Committee of the Whole - 10 Feb 2015 - Agenda

Published February 10, 2015

Word Count 9017 words

Reading Time 43 min read

Body: Committee of the Whole Type: Agenda Meeting: Committee of the Whole Date: February 10, 2015 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Committee of the Whole/2015/Committee of the Whole - 10 Feb 2015 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA

TIME: DATE: PLACE:

7:00 PM, Tuesday, February 10, 2015 Council Chambers.

Call to Order

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

Scheduled Closed Session - n/a

***Recess *** - n/a

Delegations

(a)

Anne Prichard - Community Futures Development Corporation

2-3

(b)

Carolyn Bonta - Elbow Lake Environmental Education Centre Queen’s University Biological Station

4 - 11

(c)

Helen Bartsch - Johnston Point

12 - 18

Reports Requiring Action

(a)

Lindsay Mills, Planner, re Proposed Rezoning to Permit Annual Special Events in addition to a Recreational Resort Use, part Lot 1, Concession VII, Storrngton

19 - 21

(b)

Lindsay Mills, Planner, re: Official Plan Update and Overview

22 - 68

Reports for Information - n/a

Rise & Report

(a)

CRCA

(b)

QRCA

(c)

RVCA

Information Items

(a)

Roger De Gannes, Head of Traffic Operations, Ministry of Transportation, re: Consultation on Ontario’s Default Speed Limit

69 - 71

(b)

Around the Rideau Newsletter - January/February 2015

72 - 73

New Business

Closed Session (if requested)

Adjournment

Page 2 of 73

Frontenac Community Futures Development Corporation

What is the Frontenac CFDC asking of council members and staff? I am here to ask council members and staff to continue to actively refer individuals and businesses to the Frontenac CFDC should you think they may benefit from our programs or services. What is the Frontenac CFDC? The Frontenac Community Futures Development Corporation (CFDC) is a not-for-profit corporation run by a volunteer board of directors and funded by the Federal Development Agency of Southern Ontario (FedDev). Our mission is to stimulate community and economic development throughout the Frontenacs – aptly expressed by the tag line “building business…. growing communities”. Frontenac CFDC Strategic Plan The Frontenac CFDC board has identified “pivotal” areas of focus. Vibrant Communities: Act as a catalyst to improve the vitality, range of local services and visual appeal of our communities. Promoting Business: Increase efforts in promoting local businesses to consumers and other businesses. Tourism Accommodation: Encourage and support efforts to expand and enhance the supply of tourism accommodation, particularly in support of year-round tourism and upgrading of accommodation. Food and Beverage (FAB) Region: A regional marketing partnership to attract and grow small scale (artisanal) food and beverage businesses. Awareness of our services Frontenac CFDC Services and Products Whether your constituent is considering starting a small business in the Frontenacs, seeking advice or financing for your existing business or require assistance for their community project, we can help. The Frontenac CFDC offers: Business information and counselling at no cost Business workshops Commercial loans Interest-free loans* Community Economic Development Eastern Ontario Development Program *for eligible commercial projects and subject to available funding Commercial Loans - The Frontenac CFDC offers flexible commercial financing up to $250,000 for new or existing businesses in the County of Frontenac when financing from traditional lenders is not available. The organization also offers interest-free loans for the development of vacant or underutilized commercial properties that have the potential to create or maintain employment. As well, façade improvements on commercial/retail properties located in the villages are eligible.

Page 3 of 73

Futurpreneur Canada supports young entrepreneurs with up to $45,000 in financing, an expert business mentor for up to two years. Launch Lab’s Business Mentorship Program – a program where “entrepreneurs in residence” offer mentoring and industry expertise at no cost. Eastern Ontario Development Program If the constituent has an idea grow their business or for a project that will provide economic impact to the community they may be eligible for a 50% EODP grant. The municipality is eligible to apply as well. The program is in place until Dec 2018 and applications are being taken on a continuous intake subject to available funding and projects may be multi-year. Promoting Local Businesses – encourage businesses to contact us so we can help promote On-line Business Directory Newsletter – distributed quarterly through Frontenac News to the entire County and includes “Congratulations” to businesses for milestones (they need to let us know) and will include a business profile. Social Media – Promoting businesses on Facebook, Twitter and You Tube Media – something newsworthy? we will attempt to get them media coverage For you to stay informed on our services Website – www.frontenaccfdc.com and Facebook - facebook.com/frontenaccfdc Twitter – Twitter.com/frontenaccfdc YouTube – Youtube.com/frontenaccfdc Email notification – sign up for automatic email notification of up upcoming workshops, information on grants and community events through our website Contact Information Sue Theriault, Office Manager and EODP Coordinator, sue@frontenaccfdc.com Terry Romain, Business Development Officer, terry@frontenaccfdc.com Anne Prichard, Executive Director, anne@frontenaccfdc.com 613-372-1414 or 1-888-372-9962 5062 Rd 38, Harrowsmith

Page 4 of 73

Page 5 of 73

Page 6 of 73

Page 7 of 73

Page 8 of 73

Page 9 of 73

Page 10 of 73

Page 11 of 73

Page 12 of 73

Submission to the Township of South Frontenac Committee of the Whole Prepared for Feb. 10, 2015 Meeting By Loughborough Lake Concerned Citizens Group Topic: Concerns with Proposed Vacant Land Condominium Development on Johnston Point We thank Council for this opportunity to highlight certain issues with the proposed development. We believe Council will benefit from having examined these issues before the Open House.

Water frontage Measurements to determine legal units/lots on Johnston’s Point (A) Narrow and Shallow Bodies of Water

A Narrow Body of Water is defined as an area where the minimum general distance from shoreline to shoreline is 150m (492 ft.). No lot with water frontage shall be approved adjacent to a narrow waterbody unless the water frontage is at least 150m (492 ft.) A Shallow Body of Water is defined as less than 3 m (10ft.) deep, 30m (100 ft.) offshore at low water. Waterfront lots adjacent to a shallow waterbody may be required to have a water frontage of 150m (492 ft.) {South Frontenac Official Plan, Section 7.1.1 Special Severance Policies Shallow and Narrow Bodies of Water}
Johnston Point is surrounded by Long Bay, a Narrow Body of Water on the north shore and a Shallow Body of Water on the end of the Point and on the south shore. {See Attached Maps: Johnston Point - Water Depth (Bathymetry) Map , Depth Contour Map - Dept. of Lands and Forests, Water Depth – Johnston Point Comment: Therefore, at least a 150m water frontage is required for all units /lots on the entire shoreline of Johnston Point.
Fotenn Consultants, acting for the Developer, produced a Planning Justification Report June 2014, {See report at http://www.goo.gl/mrkJM3 in the “Original Plan June” folder}. It included a chart (P.17) for the proposed (R) zoning which showed the following data: Provision - Water Frontage (minimum), Requirements - 91m and 150m for narrow waterbodies , Proposed - 91m south shore / 150m north shore. Comment: (RLSW) zoning, which is what the Township would potentially consider for the rezoning, includes the same Requirements - 91m and 150m for narrow water bodies. The expectation is that the Official Plan 7.1.1 Special Severances – Shallow and Narrow Bodies of Water would be applied where shallow and narrow water bodies exist.

