Body: Committee of the Whole Type: Agenda Meeting: Committee of the Whole Date: June 14, 2016 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac
[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Committee of the Whole/2016/Committee of the Whole - 14 Jun 2016 - Agenda.pdf)
Document Text
TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA
TIME: DATE: PLACE:
7:00 PM, Tuesday, June 14, 2016 Council Chambers.
Call to Order
Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof
Scheduled Closed Session
***Recess - reconvene at 7:00 p.m. for Open Session
Delegations
(a)
John McEwen, re: Radon and the Ontario Building Code
Reports Requiring Action
(a)
Mark Segsworth, Public Works Manager, re : Perth Road Corridor Study
11 - 78
(b)
Mark Segsworth, Public Works Manager, re: Capital Budget Amendments
79 - 80
(c)
Louise Fragnito, Treasurer, re: Canada 150 Community Infrastructure Program - Intake Two
81 - 82
(d)
Mark Segsworth, Public Works Manager, re: AVL System
83 - 84
(e)
Lindsay Mills, Planner, re: Peer Review Letter Regarding Plan of Subdivision, Part of Lot 7, Concession VII, Portland District
85 - 87
(f)
Lindsay Mills, Planner, re: Closing of Road Allowance in Part of Lot 19 Concessions V and VI
88 - 91
(g)
Lindsay Mills, Planner, re: Closing of Road Allowance, Part of Lot 22, Concession VIII, Loughborough
92 101
Reports for Information
(a)
Mark Segsworth, Public Works Manager, re: Collaboration with the OPP
Rise & Report
(a)
County Council
(b)
Arena Board
(c)
Police Services Board
3 - 10
102 105
Page 2 of 120
Information Items
(a)
Letter from Leonard, Labarge, Foxton and Lesperance re: Hartington Subdivision Proposal Reports
106 116
(b)
Letter to County of Frontenac, re: Delegated Authority for Subdivision and Plans of Condominium approvals
117
(c)
City of Kawartha Lakes, re: Support for Large Renewable Procurement Initiatives
118
(d)
Louise & Daniel Ouellet, re: Proposed Zoning Changes
119
(e)
Township of South-West Oxford, re: Opposition to Division of Conferences
120
Notice of Motions
Announcements
Question of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items)
Closed Session (if requested)
Adjournment
Page 3 of 120
^^n0^?^ ?^ciLOLS^h-.Fro-ntTC re^ardin§the 85° / year,radon mduced lung cancer fatalities as related to failure to enforce pertinent Required Sections of the OBC Act Table of Contents:
Supporting letter from the Ontario Lung Associations .
Supporting letter from Justin P.J. Trudeau (M.P. for Papineau)
Plea to Councilors (4 pages) Supportine Documents:
Copy of Sections 9.13 of the OBC Act. (2 pages)
Copy of OBC Act, Inquiry and Liability (1 page)
Copy ofOBC Act, Roles (3 pages)
Copy of letter from BDB’s John Gryffyn P. Eng. With NRCs opinion (2 pages)
Copy ofcorresopondence between CBO Gass & Code Adviser John Gryffyn P. Eng. As provided by CAO Wayne Orr (1 page)
Copy of March 2013 ten item report by CBO Gass and comments by myself (8 pages) 1-
10^ Sop^iefi^_ads/.from localcomPanies who offei" ‘waterproofing" by venting radon directly into the building. Currently allowed and endorsed where permits are not “required”’(2~page’s)
- Some Excerpts from the Commissioner’s report on the Elliott Lake Mail collapse (1 page)
Page 4 of 120
18 Wynford Drive, Suite 401 Toronto, ON M3C OK8
THE LUNG ASSOCIATION
416.864.9911
TM
416.864.9916 Fax
olaluna0ion.luna.ca
When you can’^ breathe, nothing else/ inatters.
Ontario Respiratory Care Society orcs@on,|ung.ca
Ontario Thoracic Society
Qts(3)on.lung,ca
April 7,2016
Mr. John McEwen 5782 Clair Road
Verona, ON KOH 2WO
Re: Radon Presentation and the Ontario Building Code Dear Mr. McEwan,
The Ontario^ Lung Association is pleased to lend our support to your efforts to reduce radon
levels m and around residential dwellings. It is our hope that the South FrontenacCouncilwiU adopt_yourret:ommendation to add changes to the ontario Buildmg Code-(OBC)’thatTeekt’o
protect people from the dangers ofradon.
Ill,!l^b!^,oi^^nLr^don.isa/a^io.active’>,colourless’ odorless and tasteless gas that
naturany.occurs in the^nvironment-^adon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in Ontario
Tl^T^t!.f^^er^°.fat?lities (mo^than 2 per day) Province-wide7The Ontario Lung
Associ.atlonsupportsradon education .andaw"e"ess, as" well as testing and mitigation efforts
in
e^~utyaDdassuchLwea^aud^u for .i?enin. - ^ - ^ voi^but-alsototha.
of Mr. McEwan’s to bring awareness about this deadly gas.
As a registered charity and the leader in lung health in the province, the Ontario Lun
^!lat^ !f!islt.eS^!La^!mI^wers .individuals living with or caring for others with lung
g
?iiT!e:^eialso..provideprogJams services to patients and health-care providers, invest
.
in
lung research and campaigns for improved policies on lung health.
If you require any additional information, please contact me at 416-864-9911, ext. 229 !!t!.vensla^IL.lun?.ca or Tristan MCIntosh’Air Quality Coordinator, at 416-864-9911, ext. 26
or
or uncintosh^on.kmg.ca. Sincerely, /
.I
//^.!^L^^-^^‘i. t^J /U.^ y /
^.
