law 97-95, as amended. The intent of the By-law is to establish setback requirements,
which assist in maintaining the character of the rural area. The proposed variance would
permit an existing dwelling and a proposed deck to be located closer to the rear property
line then the requirement, therefore the proposed variance would appear to maintain the
intent of the Zoning By-law provisions.
IS THE VARIANCE DESIRABLE FOR THE
APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT OR USE OF THE
LAND?
Upon site inspection it is evident that the house and proposed deck would not appear to
affect any of the surrounding neighbours. There is currently vegetative buffering along
the North property line, and farm fields surround the remaining property; based on the
above, the variance would be desirable on the lot for the existing house and deck
I
lIS THE VARIANCE MINOR IN NATURE?
The proposed variances for the house and deck are considered minor in nature on the
basis that the variance would not appear to negatively affect any surrounding neighbours.
8q -11
,
I RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Minor Variance AppJication A-8/02 be approved subject to the
fol1owing conditions:
]. 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 prepared by
an Ontario Land Surveyor.
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application, as
submitted;
3. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approve of the appJication, in
writing;
4. That the appropriate bui1ding 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. ] 990, c.P. 13;
5. That aU municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte.
Submitted by,
Todd WeathereH, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
~q -l~
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Ken Robbins seconded by, Albert Pross
"That the Committee hereby GRANT Minor Variance Application A-8/02 subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the building department verifies the height and building area approved by the
minor variance.
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application,
as submitted;
3. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approve of the
application, in writing;
4. 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;
5. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte
.,. ..Carried."
11'
,Il ~Y-O'-9' 0""" '...-MICH"L REED ~'"
'-SURVEYOR'S REAL
, PART i
PLAN OF
PART OF LOT 8
CONCESSION 10
TOWNSHIP OF ORO
{ GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF MEDONTE
'705 '725 '7910
PROPERTY
T-568 P.003/003
RtpORT
get -l~
MEDONTE
COUNTY
SCALE
2001
OF
I
SIMCOE
II = 30
Ir-'I
o 6 10
.
40 50
I
100FT
,
30
.
20
@ R.G.McKIBBON LIMITED
PART 2
MUST BE READ IN
WITH SURVEY REPORT
18. 2001
THIS PLAN
CONJUNCTION
DATED JULY
NOTES
Beoriri9$ shown nereon ore os Ircnomic and ore referred 10 Ihe
norlherly limil of parI I as shown on deposited plan 51R-6288
hoving c bearing 01 N 580:55'20" E
$(..lrvlIY MOl7UI77enls Found
S<.1rvey Monumenls Plan/eel
=b=
sho wn thus
:sho...." lhus
5.S.I.B.
S.I.B.
I.a.
1.1"'.
O/V
pi
738
DHG
CJ8S
- denotes Short S/cndard Iron Bars
- denotes Slondard Iron Bars
- denotes Iron Bars
- denotes Iron Pipes
- dllnoll!"s Origin U7known
- denol6$ deposited plan 5IR-G2BB
- denotes R.C. KI/kpcldck O.L-S.
- denotes D.H. Golbroilh O.L.$.
- denotes Dearden -8 Slanlon O.L.5-
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
I CERTIFY TfTA T
I) This survey and pion or€' ccrrecl and in accordance wilh Ihe Surveys Acl.
the '-and Tilles Acl and the Surveyor$ Act cnd II1e regula/ions mode under Ihem.
JUL r /B. 2001
Dole
2) The survey WOS' c:omp/eJed on Ihti!
R.. G. McKIBBON LIMITED
ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS
176 BULLOCK DRIVE . UNIT 10
MARKHAM. ONTARIO L3P IW2
PHONE (905) 294-3754
FAx (905) 294-9400
EMAIL- rgmol~ympoj;co.C()
F-822
I
i-
0::::
o
Z
w
Z.
-3
I
I .5,
R.
1 I
I
"" ~
<:> :; I
~
0 I "
z ~
<( ...... I
C5'> B I
If) c5 I
z ~ I
<:>
V5 I
If)
UJ !
V
Z N I
<:> 8
u ~ I
z .
I.J.J "" <::::.
w ~ .:>-
~ co ~
l- an ~
W z
CI:i
0: ~
w
u
Z
<( \
~
<:>
-J
....I
<(
0
<(
<:>
0:: i
<>:)
;;.
~
~
I:'..:
Q:)
:c
l-
(j)
I HIS REPORT WAS PREPARI
MR. AND MRS. GREENE
AND THE UNDERSIGNED ACe
RESPONSIBILITY FOR USE E
PARTIES
W-03-Q,2
02:38PM
F~OM-MI~"^~L ~~~~ L^" rl~M
. -- - - --
oq ~ 14-
CONVERSION NOTE
0151 ANCe::S SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARe:: IN FEET AND CAN
BE CONVERTED TO METERS B'Y MUL TIPL YING BY 0.'3048
ART
OF
LOT
8,
CONCESSION
10
PART I. P1..AN 5IR-5:383
PIN 58522 - 0049
653.40' pi 8 _
I-
t.",.,.,
1.5'_
SIB ~)
N 58.36'20" E."
r--- pId
I Roll...",... ~
180.00' (pi a ,..,1.1
p_1
a _.,
m.. tDSSJ
0_ /0' .--1h
0.10' e=f
PART
OF
LOT
8
~
1<;
~
~
'8 1
<:::S ~
~ ~
PART I. PLAN SIR-6288 .,~
"""...
PIN S8522 - 0048 (L T) PIN 585" - 0047 (L T)
106.01' .. ,{ ~
'1 '"
<::>
I .:'>'
\ ~
106./2' ... 23.90' ~
:ONCESS i ON 10 <.