Page 13 of 73 Questions:

Does Council agree that the policies pertaining to Shallow Water Bodies contained in Section 7.1.1-

Special Severance Policies would overrule other planning policies pertaining to waterfront measure? 2. Does Council agree that the units adjacent to the shallow water off Johnston Point shall require a 150m

waterfront? (B) Water Frontage, High Water Mark, Wetlands

The South Frontenac Township Zoning By-laws and Official Plan definitions for “Water frontage”, “High Water Mark” and “Wetlands” state: “Water frontage shall mean all property abutting a waterbody measured perpendicular to the side lot lines in a straight line between the two said lot lines at a point where the side lot lines intersect with the high water mark.” {South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-law, By-law No. 2003-75, P.21} “High Water Mark shall mean the mark made by the action of water under natural conditions on the shore or bank of a waterbody, which action has been so common and usual and so long continued that it has created a difference between the character of the vegetation or soil on one side of the mark and the character of the vegetation or soil on the other side of the mark.” {South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-law, By-law No. 2003-75, P.21} {other pertinent definitions, P. 2–22} “Wetlands means lands that are seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water, as well as lands where the water table is close to or at the surface. In either case, the presence of abundant water has caused the formation of hydric soils and has favoured the dominance of either hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants. The four major types of wetlands are swamps, marshes, bogs and fens.” {South Frontenac Official Plan, P.4}
All of Long Bay and a large area of Johnston Point are designated as Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSWs). See Attached Map: Provincially Significant Wetlands at Johnston Point and Long Bay
The Johnston Point Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSWs) are identified as Red Maple Mineral Deciduous Swamp Type (SWD3-1) Red maple dominates and they also contain silver maple, black ash, diverse shrubs and ground cover.{See Environmental Impact Assessment, June 12, 2014,P. 8,9,10, http://www.goo.gl/mrkJM3 in the “Original Plan June” folder

Comments and Questions:

Considering the above Zoning By-law, many of the condominium units do not appear to have been measured correctly and do not comply with the water frontage requirements. See Attached Map: Proposed DevelopmentSite and Existing Conditions Plan
Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority (CRCA), in its Response (August 8, 2014) {See http://www.goo.gl/mrkJM3 in the “Comments” folder}, asked whether the ‘Property Line’ on the ‘Site Conditions’ drawing represented the high water mark, and asked that the developer clearly identify the high water mark on the site drawings. The developer complied and clearly indicated “High Water Mark” at 4 points on the property line. {See maps at http://www.goo.gl/mrkJM3 in “Sept. 2014 Update” folder} Thus, we expect the 150m water frontage of each unit to be the property line which is also the high water mark. 2

Page 14 of 73 3. The Developer has not used the high water mark (property line) as water frontage, as prescribed in the South Frontenac definitions, for the units where there are wetlands. Rather, it appears that the developer has used the boundary at the rear of the wetlands as the requisite 150m water frontage next to narrow and shallow bodies of water. Question: “Do the South Frontenac Township Zoning By-laws and Official Plan support this interpretation of water frontage?” Finally, we believe that all the units on Johnston Point must have a 150m water frontage that is measured at the high water mark of Loughborough Lake (also the property line of Johnston Point) as per the Township Zoning Bylaws and Official Plan. II. Environmental Impact Assessment

All of Long Bay and a large area of Johnston Point are designated as Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSWs). The Developer hired a consultant, Ecological Services, to do an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) on Johnston Point. {See the report at http://www.goo.gl/mrkJM3 in the “Original Plan June” folder}
A second Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) would provide an objective second opinion , help to address the serious concerns of many residents and • determine the wetland boundaries • analyze the impact of the development on the wetlands and the lake • analyze the impact of the common element lane/roadway on the wetlands and the lake • provide an analysis of the diverse land including the wetlands • examine the diversity within the woodlands and plant species • assess the presence, movement and habitat of wildlife and threatened or endangered species • analyze the impact on the fish habitat in water adjacent to the Point Question: Will Council request a new full environmental assessment by a different qualified consultant to be conducted on Johnston Point?

Rationale for a second EIA

CRCA Response, August 8, 2014, indicated that an “Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (OWES) is inappropriate as a means to assess negative impact as it is a system to evaluate a wetland and does not provide sufficient categories to address development on adjacent lands” (P.4) {http://www.goo.gl/mrkJM3 “Comments” folder}
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) June 12, 2014, prepared by Ecological Services for the Developer, was based on an OWES report from 1985 on the Loughborough Lake Wetland Complex. This report is outdated and has been replaced by an OWES 2014 report.
It appears that The Environmental Impact Assessment June 12, 2014, contains flaws in its report: • It states that the Special Features Component of 2014 would be zero and the Wetlands would receive a much lower score today. (P.11) However, the 2014 report indicates a Special Features score of 542 and was only able to count 250 points of that score toward the total evaluation score. 3

Page 15 of 73 III. Common Element Lane

The Common Element Lane caused concern in the initial development of 3 freehold lots in 2011. The public consultation process was compromised due to the changing of the reported distance from the Provincially Significant Wetland at the upper end of Long Bay to the nearest portion of the lane. The South Frontenac Planning Department and Council had grave concerns with the lane proximity to the wetlands at that time.
Ainley Engineering set out road design parameters with added qualifying notes that some of their information was provided by the client, the Developer, (e.g. EIA recommendation of 30m wetland setback and location of wetland edge) not through Ainley’s measurement or study
Ainley Engineering set out parameters for a standard access roadway and acknowledged that it was for 3 residential lots. • Will this road stand up to the greatly increased use by 17 lots with, very likely, at least 34 cars not a potential 6 cars? • Will the increased use cause breakdown of road materials, increased erosion on the slope it is built on and impact the Provincially Significant Wetlands below?
Ainley Engineering in their recommendations refers to “construction…for the following pavement structure”. CRCA, in their August 8, 2014 Response, states, ”Currently, a gravel driving surface is proposed. This is the assumption on which the storm water design is based. During final design, we recommend that the driving surface may be paved in the future. What are the implications for quantity and quality control should this occur? (P.5) {http://www.goo.gl/mrkJM3 “Comments” folder} • Does a paved roadway on a peninsula fit in with the natural heritage on and surrounding Johnston Point? • How would paving affect the storm water dispersal and ultimately the Provincially Significant Wetlands?
The common element lane is very narrow with steep embankments. • How will Emergency Response vehicles get through when another vehicle is on the road? • How will the residents meet or pass other vehicles? • Where do vehicles turn around?

Page 16 of 73

Page 17 of 73

LEGEND

140.0

EMERALD

140

140.0

JPTP22

1010 PEBBLE

TW1

JPTP23

JPTP24

140.0

14 0.0

600mm CULVERT

5.0

12 5

13 5

0.0

125.0

130.0

135.0

0 0.

140

130.0

140.0

135

5.0

0.0

125.0

30m Setback

40m Setback

5.0

130.0

35m Setback 45m Setback 50m Setback 60m Setback

125

Property Line

450mm CULVERT 13

Lot Lines

125

13 5.0

UNIT 7 .0

Wetland

1101EMERALD

Proposed Septic Bed Footprint (Primary)

130.0

JPTP17

Proposed Septic Bed Footprint (Alternate)

JPTP20 JPTP16

JPTP21

Proposed House - 3000 sq. ft. (273 sq. m)

5 13

Proposed Well Test Pit Location

TW2

135 .0

TW3

JPTP25

JPTP19

JPTP18

JPTP10

0 0.

5.0

UNIT 6 0. 13

JPTP09

5.0

UNIT 11 130

UNIT 9

135.0

125

REFERENCES

25 m

50 m

75 m

100 m

125 m

130

0m .0

125.0

125

THIS SCALE TO BE USED TO OBTAIN APPROXIMATE DIMENSIONS FOR INFORMATION

UNIT 10 UNIT 8

125.0

UNIT 5

0 0. 13

5 12

CLIENT 300mm CULVERT

135 .0

.0 130

130

135.0

JPTP07

MAGENTA WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

JPTP08

5.0

UNIT 4

JPTP06 13 5

JPTP05

0.0

135.0

JPTP04 130.0

JPTP03 135.0

.0 130

JPTP02

135.0

PROJECT

JOHNSTON’S POINT DEVELOPMENT LOT 23 & 24 CON. 6 & 7 TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC - COUNTY OF FRONTENAC

JPTP01

130.0

TITLE 125.0

TW5 12

125.0

UNIT 3

TW4

SITE CONDITIONS

130

7.0

125.0

5.0 12

WESA, a division of BluMetric Environmental Inc. 130.0

JPTP11

JPTP12

5.0 13

125.0

UNIT 2

130.0

A JPTP14

JPTP13

13 0.0

JPTP15

P 0.0

PROJECT #

DATE

5.0

2014-09-05 DRAWN

DWG NO.

REV Page 18 of 73

CMR/KC

CHECKED

Page 19 of 73

Staff Report Township of South Frontenac

Planning Department

Prepared for Committee of the Whole Agenda Date: February 10,2015 Date of Report: February 5,2015 Subject: Proposed Rezoning to Permit Annual Special Events in Addition To a Recreational Resort Use on Property at Part Lot 13, Concession VII, Storrington District: Vezeau Summary of Recommendation: The recommendation is that the Committee receive for infonnation and

discussion a planning report regarding a possible rezoning to permit special events in addition to the already permitted recreational resort use of property in Stomngton District.