/
Andrea Stevens Lavigne
Vice President, Provincial Programs
Canadian COPD SnrJfitv r:anariiart Fmnhuspma Knr;ip+v C.anari ian I nnn P.anmar Fniinrtatinn
nharitahlo Ranic^ratmn ftfn 11)Ar\A RtRO oonn/it
*"
.<.
.^
c?y
I ^ 1^
^ V. 3
f
;!“1
c?i
»>->i r^.’ jw
f
F t, ;A
^
I”.
?
f I"
~,^’.
<
:r-
^
w .T.
- -rf
I-
^’
^ d
t
0 ,^.
L t p-t-i ft
^
^ (“ff
i.- >”"**
^
^
/ l»' ^
I*
^f-
^-:
!.
f fli
T.^
t–1
^
^.’.v
^
e^
d-
,1
1
^
<^
^ ‘1
/ ri|
‘.
;~i *
^ I *.V
- t 1>.
I
1.-’.t :i
^
l*fe
a
Nt i?2^p2:.3p -¥-‘v.–^’ (tli£S2^S=3'3T:b
.;::^*i
T »
-I
.ws
^ -*
A
I .f ^-’
.""\
.?* ‘*..t
?; ^ T;
^.. ^f y
w^"^ I *t
/
“.-
n»
\y^ ‘^
s I; ‘iVS3 ij
I-]
^
j]
f
^….^
‘^>^ » h
^.
^ ft
^
Lrj
‘.ws^
^+t
rn
^
Rd 1
f
\»
J-l
‘^
Ij
t
^t
^
^-
!V %
I
V-N
^s
t
*-’
A
:
ht?
ri ^
^
C!
^ I
<
s
h. ,’.^r
^-¥
@ 3 r
i
,*
W-. ^ 1
^
^ ^ .
0
p
§
r.^
§-
-f .
^ <-/
Page 5 of 120
**
-t
^
ijS II 5-
.St
I
1
»
^
0
g- ^
»
c^
3 ..^
a
^
‘<–
^;
\
^
gs
^B-
r
li
‘:v
^
<
^-1
t
»
r it
B^ i’a
;;
:t
0
w
}- w ^
1’ ‘..* A
tf
n i"i i
If .; d
“jNM *
^t? a
d St,f 0 .t;-;.
^
^
*>,
a
;i
t
f.
wf
;.
TJ
c
^
/
.-:-./..’” ,rtu
^
^
‘I’o if. ^0
-\
\
..
.*» t^
Page 6 of 120
Opportunity extended to South Frontenac Council to lead the Province in eliminating radon induced lung cancer fatalities: Dear Councilors: INTRODUCTION:
As advised by the Ontario Lung Association, April 7th, 2016: “Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in Ontario and accounts for over 850 fatalities (more that 2 per day) province wide.” This much is absolutely tme as confinned by Health Canada; they go back to the homes of “anomaly victims” and test for radon after the fact.
These fatalities should have never occurred. In 1976 the municipalities became responsible for the enforcement of requirements of the Ontario Building Code Act. Municipal Corporations are “the authority having jurisdiction for enforcing the Act and its Regulations”. Certainly had requirements of
Section 9.13 “Waterproofing and Soil Gas Control” been enforced these continuing and rising number of fatalities (estimated 20-35,000 since 1976) would have never occurred. Waterproof membranes are impermeable to both water and gas.
“9.13.1.2. Required Waterproofing 1) Where hydrostatic pressure occurs, floors-on-ground and exterior surfaces of walls below ground level shall be waterproofed.”
“9.13.3.2.. Application of Waterproof Membranes. Concrete or unit masonry walls to be waterproofed shall be covered with not less than 2 layers ofbitumen-saturated membrane, with each layer being
cemented in place with bitumen and coated over-all with a heavy coating ofbitumen.”
“9.13.4.1. Basement Floors. Basement floors to be waterproofed shall have a system ofmembrane
waterproofing provided between 2 lasers of concrete, each of which shall be not less than 75 mm (Sin)
thick with the floor membrane mopped to the wall membrane to complete the seal.”
“9.13.1.3. Required Soil Gas Control 1) Except as provided in Sentence (2), all wall, roof and floor
assemblies in contact with the ground shall be constructed to resist the leakage of soil gas into the building.
55
The Act was amended to define liability:
“Immunity from action 31 (1) No action or other proceeding from action… a chief building
official…act done in good faith… Liability (2) Subsection (1) does not relieve the Crown, a
)
municipality…of liability in respect of a tort committed by their respective chief building official… the
municipality… is liable for any such tort as if subsection (I) were not enacted. 2002, c. 17, Sched. F, Table.”
The Act defined various “roles” (summarized):
The CBO: “to establish operational policies for the enforcement of this Act…co-ordinate and oversee
the enforcement of this Act… perform duties in accordance with the standards established by the applicable Code of Conduct”
The Builder, “not to proceed unless any permit under this Act has been issued…to use appropriate
building techniques to achieve compliance with this Act and the building code
»
Page 7 of 120
“Enforcement by municipalities 3. (1) The Council of each municipality is responsible for the enforcement of the Act”
The Act now allowed for an “Inquiry 30. (1) If it appears to the Minister that there is or may be a failure in construction or demolition standards or in the enforcement of this Act or the building code, the Minister may designate a person to conduct an inquiry into the failure. 1992, c. 23, s. 30(1).” Is the basement a “living space?:
There is a fundamental issue here: Is the basement a “living space” or is it an “uninhabitable
cavity” created by the foundation walls? The OBC, the NBC, the CMHC, the NRC require that it is “living space”. While municipalities, their CBO(s), Developers, Building Associations, the Real estate industry… maintain the basement is not a living space (a 1200 sq. ft. house with a full basement is a
1200 sq. ft. house), and built it thus. At the same time the municipality, the CBO, Developers, Building Associations, the Real estate Industry encourage and allow home-owners to “finish and live” in the basement.