~ to 1
" ~
'1 '"
"'" fonce
N 58.36 "20" E /eO.OO' 1lJ'" tDaSJ
24.07'
PIN S8522 - 0047 (L T)
PART
OF
LOT
8,
CONCESSION
10
'flsf Angle
Con /0.
'--
...- J;X>SI _ ...;'" ,tJ/K>$
LinlE BelwlEerI Lois 7 and B. Concession 10
ASSOOAllON OF ONTARIO
LAND SURVEYORS
PLAN SVBMISSlON FORM
LOT
7.
CONCESS I ON
10
1360040
-4-
"THIS PLAN IS NOT VALID
UNLESS IT IS AN EMBOSSED
ORIGINAL COpy
ISSUED BY THE SURVEYOR
In occoroonce with
Regulation 1026, Section 29(3)
FILE NO G-OI-IS
D q'-15
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
,
REPORT NO.:
COFA2002-B12
PREPARED BY: Todd WeathereH
DATE: May 7, 2002
APPLICANT: Royal Bank of Canada (Betty Gullett)
APPLICA TION NO.: B-12102
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 030 012 13815
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 1, Lot 46, Plan M-22 (OriIlia)
I PROPOSAL
I
The applicant is proposing a lot addition to an adjacent parcel of land. The land to be conveyed
has a lot frontage of 0 metres (0 feet), a lot depth of 60.96 metres (200 feet), and a lot area of
0.20 hectares (0.49 acres). The land will be added to a lot that has a lot frontage of 39 metres
(128feet), a lot depth of 61 metres (200 feet) and a lot area of 0.58 hectares (1.43 acres).
I AGENCY COMMENTS
,
Building Department: No Concerns
Roads Department:
I OFFICIAL PLAN
I
The subject property is designated Shoreline (Section DlO) 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 lots will be created and the
application is on the opposite side of Lake Simcoe, this application would be deemed to generally
conform to the policies of the Official Plan.
?SQ'-lh
I ZONING BY-LAW
I
The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) in Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended.
The proposed lot addition would encompass a metal shed and the rear portion of the dwelling that
was built on Lot 46 instead of Lot 47 and ensure all buildings from Lot 47 are wholly contained
with their property boundaries. On this basis the application would be deemed to comply with the
provisions of the Township's Zoning By-law
'RECOMMENDA nON
I
It is recommended that Consent Application B-12/02 be granted subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 3 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one
year from the date of giving of this notice.
Submitted by,
Todd Weatherell, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
~-/7
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Albert Pross seconded by Joe Charles
"That the Committee hereby GRANT Application B-] 2/02 subject to the
following conditions:
]. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be
stamped using Form 2 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfj]Jed wjthin
one year from the date of giving of this notice.
.....Carried"
I REQUIRE lHIS PLAN 10 BE PLAN ::>'" -
DE-POSllED UNDER lHE RECE-\'.JED AND DE-POSIIE.D ..
LAND TITLES ACT.
DA IE- ,,?E.C.E.~,8P~. .\,3,! ,I.~~.?, ,.'" ,..." DAlE ......"...E,!I.~..~I.I.!1.f..,..
""'''~''~'''." ~~~......
~ ,.".".........,,,....
Laocl Registrar lor t\1e
J,C. STANTON l.ANO TITl.ES OIVISION
01'11 ARlO LAND SUfWE.'fOR of SirflCoe '5"
CANADA LAND SIJRVE'lOR
CAUTION
,H'S PLAN'S NO' A PLAN OF SUBO'V'S'ON
,,"H'N ,HE MEANING Of ,HE PLANN'NG AC'
SCHEDUL.E Of PARTS
pART l.OCP>TION REGISTRP> T ION P>REP>
I parcel 46 - I 0.408 aC.
Lol 46, pion 1,\,22
2 SECTION ",-22 0.052 ac.
\
t=
I~ ...1
<:)
.." \
~
i',J.; .J
.....
.(
{)I
I w
I'
\
~
I
..:'
(' yo .....
\' f... ~ ....
...
'U>'\I>~~
'", <1).....0'
":;' <1', ... Ii> ...
"'-' <1' t-' II' .
O'~,~\~
~o:.-
pART
/. I)'"
't.~ !\ -r'~'~ ~.. I
\_jJ-.i\Vt.1-.
i...J
. '.,,'," ",;.;~, .",.J~;67~;>~: 40" Vi
,::\, \,~
~l
<:
<;(
-.I
~
~
46
~
~
,
'4- (5 ." \
~
5$\B
201.3:)'
--
",<:
\~~
- 0\
;010
\ '~
\;}IO
<r't
.~\
PAR"
z.
()
lOOO
N14'l7' 30"W
'0
~\
... ~o.
_ 0
- 0
o -
~ "
...
t'I
.
.0
Z
t~___~-_---C::~~
. ,,,_d'o'. ,00.0"
." "...
\~ \
~' /./)"_ 48 \
,I - ~ I
I
''J
, \---- ~[0'40'
----- ..,~:"
w i.,H.' b'O
. :
Q
~ ?J!;;'~CSL
... ; .,.'
Lt 7' .. \
'-...
,
" \
'.'
\.'..1
!.{J
"1"
,
,~' t
'..!
.)
i_ !" r
>-
4.
~
~
ex.
4.
Q..
...
o
~
\I>
10
o
o
o
~
W
J
Q..
4.