List of Those Affected:

Those affected by the proposal are those within hearing range of the property on which events would take place. Background

Committee members may be aware that special event open-air concerts have been held on the above noted property over the last ten years. The property is approximately 41 acres in size with waterfrontage on Loughborough Lake and

road frontage on Sydenham Road. Attachment #1 shows the subject land. The property has operated as a recreational resort use for decades and as noted, more recently open-air concerts have been held in the summer months. The concerts (acoustic guitar festivals) have each time received the blessing of Council as a special event and they have proven to be very successful with few or no complaints received from neighbours. The events have drawn audiences and musicians from across the continent and have benefitted the Township of South Frontenac.

However, last year the land-owner held additional special events in the form of wedding receptions. These events were held without the knowledge or blessing of Council and the Township received complaints from neighbours that these events were too noisy and continued far too long into the niglnt/mommg contrary to the Township’s Noise By-law. Accordingly, it is proposed that the subject land be zoned to a special zone that would accommodate all of the uses to be held so that they may be properly

regulated in terms of location on the property and hours of operation. Analysis The property is approximately 41 acres in size and fronts on Loughborough Lake

and Sydenham Road as noted. Harper Bay Lane runs through the length of the west boundary of the property (indicated on Attachment #1) to provide access to a number of abutting waterfront lots. The property is split zoned with the waterfront portion (almost half of the property) zoned Special Recreational Resort-Commercial (RRC-8) and the rest of the land zoned Rural (RU). The RRC-8 special zone permits a tourist

establishment consisting of 91 trailer/campsites and accessory buildings and structures. The RD zoning permits a single detached dwelling in addition to general agricultural related uses.

Page 20 of 73

Ihe sp®clalevente h_eld on.the ProPerty nave occurred on the portion of the land thaL-ILZOned^Rural,.and a lar9e canvass structure was constructed to ^modate^audience^d assodated amen^ et.-fheowner-advises anempora^.bath,r°°m.fa.cilities wrebrou9ht in during the events. A staff ste

°S ihas.als.°-i.“dicated.that.the portion crf the P’:°pe!‘rtyiaway’fro’m’th’^“laake° ^hloh isJ^e«ve^uel.isJ’at-and-open andI seems able to facilitate any required event.paIklng-_Although.there are a number ofwaterfront’residential’fote^’^e

=2a&^KS ^sa the.-concert to some ^extent. The subject land is otherwise “remote’from

LT!i^ntial uses’ overa11-the site aPPeare well suited to’ accommodate* spedal

events.

The portion of the land that is zoned for the recreational resort commercial

^devetoped,bytoda^sstandards andthe -ing P-dates-todays-^aws: ^in.!!^r^.tT^^?P^alSJ?en1mJ?ed meanln?a density of use far too high iiLrelationto=the _intent of.the officlal. pian- especially at the water’s edge”(n’oste !??JI?.ii?5-rt,i?.n-^!-L?xlJghborough Lak® is identified in the Plan as being highly

use is

sensitive for lake trout). Conclusion

The^present use of the waterfront area is for recreational resort camping which,

teelf.js already associated with a degree of noise and open-air human activity’-l

!!?!(:La^n^e.n.d.s-Jf.rezonTd-.fh.e la^d wouldbe Placed i” a special RRC zone tailored to the specific uses including the resort and the special evente. The ?-n^?-uld.?p.?Ly.?°-.!h.e w_h01^ t?roPerty’ie- no l°“9er split-zoned, A site plan would also be required to specify locations of structures and hours of operation -

consistent with the noise by-law. Another benefit would be that the overall

density of the RRC use would be decreased since the use could be spread out over a much larger area and away from the sensitive lake. Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Committee receive the Planning Report dated February 5, 2015 for information and discussion. It is expectecTthat this matter

will come before Council within the next month for a public meeting. Submitted/Approved by: Lindsay Mills attachments

VezeauRezoningReportToCofl/V

Prepared by: Lindsay Mills

somflCTiOSp

Page 21/ of 73

^ Oi, s .p

L-v

i?v

‘\

ATTACHMENT #1

te

{

-’

-I

m \

{

T T ^

.-stes^AN^

^ 1\

/r” .J^

\yf

^L^i< /

.^r

_Ju.

I-

.!>.

/’

.-'

/- \

‘~s ^

^ ^

^ \

/ V

,/.’

r>” <4.

-I

i:\

.‘w^-

fc-

‘I-

^ :t

^ ^

0’

0<i ^

-T

T t

.<’

.^~j

t / h»

I ^ fc

UJ z

-I

^ s

?<".

OSJ yj

.',

a .z

^ *

I-.

‘^’

~^,

^ ^.< >,

./'

‘/

./’

t f

“^

r, +

^:.Js.

-J^

^–

r'<

DYLA^E \

^
1

^ .^

-1–T1

.I \

t »

.. J

^(N)^ ^y

v/’’:7<
^

\ /'

/-^

x^^ /V/1

-_^

\ " y

-1.

A. ^

.^ \ \

Y

.; ^

\ .

\ 1\

‘,’ ,\

-/ f^-’

J-: ..^

iLy

..f

:t \

^ f

llisr

..»”

.' \

–'

.

^ ..^'

I/f

-*.

.b I

,-<

I-

Page 22 of 73

Staff Report Township of South Frontenac Prepared for Committee of the Whole

Planning Department

Agenda Date: February 10,2015 Date of Report: February 4, 2015

Subject: Draft of Revised Township of South Frontenac Official Plan: Ministry Comments

Summary of Recommendation:

T^e recommendation is that the Committee review the comments attached to this report for information and discussion. Background On September 5, 2000 Council adopted the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan.

The Planning Act now requires municipalities to undertake periodic reviews of their Official Plan to mcorporate new and changing provincial legislation. In 2013, the Planning Department prepared a draft revised Plan that incorporated a number of internal changes and provincially mandated changes. These were endorsed by Council and, on December 6, 2013, the draft plan was delivered to the Mmistry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for their prelimmary review. It should be noted that the

submission to the ministry included changes to the text of the Plan and changes to the Schedules (Land Use Maps). In October, 2014 the ministry provided comments on the draft.

These comments are lengthy and are attached to this report for the Committee’s reference.

Also attached is a review of the internal and provmcially mandated changes prepared by the Planning Department that were submitted to the ministry followed by a summary of some of the ministry’s comments which arc of major concern to the Township. For the Committee’s information, the Ministry commented on the three Official Plan Schedules (maps) that were also submitted by the Plamung Department. The schedules are mcluded here as well as a brief summary of comments from Plamung on the changes recommended by the ministry. Recommendation

It is recommended that the Committee review the comments attached to this report for infomiation and discussion at the meeting on February 10, 2015. attachments

Submitted/Approved by: Lindsay Mills

OPMemoToCoWReOP2015

Prepared by: Lindsay Mills

Page 23 of 73

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN ProvinciaUv Mandated Chances

Alternative Energy Systems are encouraged in the Goals and Objectives section of die Plan and Alternative Energy System is included as a definition as per the Provincial Policy Statement.
Significant wetlands, woodlands, habitat of endangered species, areas of mineral potential and areas of cultural heritage and archaeology have been included in the

definitions section and have been included for protection within the body of the

text as per the Provincial Policy Statement.

New lots for retiring farmers are no longer permitted and “mfrastructure consents” are pemiitted as per the Provincial Policy Statement (this change came from the province a number of years ago and is already in practice).
A new section is added to encourage the redevelopment of contaminated lands ie., brownfields (as per the Provincial Policy Statement).
New Minimum Distance Separation requirements are attached as per the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs new Implementation Guidelines Statement

(this change came from the province a number of years ago and is already in

practice).