“Finishing & living” in a basement cavity mistakenly unintended for humans has lead to the 20-
35,000 fatalities to which I believe the municipality is responsible for under tort law, as specified in the legislation.
Clearly: if 850 plus Ontario residents (this would include children and young adults) are dying annually from radon induced lung cancer in spite of two specific requirements (and a preamble citing “health & safety of occupants”) of the OBC Act designed specifically to stop this from happening there is a “failure in construction standards” and/or a “failure in enforcement” and /or there exists a “failure
in the building code”. Something is horribly, horribly wrong. That the Province has made you
financially liable for these fatalities should incline you to request that the Minister conduct a Section 30(1) inquiry into this mess. SPECIFICS:
In the spring of201H thought we were at 350 radon induced fatalities per year and gave a similar presentation. Council instructed the CBO to report. Said report offers ten points as to justify the fact that “required waterproofing” is never ordered. (His report is remarkably similar to that of Kingston’s in 2004). I have addressed all ten comments in the addenda. CBO Brian Gass and every other Ontario CBO, present or past, insist that waterproofing is required only: “when hydrostatic pressure exists” as opposed to the actual wording: “where hydrostatic pressure occurs . This is evidenced by item 4 in the CBO’s report:
“In addition during the course of a footing inspection a Building Inspector will look in the
excavation for evidence of a highwater table or hydrostatic conditions. If none are observed then, in
accordance with subsection 9.13.2 of the OBC, dampproofing of the basement walls is permitted. I do not entirely blame Mr. Gass (or the other CBOs) for this assumption”. The Province’s Building Development Branch’s Code Adviser, John Gryffyn p. Eng., had told me numerous times
since 1990 that hydrostatic pressure can ONLY be caused by rising water tables and that water leaking
in through the walls “does not count”. In 2010 I did ask Minister Bartolucci to order the Adviser to provide proof for this “opinion”, which he did (enc.).
) »
Page 8 of 120
In Code Adviser John Gryffyn P. Eng. “confession” the NRC confirms that certainly
waterproofing is required ifhydrostatic pressure is present from rising water tables AND “sites tend to
be wet and poorly drained because of topography or soil conditions so, when snow melts or during
periods of heavy rain, below grade spaces may be subjected to hydrostatic pressure.” The CBO must consider the “live loads” ofhydrostatic pressure caused by rain & melting snow against the sides of the foundation walls. I wrote a book for the CMHC based on this fact.
Our CAO has provided me with the e-correspondence between CBO Gass and the Code Adviser
(enc.) The question is “loaded” with the statement “Despite that Section 9, Div. B permits
dampproofmg of the walls when hydrostatic pressure is not present”. Mr. GryfFyn no longer shows the bravado he once had: “It is the advice of the Building and Development Branch that the building code in Section 9.13. has provisions for dampproffing and waterproofing. The provisions in the code states
the conditions under which dampproofing or waterproofing is required.” Building Development Branch just informed you that, as of that moment, waterproofing is required where hydrostatic pressure occurs.
In the face of this, a short discussion ensued in Council as reported by Craig Bakay: “A lot of these properties are coming in now,” Vandewal said. “(But) if there’s hydrostatic pressure, the CBO can
require waterproofing.” I’ll correct the current Mayor: it is not “can” require the wording is “shall
5»
require. In the same article Mayor Davidson states: “if you dig a hole anywhere in South Frontenac, you’re basically inventing a swimming pool”. Exactly; if you dig a hole anywhere in South Frontenac it will eventually fill with water, and where that occurs Mr. Gass states: “when a basement is to be waterproofed to comply with the OBC, it is not only the walls, but the basement floor slab as well”.
And then he, and every other CBO, did neither and 20-35,000 Ontario residents paid the price with their lives. The reason: money.
CBO Gass states: “The cost to construct a waterproofed basement would increase the cost to consumers.” First off: what business is “cost” to the CBO. His/her role is defined under the 1992 Act
which include the “code of conduct” which concerns itself with: Public Health, applying the Code impartially, due diligence, honesty, integrity….. There is nothing about the CBO deciding that a requirement costs too much and as such Developers are not responsible for waterproofing any part of the basement. To me the statement suggests collusion between the CBO and the Developer to defraud home-owners out ofOBC requirements intended to save lives. Indeed he cites, with no precedent offered, that this would constitute an “illegal municipal standard” (item 11).
This is extremely similar to the report offered by Kingston’s CBO in 2004:
“These two options _are damp-proofmg and waterproofing. Damp-proofing is required when the
foundation walls are not subject to hydrostatic pressure and waterproofing is required when the foundation is subject to such pressure. Hydrostatic pressure is found when the groundwater table is
above the level of the footings…. Excavations which are dry and free of any water would not be subject
to any hydrostatic pressure and in this case damp-proofing is all that the OBC requires, and this is all
the city can ask for The Ministry has agreed that this strict and draconian interpretation of the code can be made by the City, but this is not meant to mean that we must do so.”