~
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Of SURVE.'<
46, PL AN N\ - 2:2
TOWNSHIP Of ORILL!A
lSOlJTtlERN 011/15101'11
NOW IN TtlE TOWNSr\IP OF ORO-MEOONTE
COUNT)' OF S\MCOE
SCALE: I",. 40'
J.C. STANTON O.L..S" c.L.S,
1995
PLAN
of L.OT
NOTE'
"."." .., ","0'0." ",,,,",0 '" .,,, u." ..,c,wooo ,,,,,..,
.",., . "."" oF ",.,,"0" '" ,.0.' 0' ,c" ..".
_-..---- ~_ .~~<"" .. <'........".. ,,,,,, '"~ ~
2q-lq
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
REPORT NO.:
COFA2002-B10
PREPARED BY: Todd Weatherell
DATE: May 7,2002
APPLICANT: Norman and Janet Langman
APPLICATION NO.: B-10102
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 010 005 10800
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 13, Lot 13, (Oro)
I PROPOSAL
,
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 36.99 hectares (91.4 acres). The land to
be retained has a lot area of 37.4 hectares (92.5 acres).
IAGENCY COMMENTS
t
Building Department: No Concerns
Roads Department:
;?5q -dO
I OFFICIAL PLAN
,
The subject property is designated Mineral Aggregate, Agricultural, and Environmental
Protection 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 of Section
D2.3.10. 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 will 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 sha]] 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)
Deeds were provided by the applicant, which show that the East and West Half of Lot 13
were once separately owned and conveyable. The proposed application is deemed to
generaJJy conform to the policies of the Official Plan once Committee is satisfied with
questions listed above
IZONING BY-LAW
I
The subject property is zoned Agricultural/Rural (AlRU) , Mineral Aggregate Resources
Two (MAR2) and Environmental Protection (EP) in Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended.
The proposed lot addition would not affect either the severed or retained lands with respect
to compliance with the Zoning By-law provisions. On this basis the application would be
deemed to comply with the provisions of the Township's Zoning By-law.
2f4-dJ
I
'RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Consent Application B-1 0/02 be granted subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be
stamped using Form 1 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That aJJ Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfi]led within
one year from the date of giving of this notice.
Submitted by,
Todd Weatherell, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
~q-,~
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Albert Pross seconded by Ken Robbins
"That the Committee hereby GRANT Application B-] 0/02 subject to the
fol1owing conditions:
]. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be
stamped using Form 2 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That al1 Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfil1ed within
one year
from the date of giving of this notice.
.. ...Carried"
~ en
~.. 8
... 0
10
o 5-11300
05-08100
o 0
o 0
U1 U1
I I
.... ...
... ...
NN
o N
o
o
U1
I
...
...
...
o
(}I
'005-11100
'005-11200
'005-11000
005-08900
005-10900
. '005-1081
tb
~\1
Sl\A- '"
'005-10800
fT1
'005-09000
, -005-10600
N
z
'005-09100
'005-10500
o
o
U1
I
o
10
...
(}I
o
--~ 1t"\kil"\ n
, 005-1 8700
;._, :....-.
)( _: j ~~
. 005-18850
',,,,.. T "j '7'
-
'.';' ..:. -
l' ~?'
005-18800
005-18900
005-19000
005-19100
, ~ .,.. - .,.
/: ,,\N tl)
~~\
.". ..:. ..; ....;
-: ....~.
f
I
005-10700 '005-19200
BAR~p~l \~
005-21200
ZA-~
005-21000
.-';-1
,__ :.-' i
-
'005-21100
005- 20900
r
L-
. 005- 20800
-
L'\"
)', '1 '5
'L fS
005-2070
'005-20700
. 005- 20602
'005-20610
005- 20500
, 005- 20400
!
Z
"
005-20330
'005-19400
,"'(,.;.' -:' ,~.
, -
05-1
'.-
j
.1!,,:. ..::. ...
.- --
-'! ,--
, "-'
. 005-19500
1 5 /_~6
SIDER
-," , ",,' j'" s...: ''-.,' ....OJ .... .::: ~~ "'..' '"
z
o '005-2035
:;0
-1
'005-20300
AD
, '~':,A;.. ,~.~!... .,;,~1 ,...">'\. " " ~.; ~ ....
~q -().~
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
I
REPORT NO.:
COFA2002-B13
PREPARED BY: Todd Weatherell
DATE: May 7, 2002
.
APPLICANT: Debra London
APPLICATION NO.: B-13/02
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 010 007 35000
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 3, Part of Lot 28, (Oro)
I PROPOSAL
,
The purpose of application B-13/02 is to permit the creation of a new residential Jot. The new Jot
is proposed to have a Jot frontage of 30.48 metres (JOO feet), a Jot depth of 60.96 metres (200
feet) and a Jot area of 0.19 hectares (0.46 acres). The land proposed to be retained would a Jot
frontage of 30.48 metres (100 feet), and a Jot area of approximately 1.01 hectares (2.5 acres).
'AGENCY COMMENTS
,
Bui]ding Department: No Concerns
Roads Department: No Concerns
I OFFICIAL PLAN
,
The subject property is designated Shoreline (Section D 1 0) in the Township's Official Plan.
The intent of the Official Plan policies is to protect the natura] features of the shoreline area
and to maintain the existing character of the residential area. This application is subject to the
policies of Section DJO.3.7 New residential Lots by Consent. A plan of subdivision is not required
in accordance with Section DI0.3.5. In accordance with the policies both the proposed Jot and
retained Jot front onto an existing public road maintained by the Township, and would not appear to
cause a traffic hazard, and appear capable of being serviced with an appropriate water supply and
means of sewage disposal. On this basis, the application would be deemed generally conform with
the policies of the Official Plan.
gq -;)5
'ZONING BY-LAW
I
The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) in Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended.