As per the Provmcial Policy Statement a definition of Significant is added to read: Significant means: a) in reeard to wetlands. and areas of natural and scientific interest, an area identified as provincially significant by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources using evaluation procedures established by the province, as amended from time to time; b)

in reeard to the habitat ofendansered species and threatened species, means the habitat, as approved by the Ontario Ministry of Natural resources, that is necessary for the maintenance, survival and/or the recovery of naturally occurring or reintroduced populations of endangered species or threatened species, and where those areas of occurrence are occupied or habitually occupied by the species during all or any part(s) of its life cycle;

c) in reeard to woodlands, an area which is ecotoeicallv importaDt in terms of features

such as species composition, age of trees and stand history, functionally important due to its contribution to the broader landscape because of its location, size or due to the amount of forest cover in the Township; or economically important due to site quality, species composition, or past management history; d) in reeard to mineral potential, means an area identified as provincially significant through comprehensive studies prepared using evaluation procedures established by the province, as amended from time to time. Such as the Provincially Significant Mineral Potential Index;

e) in regard to cultural heritage and archaeolosv, resources that are valued for the

important contribution they make to our understanding the history of a place, an event, or a people.

New Added Schedules to Provide Better Clarify

A Schedule ‘B’ “Environmentally Sensitive Areas” has been added showing all lakes and environmental areas, wetlands, sensitive lake trout lakes, ANSI’s and Groundwater Sensitive areas overlaying the parcel fabric in the whole Township.

This will make the Plan much more clear for evaluation of development proposals.

A Schedule tC’ “Roads Map” has been added showing all roads and lanes m the Township overlaying the parcel fabric, lakes and hamlets. This will help in every day evaluation of development proposals and in applying fhe transportation policies of the text.

Page 24 of 73

Schedule ‘A’ has been updated to more accurately indicate all land use designations.
Other standards developed by the Public Works Department are incorporated and attached as separate schedules comprising: a) minimum required standards for road and lane construction;

b) minimum spacing requirements for driveways on former provincial

highways and former County roads (presently contained m the Township’s “Policy on Entrances Onto Former County Roads” document;

c) fature road widenings for foimer provincial highways, former County roads and all public roads.

Internal Policy Chanees Endorsed bv the Council

New sections have been added to the ‘Natural Heritage Goal’ to read as follows:

I!^^^lh^^^^e!.,^ei^^eJ?i!^i^an^!!!e^^v.a?<!shi? pil^<Lthat ^arc .uutlated by various lake associations within the municipality. When prepared by qualified professionals, these plan, p»,vide funhcr technical data on which to substantiate Official Plan’policies lo ensu^

sustamability ofthejakes. the lands and the natural ecosystem while supporting continued activity

and development. The “StewardsUp Plan for Bob’s and Crow Lakes”, dated’march 2007, is an example of such a plan.

The Township recognizes the value of Frontenac Park bofh m tenns of providing recreational opportunities for residents and as a destination centre for visitors to the Township. Council appreciates that UNESCO has recently acknowledged the uncommon beauty and special natural characteristics of South Frontenac by including its landscape in the Fronienac Arch Biosphere reserve.

(i)

To have regard to the findings and recommendations of lake management and lake stewardship plans when evaluating the merits of development proposals;

(ii)

To promote Frontenac Park as a tourist attraction and to protect its special environmental qualities.

(iii)

to reduce reliance on conventional energy systems as the major source of energy

by encouraging alternative energy systems. (Provincial Policy Statement)

A new section is added to the Cultural Heritage Goal’ as follows: The Township appreciates that the Rideau Canal has been designated by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee as a World Heritage Site in recognition of the historic role the canal played in

the defence and development of Canada. The Township supports this designation as part of our cultural heritage and as a natural feature in the area as it provides opportunities for heritage education and appreciation, and recreational pursuits. The Township will contribute to the conservation and sustainable development of the lands adjacent to the canal. (0

to prohibit any development that would significantly alter the size, shape or configuration or the navigation of the Rideau Canal system.

(ii)

to identify and protect significant cultural heritage landscapes directly associated with the Rideau Canal and to work with Parks Canada to identify cultural heritage and scenic features and vistas of the canal landscape and protect them.

(iii)

to circulate development applications within 90 metres of the Rideau Canal to Parks Canada.

A new section has been added to the ‘Agricultural and Rural Goal’ to enhance the economic opportunity for family farms and: (i)

to promote the economic viability of farms by facilitating diversification ofon-

farm uses to include: value-added activities such as food processing and sales directly to the public; renewable energy developments; and agri-tourism activities and facilities.

Also, a new permitted use has been added to the permitted uses to read: , agri-tourism activities and facilities for generation of electricity from renewable sources such as biodigesters, wind generators and photovoltaic generation.

Page 25 of 73

A new paragraph has been added to the ‘Environmental Protection’ to emphasize consultation with the Conservation Authority. It reads:

?-?-l^c<?SDize?that Dot l!n! Iakes> watercoul’ses) Doodplains, erosion prone areas, wetlands

and significant portions of the habitat of threatened and endaDgered species are idcntiHed on

^.e.<^.le-^L’ *w^en’ deveIOPmcnt is proposed in these areas, the Township shall consult the Conservation Authority to determine the appropriate development standards and criteria to ensure no adverse impact on the natural heritage feature or pose a threat to life and property.

Also, the following sentence is added to for Environmentally Sensitive Areas: Development or site alteration in Hsh habitat shall only take place in accordance with federal fisheries regulations.

The development policies for Sydenham have been revised to state that new

development in Sydenham must connect to the municipal water system. The policies have also been changed to specify that the minimum lot size for newlycreated lots in Sydenham is 0.4 hectares (1 ac.) on municipal water. In all other hamlets the minimum lot size remains at 0.8 hectares (2 ac.) on private services and subject to approval of the appropriate authority. Note to Council: This policy means that any proposed lot creation within the Sydenham Hamlet designation but outside the water serviced area will be

required to hook up to water too. However, certain exemptions to hooking up to water may be considered on application to Council. Thus, the new policy reads as follows: Other than in Sydenham, the minimum lot area for a single detached dwelling shall be 0.8 hectares (2 acres) on private services and the minimum lot size for semi-detached or duplex dwellings shall be 0.8 hectares (2 acres) when privately serviced, subject to the approval of the appropriate authority and Council. In Sydenham, the minimum lot area for a single detached dwelling shall be 0.4 hectares (1 acre) on municipal water supply and private sewage disposal services and the minimum tot size for seml-detached or duplex dwellings shall be 0.4 hectares (I acre) on

municipal water and private sewage disposal services, subject to the approval of the appropriate authority and Council.

Within Sydenham, development shall occur on the basis of municipal communal water and private sewage disposal systems. However, in some cases an exemption to the requirement to connect to

municipal water may be considered on application to Council.

Further note to Council: The above new policy applies to residential, commercial and industrial developments but, for multi-unit residential

development (apartment buildings) in Sydenham, a higher residential density may be permitted. This policy reads: In Sydenham the servicing of new multiple unit residential development shall be permitted to occur only on municipal communal water supply and private sanitary sewage disposal systems subject to

the approval of the appropriate authority, insofar as it relates, among other things, to the types of systems to be utilized and minimum lot size. In all other Settlement Areas designations multiple unit residential development shall be permitted to occur on private water supply and sanitary sewage disposal systems subject to the approval of the appropriate authority, insofar as it relates, among other things, to the types of systems to be utilized and minimum lot size. A

hydrogeo logical study shall be required where development is proposed on private services. Notwithstanding the results of the hydrogeo logical study, the minimum lot sue for a multiple unit dwelling shall not be less than 0.8 hectares (2 acres). Where serviced by municipal water system (Sydenham) consideration may be given to a higher residential density subject to the approval of the appropriate authority and Council. Council will not consider development on private communal sewer and/or water systems in any case.

Section 5.7.5 (iii) (a)Rural Commercial Policies for Motels, Hotels and Rental

Cabins, is changed to add a sentence dealing with fractional ownership situations requiring such lots to have a minimum lot size of 2.0 hectares (5 ac.) and to read:

Any property used for the purpose of a motel, hotel, 1 or more rental cabins, multiple ownership/sharing arrangements or other sunilar type of commercial accommodation, shall have a minimum lot area of 2.0 ha (5 acres).