The city of Kingston concedes waterproofing is one of two options, and that waterproofing is
(^ql^r^e^ih^o^ff^^lt^cisp^>!^ toT^A’<?tste^^Sll^e ^n)t^lh^l^ls^ ’m^fi^t ^,ti^toiS<
should have been practicing “due diligence” and looked at the Required Statute themselves.
they
Page 9 of 120
I believe that this “illegal”, “strict and draconian” Statute’s omission has cost 20-35,000
fatalities since 1976, and that municipalities are liable for this under tort law as specified in the Act. The reason: the CBO believes that: “This could make South Frontenac a less desirable place to construct ne-w homes. " He should have just added the word “Developer” to the sentence; who else could he be referring to? All that said: Given the fact of 850 fatalities, and the liability issue, I think Council would be
wise and justified in requesting a Section 30 Inquiry from the Minister ofMA&H as soon as possible. Two items that can and should be dealt with immediately :
tSouth Frontenac has “hot-spots” as confirmed bv the CMHQ
Open Sump pits: That should be “covered & sealed”. As is usual sump pits are left uncovered by the Builder and passed by the municipality. If the “drainage” section of the OBC Act is more or less
“correct” the weeping tiles directly vent soil gasses into the uncovered sump pit which also vents the entire area below the floor slab directly into the basement. Please request that the CBO enforce this in new construction and please advise Citizens of this in the weekly ads in the Frontenac News and the EMC. This will save lives.
Require Permits to repair or materially alter a foundation in any wav, shape or form, and lay charges when violations occur:
In our “upper tier” the municipality ofWolfe Island absolutely, positively, 100% requires permits for any and all foundation work. This slows the “inside fix” scam cited in my CMHC book on page 60 under the title:
“WHAT NOT TO DO. Which begins v^ith; “In desperation, and sometimes under sales pressure, homeowners have made fundamental mistakes in trying to control water and moisture
problems….There are also soil gas entry problems with many of the systems sold.”
As our CBO’s “logic” goes: I do not issue or require permits to re-dampproof an existing foundation as this is “maintenance”. This “logic” is extended to: I do not issue or require permits to waterproof existing structures (although this is both a “repair” and a “material alteration” in other parts of our tier municipality and requires permits). This “logic” is extended to I do not issue or require permits fix this from the inside with an open trench in the floor slab that allows soil gasses directly into the basement in clear violation of Required Soil Gas Control.
Please instruct the CBO to offer the same degree of service as the CBO of Wolfe Island (and
Loyalist) in this regard. Required permits for everyone doing any foundation work. This should also be advertised in the weekly notice. This will save lives.
In conclusion: In light of the 850 radon induced lung cancer fatalities per year and Council’s legislated liability I am begging Council to request a Section 30 Inquest from the MMA&H. I am begging Council to insist that the CBO provide the same level of service as provided by our other tier
municipality Wolfe Island. This will save lives.
Page 10 of 120
Libéi-a1 Lanark»Frontenacxingston June 6”‘2016, To whom it may concerns,
This letter is to confirm the support of the Lanark Frontenac Association to our constituent of Verona Mr. John McEwen.
Kingston Federal Liberal
Mr. McEwen has been working hard over the last few years to advocate for greater enforcement of the building code to ensure the required waterproo?ng occurs on building structures.
We think his efforts are commendable and hope that greater oversights will lead to a reduction in lung cancer fatalities due to exposure to Radon Gas.
War
est regards,
Philippe Archambault President & CEO Lanark Frontenac Kingston Federal Liberal Association PO Box 72 lnverary, ON KOH1X0 president@|fk|iberals.ca 613-583-2135
June 6”‘2016
Page 11 of 120
STAFF REPORT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PREPARED FOR COW: June 8, 2016 AGENDA DATE:
June 14, 2016
SUBJECT: Perth Road Corridor Study BACKGROUND: A Corridor Study was undertaken of the 10 kilometres of Perth Road, between Rutledge Road and Spooner Road, to assess existing corridor conditions and to analyze future impacts to the transportation network associated with background growth and planned development growth. This study was presented to the Public Services Committee in April. ANALYSIS: The objective of this corridor study was to develop a corridor improvement plan that would take into account all known proposed developments in addition to the impacts of background growth. We need to take a proactive approach and identify the cumulative impact of all known potential developments. This will allow for a more accurate cost apportionment to each individual development. The background growth rate was estimated to be linear and 1% per year throughout the Township. Attached to this report are maps of the Study Area and the known potential developments impacting this Study Area. The recommendations of the study are also reprinted in their entirety and are attached. It should be noted that some improvements will be required as a result of background growth, regardless of whether some developments proceed or not. FINANCIAL/STAFFING IMPLICATIONS: None at this time. However, as development proceeds, certain items will be included in subsequent capital budgets.
Attachments: - Study Area
- Proposed Developments
- Recommendations Submitted/approved by: Mark Segsworth, P. Eng. Public Works Manager
AECOM
Page 12 of 120
Township of South Frontenac
^+
<.
Uk
.«nr
.’t >, ..^ .
.r J.
1
-;^ ..-,«<
;
“(’.
-.^
<
-^
-^t,:-
r.?
;F,
-t’
,t
3 w
h i 1
3> J Hr
n
“1^ -J
c. ^e r
‘?
t h
- A .<..»
.--
i.
.:.f
^-^’^ :-"^
-i; ^-/”, t
^
r
1
*.’.^
I
,-i
I
!;…
f- .’£ / .t
< ^t’
f
.^
.1
..,.^
I-‘K.^ ‘:…
.s
d 1.^ !;rA
»
,.1
.^’
Ri Ih
y…-’
^
.I
^f
i’;
< \
^.,
.f” ^
.J*
V-
t: y.
yfiELMD
^-
*iXCti n^ftti
-^
~f
<
I.
r;
,' -t
1’ r
^
^ ^
g
<
^ -. /
«Sk
.?