The proposed lot and retained lot would appear to meet the zoning requirements of this Zoning. On
this basis the application would be deemed to comply with the provisions ofthe Township's Zoning
By-law
I RECOMMENDATION
I
It is recommended that Consent Application B-J3/02 be granted subject to the following
conditions:
l, That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 2 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfi]]ed within one
year from the date of giving of this notice.
Submitted by,
Todd Weatherell, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
g q -d-~
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Dave Edwards seconded by Joe Charles
"That the Committee hereby GRANT Application B-13/02 subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
.
2. That three copies of a Reference Plan which indicates the existing right-of-
way to Mr. Rotstein's property, of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario
Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or appropriate
registerable description.
3. That three copies of deeds that acknowledge the existing Right-of-Way being
Part 1, Reference Plan 51 R-9419 be submitted to the Committee Secretary to
be stamped using Form 2 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of giving of this notice.
.. ...Carried"
~
~
2
2.980 ae. ~
--0
3.110 ac !
\
\
\
\
,
1
~'
I
I
j
;..'~~
"
yil:'J'c'
".of.) ,//'
'lV
~>'!? o~
/ (o,co
,
~
Q<J
\
\
1"\
~1~
~o
~
~,
'"
,.,p \
,. <,.>-~
.I' "1 "
~....
(\
\./
'%
.-
/, ~
~
q"
s>
\/
.'
i;
i
38':1:
N 30.41' 30.W
8.44'
N!502<OCJ"E
f-(r-/\/!r-'_r '__,
,.... "/-t-", 1-.- ,
""- . "'"--'\.J._
BA''('
c' /\,J
IAkr-
- ,\.t:;.
<:::' i ti .'7:..- ._:;::::
,,-0 I . \ ! '_ __ ""-.
'-'I
t r-\( , I -
BROKEt\J LO.
COt\JC ES 5,1
TOWNSHIP OF (
COUNTY OF S
Scale I inch :: I(
1973
SURVEYOR's CERnFICATE
HEREBY'CERT'F" ft.;;,;
I THIS SURVEY {.',D IJL~,(" ",1\1' ':;ORP.ECT tlN[
ACT ;..NC TYE REGISi=" .:..::' .)c'~~ ~'HE PEG',".;)'I
2 THE 3UR,S'" \~'{j,~ ;:o;,F,E;I::[, GN O:::C'EM8ER
~~/:'~
BEARINGS HERE(lI~ tJ.F-f' ,~,:;:'P':>I.:,,,,IC AND Afi
ON POLARIS AND N'IE REFERREG TO THE CENTR.
ONTARIO CO'ORDINI.\TE SY:-TEM (79030' W - U
U, M. E, _ DENOTES UNWIN, MURP~IY 8 ESTEN, (
-O-IT 00"_ ., DENOTES IRON TU6E
-fi}-SIB STANDAP,[I IRON BAR
_._ 18 IRON BAD 5/6" SO ): 2 FEET LONG
CAUTION: This c;;.urvey i~
subd ivision VI ithin the me
29, 32 and 33 of the ~
R'OGER
R.
\1\1
ONTARIO L/J.rvD S
BOX 23 I : B P. R R IE:
DOle NOVEMBER 21.1973 _= \ For D!
Ref 22- 3-0- 578 \ Sur..'
gcc-d-8
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMITfEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
I
REPORT NO.:
COFA2002-Bll
PREPARED BY: Todd Weatherell
DATE: May 7,2002
APPLICANT: Carl and Eric Cumming
.
APPLICATION NO.: B-ll/02
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 010 002 33100
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 5, Part of Lot 20, (Oro)
I PROPOSAL
,
The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment (lot addition). The land to be conveyed has a
lot area of approximately ]4.2 hectares (35 acres). The land to be retained has a lot area of
approximately 28.3 hectares (70 acres).
'AGENCY COMMENTS
I
Building Department: No Concerns
Roads Department:
J OFFICIAL PLAN
I
The subject property is designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan. The
general intent of the policies is to preserve the agricultural lands of the Township and to
maintain the open countryside. As the application is for a boundary adjustment no new
lot is being created, this application would be deemed to generally conform to the policies
of the Official Plan.
~C{-()9
I ZONING B,Y-LAW
,
The subject property is zoned AgriculturallRural (AJRU), and Environmental Protection (EP) in
Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The proposed lot addition would not affect either the severed or
retained lands with respect to compliance with the Zoning By-law provisions. On this basis the
application would be deemed to comply with the provisions of the Township's Zoning By-law.
I RECOMMENDA nON
I
It is recommended that Consent Application B-] ]/02 be granted subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 3 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That a]J Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfj]]ed within one
year from the date of giving of this notice.
Submitted by,
Todd Weatherell, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
'3 ct - '?:J)
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Ken Robbins seconded by Joe Charles
"That the Committee hereby GRANT Application B-11/02 subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be
stamped using Form 2 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of giving of this notice.
... ..Carried"
:'\
,
....
,
,
....
"
~~
~
, , ,
. , .
c}{.iii9(ll
\"-""Y-~-'Qj'-~1 ' hi'
: c&\~~~
I ' (~i'~i'~ q~rU
\.. , -j,. ,'.' ;.
.;... r-\'~ .~1\-. -!.k-.
c .-.l,.-- ~_..,.;"."_c,,. ,__,..,:
! '
.. ....
"
,
1
!
I
I
L
I
!
i
-[-
I- ,
!
.~L,.
'w. \
: . - . 'V>:" ~:.~"
, \4..; ~ ~;
_.:..~.._- :..~J
, ,
.~-~ '.-"-'-
'~r
~:
i i
._-t-...:
, <J!