Page 26 of 73

Changes are made to section 5.7.7 the Limited Service Residential policies for severances on lanes leadine to water, to read:

i) severances for new lots on extensions to existing private lanes may be permitted provided fhe

extension is not _greater than 182 metres (600 feet) and is designed and constructed in accordance with Township’s standards for new private lanes. In addition, the whole of the

eiEisting lanc travelled on to reach the new proposed lot may be required to be improved !.° tlle T"^?shi-p^st.andards ro^^.iistin8 Private Iancs when there are concerns expressed by Township staff about accessibility to the new lot(s) by emergency vehicles.

ii) Despite the policies of subsections i) and iv) above, where a new private lane or extension to a

private lane is proposed to accommodate a new lot(s) and it has been clearly determined by the Township fhat no further future extension of the lane is possible, then the new lane may only be constructed to tfae point of access to the last lot on the lane.

d) On existing lanes that do not lead to water, severances wiU not be permitted and no new such lanes will be permitted.

Changes are made to permit two more residential severances from a parcel of

land. The new policies would sate that five severances arc penninedfrom a parcel of land that existed on the day of adoption of the Official Plan.

For development on island lots, section 5.7.7(iu)d) requires that land be available

on the mainland to provide parking and mooring facilities for any new development proposed on islands. This provision requires that this mainland area be owned or tied in perpetuity to the water access lot. The requirement was changed to delete the reference to the mainland area being ‘owned’. 20. Shared entrances are already permitted in the OP in some cases but discussion

took place on whether to permit shared entrances on the former County roads (now owned by the Township). Section 7.1 (j) is changed by adding two sentences so the whole section will read as follows: 0)

The creation of a residential lot having access only to former provincial Highway No. 38 outside of the Settlement Areas for residential purposes will generally be discouraged. In special circumstances where there is no other alternative available, such a lot may be considered provided that the Township approved the proposed entrance. Entrance requirements to former Highway 38 shall be in accordance with Ministry of Transportation guidelines and regulations. Access to new lots on former Frontenac County Roads will be guided by the Frontenac County Road Entrance Policy as amended

from tune to time. However, where this minimum entrance spacing cannot be met exactly

as specified, a shared entrance (mutual driveway) arrangement may be considered provided the overall number of entrances and number of permitted severances is maintained. In such cases, landowners shall enter into an easement agreement specifying that maintenance of fhe entrance will be the mutual responsibility of the affected landowners.

Following from the Groundwater Study, the following addition is placed into section 7.1(s) for new lot creation: (n)

Where applicable, the applicant wUl provide sufficient infonnation to substantiate that all lots created have a source of potable water from a well and appropriate sanitary sewage disposal facilities in accordance with current regulations to the satisfaction of the Township and the appropriate approval aufhority. Applicants proposing new lots anywhere within those areas identified on ‘Schedule B’ to this Plan as having “very high sensitivity’ in terms ofgroundwater quantity and/or quality, shall be required to undertake a hydro-geo logical study including draw-down tests on abutting lands, to verify that there will be no adverse effects of any proposed new well on existing adjacent domestic wetls.

Section 7.1.1 ‘Special Severance Policies on Narrow Waterbodies’ is changed to read as follows:

Notwithstanding anyfhing in this Plan to the contrary, as a general rule no lot with waterfrontage shall be approved adjacent to a narrow waterbody unless the water frontage is at least 150 metres (492 ft.) in order to ensure safe boating and swimming conditions, to avoid an overdeveloped appearance m a constricted area and to help ensure a reasonable separation between residential uses. Reductions to this requirement will only be considered v/hen it can be clearly demonstrated

Page 27 of 73

that the mtent of the policy is maintained. A narrow waterbody is an area where the minim

S?^fl^^c^,?^i^r^?l^!?^l?1.^15-OJ^1^^^492-y_,fofa,lak!and 5,° mJ!!res ^ ft.) for a river. Guidelines for measuring narrow waterbodies are included in Appendbc ‘B’ 23. Section 7.2 ‘Policies For Plans of Subdivision’ is changed by adding a sentence to clarify the intent of minimum water&ontage as follows: (a)

New subdivision lots shall comply with the mmimiiTn lot areas and fiontages in Section

5.7.4 (ii) (a) of this Plan unless it is demonstrated through the subdivision review process that reductions to fhese minimums are justified based on good land use plamung principles For proposed wateriront lots, some individual lot frontages or areas may be less than fhe mmmmm standards specified, provided the average loffi-ontages and areas comply with these minimiuns. For greater certainty, all lots shall have sufficient area so

fhat a private weU for water supply can be located without danger of contamination by the

sewage system and so that a serious draw down of groundwater levels beyond the

boundaries of the lot itself can be avoided.

New sections are added to the Implementation section as follows: 8.1.3 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AREAS

Pursuant to fhePlannmg Act, the Municipality may pass by-laws to delineate Development Permit Areas to specify fiirther coirtrols over such items as the built form and exterior design of development.

8.10 REVIEW PROCEDURE

Under the provisions of the Planning Act. the Official Plan must be updated/revised no less than every five years after it comes into effect. New revisions to the Plan will be required to conform to new provincial plans, have regard to provincial interest as outlined in the Planning Act and will be consistent with provincial policy statements as amended from time to time. 8.11

PRE-CONSULTATION

Under the provisions of the Planning Act, the Township may require applicants for OfGcial Plan

amendments, zoning by-law amendments, or site plan agreements to consult with appropriate municipal staff prior to any formal submission of such applications. 8.12

COMPLETE APPLICATIONS

Under the provisions of the Planning Act, the Township will require applicants for Official Plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, or site plan agreements to submit complete applications as specified in Appendix D to this Plan.

A new paragraph is added to section 6.10 SERVIC^G as follows Council will review the development based on the findings of the Western Cataraqui Region Groundwater Study (April, 2007). Proposed development in areas identified in the report and specified on Schedule kB’ to this Plan as having ‘Very High Sensitivity” to groundwaier quantity and quality, will require supporting documentation in the form of a hydrogeo logical report including draw-down tests on existing adjacent wells, prior to any development approvals.

urn

Page 28 of 73

MINISTRY’S REVIEW OF TOWNSHIP’S SUBMISSION The following lists some of the comments and requirements fi-om the Ministry of

MumciPal Affairs & Housing that are of particular concern to the Township aad that

would affect future development of all kinds. Planning comments are noted in bold type:

Comment #38 _“It is not clear what justification exists for increasmg the number of severances fi-om 3 to 5. It is recommended to limit the number permitted to three (3).”

The ministry will not permit 2 more severances from existing lots.

2 Comment #39 “It is recommended to modify policies in this section to specify that new private roads shall not be permitted unless facilitated by plan of condomimum. This would also apply to extensions to existing private lanes, requiring some adjustments to the current policies. Infillmg along existing lanes is

ah-eady well-govemed by the policies of the Plan.” The ministry’s proposed

wording is: “Ne\v condominium roads shall be permitted -where such road is

mthin a registered plan of condominium pursuant to the Condominium Act, 1998, as amended, where it connects directly to an existing public road and where the subject land has legal frontage on the same existing public road. Internal roads within the condominium that connect to the existing public road through other condominium roads are also permitted "

The ministry will not permit new private lanes to be developed unless they are condominiumized.

Comment^? “It is recommended to increase the width of lands adjacent to waterbodies to 120 metres… Where detailed fish habitat mapping is not available, all waterbodies should initially be considered fish habitat unless it can be

demonstrated otherwise. It is recommended to include a policy requiring demonstration of no negative impacts adjacent to fish habitat in order to be consistent with the PPS.” The ministry’s proposed wording is: “AH lands wfthin 120 metres of the highwater mark which are not designated environmental protection are included as Environmentally Sensitive Areas. Development and site alteration within these areas shall not be permitted unless it is demonstrated through an environmental impact study that there will be no environmental impacts on the features or functions” THIS HAS HUGH NEGATIVE IMPLICATIONS FOR SOUTH

FRONTENAC because so much of the Township is made up of water in the form of lakes, rivers, streams and countless pockets ofwaterbodies throughout the rural areas.

Comment #29 “It is recommended that all incompatible land uses mcluding residential, be prohibited wifhm 500 metres of a quarry (or bedrock resource). Furthe, it is recommended that 300 metres be used for all pits whether above or below water…..”