^y
" -^ .T-
’ ‘.. ?-’ <.1
.(
^.\
;\s
.-^.,.’.fi^
’t-
«t
:!.
Segment4
h
.u
t
1
^ if
< ^ f
.~K:
FS^fcS
f::”:.
rt
*f,1r
\
“. .+.<
^ ff
.^.^ T-t. .1
.^
^& .^’
I.
.V
.J. .X
^
^
*< ^ -3f’_^
r
.k
1
:‘ir .’ ;’-r-t.-
- _“i
*>
“,’".lf,‘L
. ^.^.^
a
.
r.u
^
/
(…’ -..1 ^ ^.<* \
^- h
K;i;3St,,r. J
<;N^Y ^ ^ J
Legend 1.
^…;‘w
M
Sf-; ‘.I’ra '
.’.’
.iP/
t. .t
I
<
-T.^
-.’. f
- ‘.t r r
Figure 2. Study Segments
.-’.!^–^
I”
:< 4
.1’.,
.’.
T
.‘Y
h;d.ii i in al
\
.T’.I-’-;-.”.
h- /.’*.
-*
.‘w.f
Flguf 2. Segnrnf
Towithip il South Fronuntc
Perth Rowf CorrWor Study
C.-’l..;^A"j :,-:…^a.r-‘i .:.
AZCOM
Township of South Frontenac
AECOM
Perth Road Corridor Study
Page 13 of 120
*. /
1-,
r T-
‘;
.’”. I
.1 T
/
jf
.i^
;t’^
KO^R
^ bs. ‘.n b.’’^/
.K T
^i’^n’sy^’
r?c?.‘i’?
?^^Q?j.:;H ^&^
Legend
.< …/*, i?tc,;
Fs»
R-’-’.U Nr~*i«.’;
1
P’-’^-^.^C-.:
K,:. r-‘JpA’<\
I
f-:-
-* -N * ?.
-»-L pHi
un
Figure 3. Speed Zones
.*.
.^t
kT .-.
W ^.-t::.:‘D;
..“Sf
.’..-^MIA-.?.’ ^
?J
/
/”. / r^ .^
/-
\f
6
Township of South Frontenac
AECOM
Perth Road Corridor Study
Page 14 of 120
rw;?
1 * t
t I < I a
»
v
^ ^
. .‘i!.,
y^-so^ri ^’^’^ Fjc’.’.s *.
<
T
<
L’^
ivc’^
^
^
f
f
<T
.»
L
Legand .w
!*– y.^ 1 ,L
y
^
-^
k.
I- .«-
I:-1
\ £.» .;1?K1
^s^y.r^^^i .-..’-.-
»
..^w-l.’.’; 9..^U|i^;’
.4
l.\:3L-.:-,lAre,3
Figure 4. Passing Zones
— w^
^-
?B r^
:S O’i~y r’^-.-n
^ 4
Figure 4. Pa-salng Zonw THmeh^p ot South FronLnac, Pt-tti Road Coftnaor Study
h’^ F.iys.ffl.j
W’L^.fP^’::.
/CCOM 7
AECOM
Township of South Frontenac
Page 15 of 120
Perth Road Corridor Study
Development Potential on Perth Road (South Frontenac)
FF1
f
.1
JL
^
? ^ t4
as/!
is
/
/
:.v r’lc
^-r
^-
/
t~;
/ <
a
un
i-
M T
f
‘.»
^
1 1 ^
-’.?.
.I
/
,/
^2jsai£
J
^.
t’s,
L.,-i-.-,
^.1 t
aW^
:t
<-^Jr< i-.*-
<
I!
t
~^-
^.^ rf ^
^
If
.c’ .^.
.J
k–..…
^
v’warwf
.V
f
y
.^ :^ ^
.>; / -n
a*’ ^
/ /
^
" r^
/
vf ^
rt ;N
n
fI
~i.
V-
.It
»1
3?
I
Vv .V
^^
ij
^
/-
f
^ ^
\
h
t
^ I-’
..-y.
./,
*.’
^
Legend
‘*’?
‘;’ .
-rf T
r’->.
^^^……^ s*
1
t
.}
L
A
*4
I’ ^^-.
i.-l
fl
u i
\
<
,—1; :
.^*
“1 »-”
–1 -^
f ^ .w. 3*
J.T
?
-.ir -^ r NH
t7 /k-
Ac:
“^ f:f- ‘A
iKfPHwrtftrtktrUrt’.
.^£^ “, f,
^
r»
It;. tw?q,.v ..’twnnw.-irif
1
Iftt.’^liteh^
^^
^1
^
fl^Mtt, p
F.-^i
.i
I
- .?
t.; f
yr-t.
i.
f.:.^-,
f
A
‘&
^
+’ i* ^
L I
/
I/
…*r>‘E
‘i.
m ^
&
^ ft–”
-/
\ ^03^
^.’
/.to 1
-B d J,.r
u
t ^
^
t.
h
.*<-.
^ !-4”| t
^1
nr
t,
‘r-1 Fr
h
Sunbu
“>’*.
£
‘J t
Rl
k
y
,‘r”’ I
s Vp-^-
–> ^1 ^ ^
^
^
r.