: ...J, !
-...-
,I,'Qj"
.~
,.--""_. .
~
. N,
.~;'
,i_~+.
'n...
~ ~ ,
L.~__.
;~
i ,,~;
;~!
...'-0.--.<...-..-..
..--.--
; ,
_.. . --- '--..-., ,. --~.
. . . .
,;c~c
.. . '
._.~Cftu-r' ,
~..--. .....-...-..-
! .--
-'~--
...-...
~:-7'
'j1
:~Nri"~r
~..
.~-Ln.
......
..
"~"-'"
~
';~~
;...
..m~lj.,
'uj
.:<1' C
00
;.....:
/:..>.
T.."....;.
, --
~.. . ~
-
~;
~
:._~-_. .-..-.-.
'<..., ,,:
,,',' r;
lJi: -i.l.r
~ C!.J
-" ..j'
,,~,
: "fJ
'i1'i
,.'
.. -. -..
... _[t~j~E~!
....-.-.
2? q -33
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
REPORT NO.:
COF A2002-B14
PREPARED BY: Todd Weatherell
DATE: May 7, 2002
APPLICANT: John Strimas and Jane Burgess
APPLICATION NO.: B-14/02
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 020 005 08800
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 8, North Part of Lot 12, (Medonte)
I
I PROPOSAL
The purpose of application B-14/02 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot. The
new lot is proposed to have a lot frontage of 64.8 metres (212.60 feet), a lot depth of
50.56 metres (165.87 feet) and a lot area of 0.328 hectares (0.8096 acres). The land
proposed to be retained would a lot frontage of 135 metres (443 feet), a lot depth of 144
metres (472.49 feet) and a lot area of 1.46 hectares (3.6 acres).
,
IAGENCY COMMENTS
.
Building Department: Structure converted to single family dweJIing without building
department approval. Permit #124/00, proposed and issued for garage.
Engineer/ Architect review required to assess all construction work not inspected.
Verification of Hydro inspection required. Change of use permit required. Order to
comply #35 issued August 21/01 to obtain a building permit under Section 8(1) of
Ontario Building Code Act, has not been complied with.
Roads Department: No Concerns
gq '3~
,
'OFFICIAL PLAN
The subject property is designated Rural and Environmental Protection Two OverJay in the
Township's Official Plan. The general intent of the Rural poJicies is to preserve and
promote the rural character of the Township and the maintenance of the open countryside.
As the proposed application is to separate two dwe]]jngs (section D3.3.1), the proposed
application is deemed to not to conform with the poJicies of the Official Plan as the second
dwelling on the property was created after December] 6, ] 998 which was when Official
Plan Amendment #3 (Creation of new lot for properties which have two legal single
detached dwellings) was adopted. Therefore the severance of a residential lot with the
second dwe]]ing wiJ] not conform to the poJicies of the Official Plan.
....
,
'ZONING BY-LAW
The subject property is zoned Environmental Protection (EP) in Zoning By-law 97-95, as
amended. The permitted uses permitted within the Environmental Protection Zone are
public parks, conservation uses and agricultural uses. Minor Variance application A-8/00
approved an accessory building to be permitted 9.5 metres (31 feet) away from the front
yard setback, but it did not permit the construction of a single family dwe]]jng; therefore the
application does not conform to the Township's Zoning By-law.
,
I RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Consent Application B-] 4/02 be DENIED, as the application does
not meet the requirements for the Townships Official Plan and Zoning By-law.
Submitted by,
Todd Weatherell, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
.....
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Joe Charles seconded by Albert Pross
"That the Committee hereby DEFER App1ication B-14/02 to a110w a site
inspection to be completed of the property.
.....Carried"
"
f
2?Cf~35
U)
z
o
.....
U)
U)
r:iI
U
Z
o
u~
o
Z 0:
r:iI 0
~~
UJ
E-< ~
r:iI 0:
!):It:
r:iI
U
~
I (WIT) . I:S=
o 0
@\~q~~
~~ - - ~
PIN 58523-0168(LT) TI 0
#:" ~
t~
\~
-~-I-
PART 2
306,62'
N59"30'30'E(P1&:M)
g
N
N
in
'"
cD
'"
RETAINED LANDS
AREA 3,608 ACRES
AREA 1.460 HECTARES
! PROPOSED SEVERANCE
t- AREA 0.8093 ACRES
t AREA 0.3275 HECTARES
co
"0
'"
...
N
PART 1
51R - 29252
PIN 58523-0166(LT)
in
q
;::,
@.'.w.
I 117,70'
~TWOOD
~CLAD SHED
8.T
.. N59'30'30'E
WOOD ;b-~
PUMP-HOUSE ~ CLAD SHED
'"
-~l ,,"
-- --- ~.~"
~; , .'" ~'~
/" ~~~ 2
/ GO
LOT
12
WOOD CLAD
46,00'
1 1/2 STOREY WOOD
CLAD DWELLING
No, 4910
,/
z
o
IJ)
IJ)
W
U
Z
o
U
118,85'
...-
518(1035)
~WIT)
,~. 18.8'~M)
-, '- ~"(P2)
XI "'" 1\-<96,
~J~O"
I "",1so(,o-2
~.f()
I '-. -2
P AI< 1 i '!!""-"
I 51 R - 1 77 1 0 '-f../rj
\ ""'<(i~(i
PIN 58523-0167(LT) ~(,o<) ~.