The ministry is increasing the required setback from a quarry from 300 metres to 500 metres for any proposed incompatible use and increasing the

setback from 150 metres to 300 metres for any incompatible use near a pit above the water table. These minimum setbacks are mandated by the province but will have impact on residential development in the Township.

Other comments from the muustry relate to the preservation of natural heritage, cultural heritage and archaeological resources and can be discussed further with Council as the Official Plan review proceeds. OPChangesPresentedAtOpenHouse

Page 29 of 73

Feb 3,2015

Report regarding changes to OP maps from 2006» to 2014 -

After a very brief comparative review of the existing 2006 Schedule A and B OP maps and the new layers supplied by the County (which I will assume where supplied by LIO), here is what I noticed: Waste Disposal sites-Same Area of Influence - Same Lake Trout-Same

Hamlet Boundaries - Need to be adjusted on County maps to reflect ours. PSW - Generally the same, however some areas that were previously designated as EP have now been designated as PSW. EP - Larger areas are designated EP in 2014, and more Interconnected. EP has replaced some previous PSW designations. Of significant note: EP and PSW designations in the Eastern/South Eastern half of Storrington have largely been removed. This area now stands with little or no EP or PSW designation compared to 2006. ANSI - 2014 data supplied does not distinguish between ANS1 Life and Earth. There are new areas that were previously designated as PSW in 2006, are now designated ANSI. They include: .

. . .

2014 map - Storrington Con IX Lot 7 to 11 (Large area in Battersea now designated ANSI, was just PSW) 2014 map - Storrington Con I Lot 22 - designated as ANSI now, not just EP 2014 map - Loughborough Con V Lot 10-12 - designated ANSI now, not just EP 2014 map - Portland Con V Lot 10-15 - designated ANSI now, not just EP

Agriculture-There are some new areas designated as Agriculture/as well as areas that are no longer designated Agriculture: . . .

Portland - Con IX Lot 4/5 - New on 2014 map Storrington - Con VII Lot 16 East of Sunbury, different shape in 2014 Bedford -Con VIII Lot 19/20 no longer exists on 2014 map; Con XII/XIII Lot 20 no longer exists on 2014 map

Mineral Aggregates- Significant differences exist between the 2006 map and the 2014 layer. Some aggregates have been removed, others have been added: .

Portland - Con I Lot 6 removed from 2014 map; Con V Lot 1 removed from 2014

map; Con VIII Lot 2/3 removed from 2014 map; Con XIV Lot 14 and Lot 6/7 removed from 2014 map.

Page 30 of 73

Loughborough - Con III Lot 10 removed from 2014 map; Con VI Lot 5&6 removed from 2014 map; Con I Lot 12 new on 2014 map; Con XIII Lot 4/5 new on 2014 map. .

Storrington - Con VII Lot 39/40 removed from 2014 map; Con VII Lot 19 removed from 2014 map; Con VIII Lot 18 new on 2014 map; Con VII Lot 11 removed on 2014 map; Con VII lot 13 new on 2014 map; Con VII Lot 15 removed on 2014 map; Con IX Lot 12 removed on 2014 map; Con IX Lot 22&23 removed on 2014 map; Con XIV Lot 12/13 removed on 2014 map Bedford - Con I Lot 5 removed on 2014 map; Con I Lot 12/13 removed on 2014 map; Con II Lot 12-14 removed on 2014 map; Con II Lot 6/7 removed on 2014 map; Con III Lot 10/11 smaller on 2014 map; Con III Lot 15/16 smaller on 2014 map; Con III Lot 18 different location on 2014 map; Con IV/V Lot 13/14 removed on 2014 map; Con 14 Lot 10/11 removed on 2014 map.

Page 31 of 73

Page 32 of 73

Page 33 of 73

Page 34 of 73

Page 35 of 73

Page 36 of 73

Page 37 of 73

Page 38 of 73

Page 39 of 73

Page 40 of 73

Page 41 of 73

Page 42 of 73

Page 43 of 73

Page 44 of 73

Page 45 of 73

Page 46 of 73

Page 47 of 73

Page 48 of 73

Page 49 of 73

Page 50 of 73

Page 51 of 73

Page 52 of 73

Page 53 of 73

Page 54 of 73

Page 55 of 73

Page 56 of 73

Page 57 of 73

Page 58 of 73

Page 59 of 73

Page 60 of 73

Page 61 of 73

Page 62 of 73

Page 63 of 73

Page 64 of 73

Page 65 of 73

Page 66 of 73

Page 67 of 73

Page 68 of 73

Page 69 of 73 Ministry of Transportation

Mfnistere dos Transports

Traffic Office

Bureau de la circulation routiere

Highway Standards Branch

Direction des normes routi6res

St. Catharines, Chtario L2R 7R4 Tel Number: (905) 704-2960 Fax Number: (905) 704-2888

301 rue St. Paul, 2e etage St. Catharines (Ontario) L2R 7R4 Tel.: (905) 704-2960 Telec. : (905) 704-2888

301 St. Paul Street, 21d Floor

c “-

^/ f

vs^^l

»..

29 January 2015

I k-

OytE^Tu PW M6<C-

Clerk’s Office

‘f s

FEB 02 ZU?5 .<?0^

TO^^!p OF 1^\ ,

The Township of South Frontenac P.O. Box 100 4432 George Street

1 ^

Sydenham,ON KOH 2TO Dear Clerk’s Office,

RE: Consultation on Ontario’s Default Speed Limit

The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is seeking stakeholder input on whether to

consider changing the default speed limit for local roads within urban areas. As a representative

of The Township of South Frontenac, we welcome your comments and invite you to participate

in the consultation activities for Ontario’s default speed limit.

The current default maximum speed limit for local roads within urban areas in Ontario is 50

km/h. MTO would like to consult with stakeholders on the following options: Maintain current default speed limit of 50 km/h;

Through a legislative change, reduce the default speed limit from 50 km/h to 40 km/h; Through a legislative change, permit municipalities to set a default speed limit of 50 km/h or 40

km/h inside municipal boundaries, and require the posting of a . ^i at each entry point of the municipality; or

Through a legislative change, permit municipalities to set a different default speed limit inside municipal boundaries or neighbourhoods, and require the posting of a sign at each entry point of the municipality/neighbourhood.

You are invited to provide comments and/or complete a questionnaire available on-line at https://www.sunre'monkey.com./s/ISpeedLimitOntano by February 27 2015.

1/2

Page 70 of 73 -2-

Following the public comment period, MTO will host a series of workshops to consult with

municipalities and various stakeholders regarding the options under consideration for a potential

change to the default speed limit. Stakeholder workshops are currently scheduled for March, 2015. Each workshop will be held in a different geographic jurisdiction ofMTO (e.g., Central,

Eastern and Southwestern and Northern Ontario).

You are encouraged to provide comments and/or complete the on-line questionnaire, and/or

attend a stakeholder workshop on these possible changes to the default speed limit. I kindly ask you to complete and forward the attached workshop reply form indicating your interest in participating in future workshops by February 27, 2014 to me as follows: Roger De Cannes

Head, Traffic Operations Traffic Office

Ministry of Transportation Ontario

2nd Floor, 301 St. Paul Street

St. Catharines, Ontario L2R 7R4

Phone: (905) 704-2947 Email: Roger.DeGannes@mto.gov.on.ca

Thank you in advance for your input. We welcome and appreciate your feedback. Should you have any questions or difficulty accessing the on-line questionnaire, please do not hesitate to contact me at 905-704-2947 or by email at Roecr.DcGannes^mto.gov.on.ca. Sincerely, f

. ^

Roger De Cannes

Head, Traffic Operations

.i.