H
..M. w^ T[ ni ^
A, -*..;
t
n
^
.^1
-ik
^
;“7
t-
f-
.i
1-. w
[‘I
-t
/
t~ rt * j
^
^
h
\
N-^
V*
w
–*
-<
[-4
t
-UltnsidMtEaClHrtt
.F
r
T
1 -I; ^ -J- <.
.tf
r^
f
“F-. L-l’
^
.t
.-..I
iCj^:-
^
f. < ^H
.<v,Fi
1^
v-t,’
-^
.f
‘^
?r
.
^
r
^
*J
‘.»
‘I
»;
/
It.
?i
/\
4-
I
^
“^
(W1
d’
\
<
1,1. 9
npf-.wJf.ntBittrtit
L/TT! in-fc
/r
D–
.’
^
^
,lf
i’
/
^
.}
^T-’-
L-^
*i -t
^t
~t
?
<”
J
f’,
y
u–.
4
s’^
^
n
//
w
ft..<f
.I
ic?”
-7
“^“f ^L
? f
If
~“1r-
r”
>^»,
t,
‘.^
/
^y
-n ….:4v-4^H
h-
in
i,
i 4
SflRttKte.-iHtLttt /
/
i (S
^ »
<
^ Rcfdt-A.-A Lpte ;. a CwnKarTt.-il tot*
^
f
F
.^-r^ymw
^
f-
/
<
t
.I
r”
.^
?5 y.
^ -” *M^*i’
y
.‘I
t
.-^
^-
r^
-I”
-r
*.-
i. I
rrn -T
te-1
f k
^1
.rt.
i^S
;A
.”;
1
1
y~
t “- 3:
I
Ui
h
r.
‘<
(i
^s
f,
f - “t RM-ATtW LoH
.r.^
.-> £!1
^
.,
/
^ ^1
^-
r-r
L ^
./
^/ ^
^.
.j
/ -Nt’
r
r^
rf
t
^r\
.
.1.
H/ .<n
*f^
.v
.^ .^
N
/
^ ^-^ ^
‘."^.’.; *
h
…<
/
r *-
v.-^f si
Y… J.-t.
/ )
t-
‘*-
4 1
‘”
< T
r
‘L-
f.
^
.-* <
ft
^
/;
‘^-Cv, .’?.
./*
» i
1–W J
-r 1. f_
f
t^f ^
»l
-A
/J
^
Tt
J
I
/
^^’^^” c:’
/
^
.t 4-
/
A
‘^
^
ftf-ua»Mu>k i^to <$ li^
.t’^M” ^-T.
~i^^y’y /-y^.^
7\
^1
r
I
- ^a;
c
‘<v:.
E-‘K
f
K -^
\Lq
:k y
.*. 1
h-4-
‘-f
jt,
J”
.^ 1
L
ri
<
If
.-I-1
~r IP
^
i–
.^ ;”’’ ^
IT*
1
^
V
u
‘/ ^
,-i
1
i
t’ rf
t
if.
^ [»
1
99!
.^
Vf
f
. ^A»
n
-^?1
^ ,4-v
i< T
1
“.- ^
d
r
^-
~t
1
r^ *.’
¥
t /
f,
.Y^
^-
f
.<>
*.
^
r-T ^
r~
1
i
h.
^^
Ti
t
fm
;.<:
- 1
Z-‘r,-^
.^
^
.-s,^ ./..’’.T”>.
rf
.s
1
‘1
^..^-^. /?
ft
^y
f
r
1.&S
r,”* ^^
^
11
1..
I
^…
^
/
<
r’’ I*
I
-J
I
<.
~1
1
t
1
w
f-y’.-^l
I.,
.^
UET(
» f
J
L/”
__23^-
t- 2±h
-Jf
^
-^-
l.| L
.*
‘.<
I
^i
/-’!f-
-.’
.^
.^.-^^ tl
r
e
I’ »rf
- jf’
it
-*-.
T.
1
H
»b
,1
n
J
‘^
‘^ ^
.1
.*
I?-
!- f
^
^
fc.F to.’-l .l.-aj ^
jT.’
tu’ l.i/-
^
^
…i.:&
L
f
.T
,TF.
1;;
?..fcl-
n
.t I
t
.I
i
1,
=r ‘^
.-ft
^ 1 /J
.J.
\ ‘^’
1^I"
/ ^–
y//s
N |-^ B
.r
1
/*^-’ *f_-
PaffisBd l>^4Bt
1:61.131
. £:ii -’-WW
li
Figure 6. Development Potential on Perth Road
Rpt-20180* 13-PelU) Road Corridor Study-60438840
11
AECOM
Township of South Frontenac
Perth Road Corridor Study
Page 16 of 120
s> y 01
SPOONER ROADSIGNALEATIQN jh -i + T^ ;h 1 ir 6 ^ ^-£ r ,rt .t -,<" *«t -i I .? ^ 'v f" / ^ rf"- t. ^.*/ / / z-' ^. / .^*'f ? ^ >' ^ f f-' .df- ^.^ -'.* * -i-i /? I ^ AT ! ^ / ^ *s, I -^ .<< ,r &'3 »* .J ^ y ^1? -f ti ;.) i'- 9I’o (I)! CIO H: EW IIIZ
E t s!: t:3ffl::
l-l’ll
Q “’!? o:!Za, “W jo= U b’i m5s s z “Q jg 5, ,q:““tii s: 3= g,B fis nq 11)
l-12
s ci
(11
Q
ha 55 srWoa
I-l:E
(
o
l-l
5 t’i H
g Z
,3-i
Z
- ‘o !”” ‘P 0 “l :’ J ?