\ '< \":
"'" 11 -
I SI8(139~ ~
(WIT) ,
WOOD CL,[,
;:'vMr:- r1\J\ ~ t
IN 58523-07 70(LT)
:ETCH FOR SEVERENCE
PART OF LOT 12, CONCESSION 8
mAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF MEDONTE
NOW IN THE
rnSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
0 :IS eo 100 200 FEET
I I I I I
~
SCALE 1'.50 '
APRIL 25, 2002
h::'
.;::::.
......
FENCE \IJ
l,75't>ST ~
<:::::i
I
~
~
II')
~
C(
o
o
cDofI
"'.
\.a.Iu;)"'*;,
!it '"
~ ~
"
z
:>
~
o
..;
'"
'"
~
~
IX!
W
U
Z
W
'"
~
w
~
L~~T ~
'"
iD
'!'
;;;
z
25q -~
S'
016
FROM S1
WATER'
POINT BEAR
1 N49"'
2 N46"
3 N39'{
4 NJ9'!
5 N43'
6 N51',
7 N58"
8 N63'
9 N7T
10 N7T
11 N8T
12 N75'
13 N79'
14 N78"
15 N80'
16 N84'
17 N8T
18 N83'
19 N83'
20 N8Z
21 N83
22 N85
23 N89
24 N87
...,
~,
~
o
...,
,,;
N
o
N
...,
"
"'
0)
(::\
~
IX)
-"
'"
518(1390) \
"sr'~ ~ I
- PART '1 lieS' IS'
"' 016 016
51 R-17710 ~~~ r;'.
~ N
---- Cl.
18(1390) ~~ ;
{Sq-37
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF
ADJUSTMENT
I
REPORT NO.:
COFA2002-B15
PREPARED BY: Todd Weatherell
DATE: May 7, 2002
APPLICANT: Cameron Clarke Wardlaw
APPLICATION NO.: B-15/02
ROLL NUMBER: 4346 01000720900
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Concession 3, Part of Lot 28, (Oro)
I PROPOSAL
I
The applicant is proposing a lot addition to an adjacent parcel of land. The land to be conveyed
has a lot area of 570 square metres (6135.6 square feet). The land to be retained has a lot
frontage of 65. 16 metres (213.7 feet), a lot depth of448.6 metres (1471. 78 feet) and a lot area of
2.10 hectares (5.19 acres).
I AGENCY COMMENTS
I
Building Department: No Concerns
Roads Department: No Concerns
I OFFICIAL PLAN
t
.
The subject property is designated ShoreJine, Rural Settlement Area, and Rural in the
Township's Official Plan. The intent of the Official Plan policies is to maintain the character
of the shoreline residential area. As the proposed application is the consideration of a lot
addition from one existing residential lot to another, the proposed application is deemed to
generally conform to the poJicies of the Official Plan.
tfq -60
I ZONING BY-LAW
I
The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential Exception 83 (SR*83) in Zoning By-law 97-95,
as amended. The proposed lot addition would not affect either the severed or retained lands with
respect to compliance with the Zoning By-law provisions. On this basis the application would be
deemed to comply with the provisions of the Township's Zoning By-law
I RECOMMENDA nON
I
It is recommended that Consent Application B-15/02 be granted subject to the foJJowing
conditions:
#-.
,.,
1. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Building Department approves of the
application, in writing.
2. 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.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped
using Form 3 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That aJJ Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfiJJed within one
year from the date of giving of this notice.
Submitted by,
Todd Weatherell, Junior Planner
TOWNSHIP PLANNER COMMENTS:
..
Andria Leigh, Planner
Date
..
~Cl -3C;
Decision
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by, Albert Pross seconded by Dave Edwards
"That the Committee hereby GRANT Application B-15/02 subject to the
following conditions:
]. That the Township of Oro-Medonte Bui1ding Department approves of the
app1ication, in writing.
2. That three copies of a Reference P1an of the subject 1ands prepared by an
Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary or
appropriate registerab1e description.
3. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be
stamped using Form 2 as prescribed in the Planning Act.
4. That all Municipa1 taxes be paid to the Municipality.
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfil1ed within
one year from the date of giving of this notice.
.. ...Carried"
RtOCC ROAD
PiN - COUNTY ROA/)
__ H64-::'JcJ-tl 5d551-C<Oi!~ No. 20
~ Hi4,~- _ __ (11;211) \ ~)
I 202 11 (PI)
\ \.. :-H."€.-CVR~-cY1 , ~ .21 10.43
11.01.).1. .v. JO.!I :i'... ,. ......,-
1 ....---------... ... ... r.,. I G.ZIo ......
I
I
I
I
,
::; f
; :.
-,-
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
r
~-
-=-- _.,
,,,T
..vl
r~
'"
.>
~j
:::i!:
1t: ~
~:O
;~
27
.
~ !
!. Ii ~ i
:: ~
~
;
;
>;
~i
,f.:~I"';;
'-7ii-'
-
-
---
--
UN!:
A~.1N.~
~
A/ZEZ/
~" I;;f'.oc;l
"-;c. AJ>';>"'O"J
J.L.;.~;
~iiSsf:'_:~~-<oe.~~
i
;
.
~
..
!.
i
~
.
g.
PARr::. PLAN S!R-20!!!:r:
P.':'.?, 1, PL.:;';'; S!P.-2()ii90
PiN 5i:!55:;- ::-Q5t:
=~.
,::
~;
~
~
!
W'[::ST
~
~
OF
PAHT
PART 1
AAEA= :t2lozam2
.
"n"
CJ,:i'''C~::;S'O''\
;
~
I
.....--.....~
'--.~
~"""''-........
; .....-.--
;
.
...-
..3(""".11
~
~:
~N
:f:..
-,
...
".,t;_ ,.-
.
~
~
.
:=.: ~
O~t_200(16.'