Page 71 of 73

REPLY FORM (Please print)

RE: Consultation on Ontario’s Default Speed Limit Date: Name: Title:

Agency: Address:

Postal Code: Phone:

Fax:

Email:

Do you wish to participate in workshops on the default speed limit in Ontario? (Circle yes or no) Yes

Comments:

Please return this form to the contact below by February 27, 2015: Roger DeGannes Manager, Traffic Office

Ministry of Transportation Ontario

301 St. Paul Street

St. Catharines, Ontario L2R 7R4 Phone: (905) 704-2947

Email: Roger.DeGannes@mto.gov.on.ca

Page 72 of 73

KHAKF9M M.L7FAKF9M+/3’

Spring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

LKEAFL>LHJE2M<LKJBLFM=IFL@KEJE2M@I>?AJLFM>ICLDGH;MKHCM=DIIC?DKGH K?EMMKDDMKFLM5L9MGHM>K5GH;MKMFLDGK7DLM=DIICM=IFL@KEJ: 4-61MAELEM3’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»AHG@KJGIHEMKFLMKDD FLKC9:M(FI?LFJ9MI<HLFEMEBIADCMKDEIMKEELEEMJBLGFM?DKHEM=IFM>GHG>GGH; =DIIC,FLDKJLCM?FI?LFJ9MCK>K;LE:MBIADCM=DIICGH;MI@@AF2MJBLM=GFEJ FLE?IHELMGEMA?MJIMJBLMGHCG8GCAKDMBI>LI<HLFE:M =MJBLM=DIICMGEM7L9IHCMJBL @K?K7GDGJ9MI=MJBLMBI>LIAHG@G?KDM$>LF;LH@9M4LE?IHELM(DKH 5G@5EMGHMJIMKEEGEJ:

.DIICM=IFL@KEJGH;MGEMAEJM?KFJMI=MJBLM?FL8LHJKJG8LM>LKEAFLEMJBKJ 6IHELF8KJGIHM1AJBIFGJGLEMJK5LMJIM?FIJL@JMJBLM;LHLFKDM?A7DG@M=FI>M=DIICGH;: 0BLM4-61MKDEIMFL;ADKJLEMCL8LDI?>LHJMKHCM?FI>IJLEM?FI?LFMDKHCMAELMGH IAFMDI@KDM=DIIC?DKGHE:M(KF5EM6KHKCKMKHCMJBLM%GHGEJF9MI=M#KJAFKD 4LEIAF@LEMKHCM.IFLEJEM>KHK;LM<KJLFMDL8LDEMJBFIA;BIAJMJBLME9EJL>MKJ CK>EMKHCMIJBLFM<KJLFM@IHJFIDMEJFA@JAFLEMKHCMJBLM4-61M<IF5EMGHM@I, I?LFKJGIHM:M(104 6M@KHMJLDDM9IAM>IFLMKJ ?KJFG@5:DKFEIHF8@K:@KMIFML)J:M333/:

0BLM4-61M?FI8GCLEM>L>7LFM>AHG@G?KDGJGLEMKHCMDI@KDMFLEGCLHJE KC8KH@LMHIJG@LMKHCMGH=IF>KJGIHMK7IAJM?IJLHJGKDM=DIICGH;:M0BL 4-61EM.DIICM.IFL@KEJGH;MKHCMKFHGH;M9EJL>MI?LFKJLEM 3+M>IHJBEMKM9LKFMKDIH;MLHJM<GJBMJBLMI<MKJLF 4LE?IHELM0LK>: BLHM<KFFKHJLC2MJBLM4-61MGEEALEMIHLMI=MJBFLLMJ9?LEMI=M>LEEK;LE JIM>AHG@G?KDML>LF;LH@9M>KHK;LFEMKHCMJBLM?A7DG@MJBL9MKFL

Watershed Condition Statements M<KJLFMEK=LJ9MIFM=DIIC IAJDII5E:M0BLELMEJKJL>LHJEM@IHJKGHMGH=IF>KJGIHMK7IAJMJBL @AFFLHJM@IHCGJGIHEMI=MJBLM<KJLFEBLCMJBKJMELJMJBLMEJK;LM=IFMJBL ?IEEG7GDGJ9MI=M=DIICGH;MG=MJBLMFG;BJM<LKJBLFM?KJJLFHEMCL8LDI?:M"L GH=IF>LCMKHCM7LMK<KFL
Flood Watch MJBLEL

LEEK;LEMKFLMGEEALCM<BLH GJMGEM?LF@LG8LCMJBKJM=DIICGH; @IADCMFLEADJM=FI>MKH K??FIK@BGH;MMJBKJM@IADCM7FGH;MBLK89MFKGHMIF MKGFM@KAEGH;MKMFK?GCMEHI<>LDJ:M"LM?FL?KFLCMJIMK@JG8KJL 9IAFM=DIICMFLE?IHELM?DKHEMG=MGJM7L@I>LEMHL@LEEKF9:

Flood Warning MJBLEL

LEEK;LEMKFLMGEEALCM<BLH GJMGEM?LF@LG8LCMJBKJM=DIICGH; @IHCGJGIHEMCL=GHGJLD9M<GDDM7L L)?LFGLH@LC:M1@JG8KJLM9IAFM=DIICMFLE?IHELM?DKHMHI< JMGEMJBLM4-61EMI7MJIMHIJG=9M>AHG@G?KDGJGLEMKHCMFLEGCLHJEMI=MJBL ?IJLHJGKDM=DIICGH;M=FI>MIAFMFG8LFE2M@FLK5EMKHCMEJFLK>E:M -GL<MFL;ADKFMA?CKJLEMI=MEJFLK>=DI<M@IHCGJGIHEMKJMJBLM4-61 <L7EGJLMKJM«<:F8@K:@K MMM.GHCMIAJMG=M9IAMKFLMGHMKM=DIICM8ADHLFK7DLMKFLKM79ME?LK5GH;M<GJB IHLMI=MIAFM4LEIAF@LM?L@GKDGEJEMKJM3*,+,‘3MIFM 3,!//,+,’/ML)J:M33+!MIFM33*+ MMMLJM>LEEK;LEMELHJMCGFL@JD9MJIM9IAFML>KGDMK@@IAHJ:M6IHJK@J % 6$$MKJM>G@BLDDL:?KJIHF8@K:@K MMM.IDDI<MAEMIHM0<GJJLFM4GCLKA-KDDL961MIFMDG5LMAEMIHM.K@L7II5

Page 73 of 73

KHAKF9M M.L7FAKF9M+/3’

6&+ #LAJFKDM.K>GD9

Family

0BLM4GCLKAM-KDDL9M6IHELF8KJGIH RideauValleyConservationFoundation CarbonNeutral .IAHCKJGIHMGEML)@GJLCMJIMLD@IL Program IAFM=GFEJMDI@KDM=K>GD9MJIMJBLM6KF7IH #LAJFKDM(FI;FK>:M0BLMA@AG5M=K>GD9MI=M%KHIJG@5MFLCA@LCMJBLGFM@KF7IH =IIJ?FGHJM79M7AGDCGH;MKM$$M?DKJGHA>MBI>LMKHCMBK8LM>KCLMJBLMHL)J EJL?MI=MEL ALEJLFGH;MJBLMFLEJMI=MJBLGFM@KF7IHM79M?DKHJGH;MJFLLE:ML BI?LMJBKJMJBLMA@AG5M=K>GD9EM>ICLDMGHE?GFLEMIJBLFMDG5L,>GHCLCM=K>GDGLE: 0BLMA@AG5M=K>GD9MIGHEM>KH9MDI@KDM7AEGHLEELEM<BIMBK8LM@BIELHMJI

K5LMJBLGFM7AEGHLEELEM@KF7IHMHLAJFKD:M6KDDM1#M=IFM>IFLMGH=IF>KJGIH IFMJIM7L@I>LM@KF7IHMHLAJFKDMKJML)J:M33+MIFMCKH:@II?LFF8@K:@K:

0M.FGLHCEMLD?EMGCEMLJM"K@5MJIM#KJAFL

0BLM4GCLKAM-KDDL9M6IHELF8KJGIHM.IAHCKJGIHMFL@LHJD9MFL@LG8LCMKM;LHLFIAE ;G=JM=FI>MJBLM0M.FGLHCEMI=MJBLM$H8GFIH>LHJMJIMBLD?M>IFLMEJACLHJEM8GEGJ .IDL9M%IAHJKGHM6IHELF8KJGIHM1FLK:M0BLM2///M=AHCM<GDDM7LMAELCMJI ?FI8GCLM3’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‘‘MIF FL7L@@K:KHF8@K:@K:

.G8LM%GDDGIHM0FLLEMKHCM6IAHJGH;