}H
S: NffiN,==
- M5B
- . 0
- ;gm
- ;=. E
- %S.-,5 oo’q lo Z 75 lo IS Oo ,
?m a41ll (l)l-l
t-lj El’l IJU)
Hhi l-!H OC) H> 5t4 I-to
51-l 10
16> M(a ’l’) Om ‘rlll) ‘5> 5zh l;)Z
J l’)>11) e
l ooo : :.g,b’l =: D qq .n=‘5-..)-lj3 IJ% Nr s a,?.,,’,& 0@ U) 0 Ui Z " : ‘i € ) f2k ; H!j ' .” )
S’l -!A " 5I
' S’ U)fi l’) “) " Oli) ‘{ “lt) %I o’xi ‘1 oG€ F!1 +-l fi ‘O 5 !>’ . 016 % ‘O S N ‘E”‘S !11 Z E lw % 3 H ., SIE I< N 5i.i S ]E BH :l. i,,l 5 ’l"111
fflw,< (’)Z 0 v X
tq l-i
’l
.
ti;B
‘{ q
%
an
S
o
, i? tl0l
% H< :j
!110
:lk %, lli
l
U)lj
li -g bZ 77
o <>
50
(,,
ri ()
E g
h!s ’l j tl 5
-‘7
y
(I)lj
)m(6
(I)
!Z() OE
J
J;ff
E
W H<
k'01-i l::E
H
j
?g )dZ <In
z
r HS %h?
*I
,-l;
g§
a
;l
o 11)
?H
15
«-’-’<i< 00
"
a
00
B §0
C)Q
X
Z
.aE HK l ICT)
)-l
!Z
l’) 0 lc’lll rlA ll’) ffll:) Ola 0
e. e” 10
B H
m5 111!II t-15
x
E l’
K
%
hl %
Olt))d
ZX)> ml;) h.ldm
6;? m
W E, Pm
“jO W m ‘? %0, lJ7
l’) 0 -0 ’ -’-‘00 Elm S MIE 0H
Page 101 of 120
‘P% z
{
/2/
/A
(/l -l
%i
S?
S?6,
00 (o
h
it
z l@
,3’ t9.
n ,44
y9’ O
‘1
-9
z
eti
a:i
o
(0
‘-l
,0,,(? (@’
0”)
6
y f<7
o
N
,4 s
t:r+
m
o
tti
(j’i
I-)’
(Jl
‘J s
€
,?l 1
‘J’
rn
:)
z
n
cti
z
-l
(yZ %}:’
r5’i
0
o
i’:9==’
,/l J
tti i
)
m
b
r
z
:)
6
tt+
<
o
-1
?$
m
%J
r
o
) to
(al
/‘7 ffi
.(o
7
c>
./,,
?b
s
—!1
7
Q”)
N
‘0
.0 o
o
z
T
‘soo
4
l
(Q
J
-l
m ’l
z 10
(JJ
[c ,510 A4, l
r. 2Yl i,iZ
oo -J
NO
‘Ltl
S t)’
A,
s> 0’
‘p /
o:i (T
N
2
9
‘1’ %
B>
N
to
‘€ (‘qUl
(0-,(J ,y)oi o
X
lms=’s-
. , o ' B , , ' " , k , ' 3 " N o4: QM’ m?a?:2N-2B8.5.sb’a ‘? 2?,l ?EAE ?‘i. ?Al>‘O’O’Z?RO,o oaJ"fko?l -l ?As oc?‘C@CC?p,ED efos"e. JsV?
‘J
A
o
O4
T
P
I’Q
-(n
()(/I N(l)
:2
2
l y
‘4
o
N/5o ? 3 2 '
N
o
p4pT sNS’ m
.lt.
,;.6
71 9 6 0
‘Qs}
,b CV
i .,C>) %‘r ,!,I
?
R-
,’%
ao
e’
,20-E 458 ? 33
l
,,14?367o5
-?25.39
‘N7o34’ 3 0” W
7s=-r 7. 6 6 7
Az (/) -4
7 z 10
€
l'0
-l
?rS
(Al
(‘O
o’i %J
o
m
..-l
(‘a
go ,. Jo , Sl, (-, ,T,
g?,Qu’
Th-2’,?; -O? -iAu
tQ
(Jl
Page 102 of 120
INFORMATION REPORT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PREPARED FOR COW: June 7, 2016 AGENDA DATE:
June 14, 2016
SUBJECT: Collaboration with the O.P.P. BACKGROUND: Staff of the local OPP Detachment and Public Works meet 3 or 4 times a year to review common issues. ANALYSIS: At our most recent meeting we were presented with various motor vehicle collision statistics throughout the Township. It was agreed that we would share our road traffic counting with the OPP. What we are collectively trying to achieve is to reduce the number of collisions on our roads. As we evolve, we will undertake some trending analysis. We also hope to be able to determine the impact of certain treatments on the timing and frequency of collisions. Measured over a period of time, Road 38 and Perth Road are high collision frequency roadways. We have collectively decided to focus our efforts on Perth Road.
FINANCIAL/STAFFING IMPLICATIONS: None at this time.