~
~
LOT
PART 2
AR(A~ 't 20484-rT\t
'-;U ::: f
0.'_' .
..
II~)
.
~
~
~ %
SIOC.\:t"l ~ -H
N~"9'OO.E: 65.16 (~1. w.o..) - N~'''9'OO''t 6..62 (PI'" Set) 0
=-~ 2.~ I :':'-::'2.011
~... r......., 11. 'tOI7I "",.. """" _'. Uvo~' ,.. 200'
... ';: ~2.
. ......
.
,-,
IOn
I I
LAKF: SIMCOE:
I REQUIRE THtS PL.,t.N 1'0
BE OEPOSITED UNOtR THE.
I.,,4.NO ~ AC1.
PLAN 51 R- ~I~
"tCENtO ANt) O(POSITt'D:
0.,.., AilG'~lacol
DA.Tt ;
~ .. r-1.4\6ol.1NS"
1 OEPIJ'tY l.ANO RtGl~ FOR
THE v.ND m\.ES OM$tON Of
S$NCOE ( No. S\ )
...,
''''''''
...
.tU or PIN ~~6~
!
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
J
PLAN OF SURVEY OF
PART OF LOT 27
AND
PART OF WEST PART OF LOT 28
, CONCESSION ;3
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
(CEOC....PHIC TOWNSHIP 0, ORO)
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
SCAl-E ,1 OOC
7!J 1tI.. 10'" a
::::"! L'I -;:-
---
EPLETT " WOROBEC SURVEY1NC l TO,
2001
...
..,
.'
BEARING REf'ERENCE
8EARINGS AR[ ASTRONOMIC AND ARE REFERRED TO
PARt OF THE WESTERLY UMrT or PART ,. PVoN 51Ft-2oe90
HAV1HG A D(.ARING or NJZJ~'$O-W
AS $MOWN ON SJI,ID PI"AN.
i
;
..
~
~ ~
LEGEND
~oTn roUND MONUMEN'T
o DE;NOTE$ pl,,)o.NTECo UONUMENT
IS DtNOTE$ IAON BAA
SIB DENO'TC'5 S'fAN().UtO IRON a,..R
M._. DENOTES ...EASUREO
P1 DENOTES PLAN ~'R_20e90
HI~:> UI;..NOtLS H.H. Wt.I.SMAN, V.I..::;.
12~5 ()(NOTES A.C. AAfKtS. 0.1.,5.
WTT D~OTE'S WJTNB':-
-
".~"
. r
~~
l:i
~ ~1
~,
;t ~
~ ~\
..
..
~
~~ ~
:t
~ i
~
SURVEYOR'S CERTtFlCATE
I CtffTIF'Y THA.i~
" 'OOS SURVt"Y MfO ~ AM: CORRECt .&NO IN ACCQR:ONiC(
'ftI'noI THE $UfNt'I'S ,.;r. TME $IJR'/t'YORS ...cT. THt
\.ANI) fU\.LS AC1 ANt) lHl RlGtltAtfQHS NAOE IJHOf.R 1HEW,
1. ~ 72:7~~ON1K 3~~
o,a.Tt ,I,lAN J. WOI'!08E:C
""'" ....., """""'"
.
o
~
~
~
..
~
DIstANCES
AND CAN
0.3048
SHOWN ON THIS Pl...'N AAE
Bt CONVE"RTCO TO F'EE1' sY
IN MCTRES
PMtNNC BY..
.
t.1)
~...:
~tQttC "':
........,.
00-2152A
EPI.ETT " wOROBEC S\IWEYIIG L'TD &-
0ntIrI0 Land S\neyonI
134 ANN( S1'RaT soutH - UNJIC - BARRIE .. \.4N 6A2
BARR!( : (~) 722 - 1222 'AX : (705) 721 - 6~
CaJ)WA'TER: (705) N6 - 7208 [-MAIl ; _..~~,~
"\; 1. 'J'
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
FROM THE DIRECTOR OF BUILDING/pLANNING
DEVELOPMENT
IREPORT TO COUNCIL I
REPORT NO.: BD2002-05
Council:
PREP ARED BY: Ron Kolbe
C. of W.
DATE: May 17, 2002
Motion #
SUBJECT: Erwin Notter
4 Blue Ridge Cres.
B. P. #92-054 (formerly OriIlia Twp.
R.M. File #C11-011936
Date
I BACKGROUND
I
. Mr. Notter was advised that as noted on his Provisional Occupancy Permit
issued Sept. 19/94 that a Final Occupancy will be issued when the final lot
grading was complete.
. Since this property is in a registered subdivision R. G. Robinson would do a final
inspection at a cost of $150.00/visit plus GST.
. Mr. Notter wanted an immediate inspection the same day and was advised as
per the fees set that the $150.00 fee would be doubled if an inspection were
required quicker than 3 days notice.
. Mr. Notter paid the required fee of $150.00 & GST.
. Al Lees from R. G. Robinson met with Mrs. Notter on May 8, 2002, completed the
forms as required by the Municipality, noted two minor deficiencies and faxed
the approval to the Building Department.
. The FINAL occupancy was issued on May 17, 2002. Mailed to Mr. Notter.
I RECOMMENDATION
~
Mr. Notter's request for a refund of the fee required to complete his Final Occupancy be
denied.
~s Ctf~ly, subtpi~j
~~, /i~
nald M. Kolbe, CBCO, AScT, MAATO
Director of Building/Planning Development
C.A.o. Comments:
DATE:
c.A.O.
Dept.Head
t
Q
t:'7
:(
t!~. ~K.
~L.