0BLM4-61EMJFLLM?DKHJGH;M?FI;FK>M<GDDM7LM?DKHJGH;MKHIJBLFM+*‘2///MJFLLE JBGEME?FGH;:M0BGEM<GDDMEAF?KEEM=G8LM>GDDGIHMJFLLEM?DKHJLCMEGH@LMJBLM?FI;FK> EJKFJLC:MLM@IHJGHALMJIMDII5M=IFM?FG8KJLMDKHCMJFLLM?DKHJGH;MI??IFJAHGJGLE JBFIA;BIAJMJBLM<KJLFEBLCM=IFMJBLM+/3M?DKHJGH;MELKEIH:M&AFM=ADD,ELF8G@L JFLLM?DKHJGH;M?FI;FK>MGEMK8KGDK7DLMJIMKDDMDKHCI<HLFEMGHMJBLM4GCLKAM-KDDL9 <KJLFEBLCM<BIMKFLMGHJLFLEJLCMGHM?DKHJGH;MI8LFMIHLMK@FL:MA;LMEA7EGCGLE KHCM?FI=LEEGIHM?DKHJGH;MELF8G@LEM@IHJGHALMJIM7LMK8KGDK7DL:M"II5M9IAFM=FLL EGJLM8GEGJM79M@KDDGH;M6&00MKJML)J:M33’MIFME@IJJ:CKH=IFCF8@K:@K:

#I<MGFGH;MJACLHJE

4-61MGEMGHM=ADDM;LKFMBGFGH;MIAFMJLK>MI=MEA»LFMEJACLHJE:M6BL@5MIAJMJBL I??IFJAHGJGLEMIHMIAFM<L7EGJLMKJM«<:F8@K:@KHL<EL>?DI9>LHJ:BJ>D:

4-61M+/3’M"AC;LJMKHCMIF5M(DKH

KHJMJIM=GHCMIAJM<BKJMJBLM4-61M<GDDM7LMA?MJIM=IFMJBLMHL)JM9LKF M =M9LE2 8GEGJMIAFM<L7EGJLMKJM«<:F8@K:@KMKHCM@BL@5MIAJMIAFMHL<M 0BLM?DKHMIAJDGHLE L)?LHCGJAFLEMKHCMFL8LHALEMMIHL9M@I>LEM=FI>MKHCMBI< KHCM<BLFLMGJMGEM7LGH;ME?LHJ:M JM;ILEMIHMJIM7FLK5MCI<HM4-61MJKE5EMKHC BI<MJBL9M7LHL=GJM>AHG@G?KDGJGLE:M0BGEMLKE9,JI,FLKCM7FLK5CI<HMI= 4-61EM+/3’M?DKHMGEMKM>AEJ,FLKCM=IFMKH9MGHJLFLEJLCMGHMBI<MJBLM4-61 <IF5E2MBI<MGJMGEM?KGCMKHCMJBLM7LHL=GJEMJIMIAFM4GCLKAMIFLMGH=IF>KJGIHM@IHJK@JM&%%$4MKJML)J:M333MIF EI»LF:@KE;FKGH,FI7LFJEIHF8@K:@K:M

#L<MKKFCM%K??GH;M=IFM&JJK<KM4G8LF

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«<:F8@K:@KMKHCMKFLMHIMGHMAEL:M.IFMIFLM@IHJK@JM.$4&MKJML)J: 33/MIFM=LFCIAE:KB>LCF8@K:@K:

$8IDAJGIHMI=M"FL<LFM(KF5M(IHC

“FL<LFM(KF5M(IHCMM6I»AHGJ9M(DKHJMII5GH;M=IFM-IDAHJLLFE

6IHEJFA@JGIHMIHMJBLM"FL<LFM(KF5M(IHCM4LEJIFKJGIHM(FIL@JMBKEM7LLHM@I>?DLJLCMKHCM<LFLMHI<MJAFHGH;MIAFMKJJLHJGIHMJIMKM@I»AHGJ9MJFLLM?DKHJ ?DKHHLCM=IFMJBGEME?FGH;:M(DKHEMKFLMJIM?DKHJMK??FI)G>KJLD9M32’//MBKFC92MHKJG8LMEBFA7EMKFIAHCMJBLM?LFG>LJLFMI=MJBLM?IHCMJIMEJK7GDGLMJBLMEBIFLDGHL: 1H9IHLMGHJLFLEJLCMGHM?KFJG@G?KJGH;M@KHM;IMJIMJBLM"FL<LFM(KF5M(IHCM<L7M?K;LMKJM«<:F8@K:@K7FL<LF?KF5MKHCM@DG@5MIHMJBLM9LDDI<MJFLLM?DKHJM7AJJIH JIMBK8LMJBLGFMHK>LMKCCLCMJIMIAFMDGEJMI=M?DKHJLFE:M%IFLMCLJKGDLCMGH=IF>KJGIH2MCKJLE2MLJ@:MKGDLCMJIM?KFJG@G?KHJE:M(FIL@JM?KFJHLFEMGH@DACL %GHJIM6I»AHGJGLE2M4G@B@FK=JMFIA?MI=M6I>?KHGLE2M4GCLKAM-KDDL9M6IHELF8KJGIHM1AJBIFGJ92M6GJ9MI=M&JJK<K2M%GHGEJF9MI=M#KJAFKDM4LEIAF@LEMKHC .IFLEJF92M.GEBLFGLEMKHCM&@LKHEM6KHKCK2M6KFDLJIHMHG8LFEGJ92M%AE5GLEM6KHKCKMM&JJK<KM6BK?JLFMKHCMJBLM$H8GFIH>LHJM6I»GJJLLM=IFM&JJK<K IAJB:M.IFM>IFLMGH=IF>KJGIHM@IHJK@JM $##MKJML)J:M33/!MIFMLHHG=LF:DK>IAFLA)F8@K:@K:

1FIAHCMJBLM4GCLKA MMMMM MMMM MMMMM

#“$ “# #!" $! #$#$!# $#$”$"!#$#$”$ "#$#$”$! !# #“ “I)M’2M*!!M4GCLKAM-KDDL9MFG8L %KHIJG@52M&#M%M31’ 3*,+,‘3MIFM3,!//,+,’/M«<:F8@K:@KM .IDDI<MAEM JGJJLF:@I4GCLKA-KDDL961M G5LMAEMM=K@L7II5:@I>M

@GF@ADKJGIHMBKEMFGELHMJI *2!//MLKCEMI=M6IAH@GD2 6IAH@GDDIFE2MELHGIFM>AHG@G?KDMKHCM?FI8GH@GKDMEJK==2MGHJLFLEJLCM?LFEIHE KHCMJBLM>LCGKMJBFIA;BIAJMJBLM3!M>AHG@G?KDGJGLEMGHMJBLM4GCLKAM-KDDL9 <KJLFEBLCM@IAFJLE9MI=MIAFM;LHLFIAEME?IHEIFE

#$” #! $”!! #!$“$ !

MMMMM3*,+*,*MM$==L@JG8LD9M?FI8GCGH;M AKDGJ9 DL;KDMELF8G@LEMGHM$KEJLFHM&HJKFGIM=IFMI8LFM’/M9LKFE

!$ ”! $ “#!$!$#!

MMMMM3*,+*!,*+M M«<:DK<9LFE=IFL>?DI9LFE:@K MMMMM4L?FLELHJGH;M>KHK;L>LHJMGHMDK7IAFMKHCML>?DI9>LHJ DK<MK@FIEEM&HJKFGI

""”$"”$$#$ #“

Thank

You TO OUR GENEROUS

Spon sorS!

MMMMM3*,+!!,*’//M(FL8GIAED9M0BLM%IHJLFL9MIJLDMM&==LFEM!M=ADD9 FLHI8KJLCMFII>EM<GJBM7KD@IHGLEMI8LFDII5GH;MJBLM4GCLKAM4G8LF:M JMGEMKHM&KEGEMGHMJBLM@GJ9:

HJLFLEJLCMGHM7LGH;MKM+/3’MAround the Rideau E?IHEIF M6IHJK@JM 1#$MKJMCGKHL:CI<HL9F8@K:@K

Help support independent journalism

If NFNM’s reporting matters to you, Buy Me a Coffee is a simple way to help keep local watchdog coverage going.