I
..../
Erwin Notter 'W_"___'<~
4 Slue Ridge Cres. A.R. #1 ___ ~
Orillia, Ontario L3V 6H1 ".// ~'" "\
May 8, 2002
His Worship Mayor Neil Craig ~,. ," 'c ,^p {?~
Oro-Medonte Township ,~
Re: Home Occupancy Certificate ~ 1'" ~~
~ Uv. .5t-v-'
Dear Sir: ~ U
, am enclosing one copy each of "Report of Inspection" pertaining to Permit No, 92-054
dated January 27, 1994 and "Provisional Occupancy Perm if' dated Sept. 19",~.~94.
Please note that we have built our home on 4 Blue Ridge Cres. on a turnkey basis,- .-~,
complete with landscaping, and moved in Sept. 1992.
For whatever reason, the building inspection and subsequent report was done in Jan. 94
only, with 8 deficiencies as listed on the enclosed document. A final inspection took place in
Sept. 94, resulting in a "Provisional Occupancy Permit" dated Sept. 19, 1994. This
certificate confirms (1 st paragraph) that subject premises have been inspected and appear
to comply with the occupancy requirements.
At the bottom of this Provisional Occupancy Certificate you will find the following
statements:
"A final occupancy certificate will be issued upon written request when:
Final lot 9radin9 has been completed,
Other conditions, as required have been completed"
Note: As stated above, this property was completely landscaped long before the final
inspection took place on Sept. 19, 1994. Why would anyone, under these
circumstances, start talking about lot grading 2 years after the fact and make this a
condition to receiving a final occupancy certificate??
The Provisional Occupancy Certificate states that other conditions, as required have
been completed.
Under the conditions outlined above, I fail to understand why we would not have received
the final occupancy permit in September 94.
Your Mr. Ron Kolby has advised me that he personally has approved a $150.00 charge
plus GST to a total of $160.50 and recommended an outside engineer to do these lot
grading inspections.
Your Worship, we paid a substantial lot levy and also paid for the building permit. Would it
not be feasible for a building inspector to determine that a landscaped lot does not need
any "further grading" and that Mr. Kolby's appointed outside engineer's inspection is,
therefore, not a necessity?
t
nl\ ~
(; b )- I
Oro-Medonte Township
- 2-
Please consider this my "written request" for a final occupancy permit. We have recently
sold our home and require this permit to conclude this transaction. I have delivered to the
Township Office my cheque #512 in the amount of $160.50. I would appreciate receiving
the Final Occupancy Permit before June 15, 2002 and feel that, under the circumstances
outlined above, I should be refunded the amount of my cheque.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for your consideration and help.
Respectfully,
Erwin Notter
cc: Councillor Ruth Fountain
Ends.
Copy of Report of Inspection dated Jan. 27/94
Copy of Provisional Occupancy Permit dated Sept. 19/94
-~---~...,--
\:'",
ORO · MEDONTE
R.R. 1, ORO STATION, ONTARIO LOL 2EO
TEL. (705) 487-2171
BUll.DING DEPARTMENT
PROVISIONAL OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE
Lot",.. .;2~...... . BlocK .. Co~dDP:/~':.{.... ../1Z.2-
This will confirm that the subject premises bave been inspected and appear to comply with the
occupancy requirements of the Ontario Building Code and/or Township Building By-Law.
Temporary guards may protect excessive grade differences. It is the builder's/homeowner',s
responsibility to request inspection of pennanent guards.
The Township does not inspect or have jurisdiction over electrical inspection,
For your information, the following items have been observed: ,~,
....,....................(3 Pq.;l.~.~lf..... ~~~~PE01-:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..... ~ . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . -. -. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . ~ . ~ . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . ." " . . . . . ~ " . . . . . . . .
. . ~ . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . ~ ~ . . . . .'. . . '.' . . . . . . . .-'~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .'.. . . ~ . . . . . . . , . ~ .' .
... ~ ~. ~""" ~.............. ~ ~ ~ ~........, ~. ~. ~. ~........... ~..... ~.... ~ ..... ~-..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . ~ . . ..... ~ '. . . . ....
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ ~ . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.' . . .'. .' . . . . . .'~'~ . . '>
. . . . . . ~ . . ~ . . . . . . . . ~ . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . -. ',' .'. . . . . .
............... ~..... ~... ~"'" ~.....,. ~....,.... ~.... ~-'..... ~.~"'" ...... .~'. - .....
A final occupancy certificate will be issued upon written request when:
(jfJ rmal lot grading bas been eompIeted
Other conditions, as required have been completed
S.C.D.H.U. & Onto Hydro Final Inspection obtiinMifreq~.:'i;';~:~
TJtle Restrlclion may affect transferoftbese lands. " ,," ',,'.', , . c, c.,.;, :c...
_< · , .,~ \ ~h I.( . . .by. . . . . . m <i0i",;;,...,....,..'.,...,>,.,;.,'j,.~,..,j,',},!,~~,.
e:~\. 1J~".i"'~<
-
-', ,;-.,~
..
b
PERMIT NO:
ORO.:MEDONTE
Building Inspection Department
( REPORT OF INSPECTION
IJr 0;; If DATE: ;5/JrJ ;J~jIfINSPECTlON:
~ b '\ I~?:;'~'
ORC STATi>; ~ 8O~;:
ONTARIO LOL 2EO
TEL: (705) 487-2171
.
~
"II
,
o
("7(' t111 ru: '1
"
J"
~ ',-f"
TAKE,iNOTICE: that you are required to comply with the following order(s):
C~
.,
'"'
l
.Ii A~(2:"-' .' ,
Gt?;tlWt-SPB .'
<-" -
c,; ""
,,_.