Attachments: Example of Traffic Analysis Report Submitted/approved by: Mark Segsworth, P. Eng. Public Works Manager
Page 103 of 120 CPF East Region li1telligei1_ce Report if T/-\—ER—G08—2014 Report Date: 30 Octobe: Z014
-[-mi,-I
\ ahicle Coliis.cn Al13L_sis
‘-‘ :- hector
Executive Summagy I January and August peaks in collisions, I Hwy/ Cty 38 and Perth Road high collision frequency roadways, 0 animal and inattentive driving followed by speed as causes, 0 primarily locally involved drivers, possibly commuters, a forecast rise in collisions has begun with a seasonal peak expected in December. Traffic Analysis Summaigy A request was received for an analysis of collisions on roadways within the patrol area of Frontenac Detachment, specifically South Frontenac in 2013 and 2014. As there was no data available for this area until June 2014, results are based on all roadways within this detachment‘s boundaries; Frontenac proper, South Frontenac and Sharbot Lake. Although the most incidents occurred along Highway 401 an effort was made to focus on the outlying network of roadways (Figure 1). The area of interest has a population of approximately 18,000 people, is predominantly rural comprised of a few villages, cottage country and a Provincial Park bordering the highly populated city of Kingston to the south. Major roadways within this analysis area are County Roads 38 and 10 connecting the municipalities of Sharbot Lake and Westport to Highway 401 north of Kingston. Collisions appear to be following seasonal norms with the exception of an early spike last January (Figure 2). Figure 1: Collision Incidents 2013/2014
Figure
Forecast 14 ….……
.…s-?j.
..
l 60 ‘
l so
g
¥__.___j
2
South Frontenac Collision Forecast 2014 —
7
,
—
—
——
i. ,
——
g
I 40
I
,
E
–
30
.’
Maximum
j
20
Median
7
:
Minimum
.
—-2014
10
l
0
<* <4
<~
~\
\i
V
V
la‘ e.‘ e)
of
e”
‘at ts e‘” 9° \“ aimOg?ecg \®¢o’°é°\o"’ 60 Q?»
Analysis of the 2013/2014 data available in the Business Intelligence Cube, Collision Reporting System suggested the following trends:
Temporal
January, August, November as active months for collisions,
a
Monday, Wednesday and Saturday as weekday peaks, Daily increase in collisions starting at 6:00 am and peaking at 8:00 am, sustained through midday followed by the highest peak at 3:00 pm.
a 0
Spring and mid-summer for fatalities, January, August peaks in PI and PD collisions with a secondary peak in early November. Prepared by: G. vvlellanAnalyst, East Region intelligence
included in this repon, including mapping, is based on OPP Niche RMS reporting. The accuracy of the report reflectsthe accuracy ofinformation entered into the RMS system. information PROTECTED A / Law Sensitivity Routine Information requiring protection. This report and the information contained therein is for the attention of any law enforcement agency and may be disseminated at the discretion of the recipient. RESTRICTION LEVEL:Third Party Rule This report and the informationcontained therein is /or the attention of the recipient only and is not to befurtherdisseminated without prior approval Ofthe O?icerin Charge, intelligence Llnit, East Region Headquarters, OPP.
l
J
Page 104 of 120 liegioit littelligeiice cmxenac-0
Tram‘: .-\nal\sis Report
eCcllisicv.1_-
l’\ictor tel
al
Renort De 4.1,-3;‘ Cctusc. 231
Jurisdiction o
52% of MVCs occur on township roads followed by 17% on county roads and highways respectively.
Location a 66% of MVCs are non~intersection related followed by 12% intersection related. involved persons o 58% male drivers, average driver age is 41 years old, vast majority (70%) live in the immediate area,
- Vast majority of driver conditions regarding ability were left blank with one inattentive designation out of 77 incidents documented, I 3% of MVCs had intoxicants designated as a factor with April and May as peak times, I 16% of injured persons had seatbelts but did not use them. Involved vehicles 0 54% automobiles followed by 19% pick—uptrucks Contributing factors 0 22% animal related peaks in November and January, o 16% inattentive driver peaks July, August, October, 0 15% speed too fast for condition peaks January, February, November
Based on 525 MVCs reviewed in Niche RMS two roadways stood out as high volume locations for collisions; Perth Road and Highway/ County Road 38. The designated areas of these roadways in the map below were determined as most frequent collision locations based on the average of all the collisions along these roads over the two year period (Figure 3). Figure 3: Potential MVC Hotspots
ruaumuc
brvun
Conclusion Given the data available it would appear morning and afternoon commuters driving too fast are represented most often in this area’s MVCs. it is likely that seasonal changes in weather and movement of local wildlife contribute to increases in these MVCSbut the actual traffic reports are not available for a full analysis. Investigative conclusions have identified three reoccurring factors in these collisions— animals, inattentive drivers and speed contributed to the incidents most often. Given the season, the contributing
2 Prepared by: G. Mellon Analyst, East Region intelligence inciuded in this report, inciuding mapping, is based on one /vicnc RMS raaanina.The accuracy of the report reflectsthe accuracy ofinfurmutian entered into the ms system. information PROTECTED A / Low Sensitivity Routine Information requiring protection. This report and the informationcontained therein is /or the mention of any law enforcement agency and may be disseminated at the discretion of the recipient. RESTRICTIONLEVEL:Third Party Rule Thisreport and the information contained therein is for the attention of the recipient only and is not to be furtherdisseminated without prior approval of the O?icer in Charge, intelligence Unit, East Region Headizuarters, OPP. —
Page 105 of 120 CPI? Esrt l‘\eg’ion lnteliigence Repel"; Report Date: 30 Cctoa-er .-
Trai‘ c .-maly is Report From’. nae 1014} [Motor \ehicle Collision.
7,
factors and charges associated to inattentive driving the increases in MVCsare likely compounded by weather related influences. Based on ICONcharge records, previous efforts to address the issue indicate enforcement has been undertaken at off peak collision times (June as opposed to January). increased visibility (R.l.D.E.) may be having a positive influence on the area’s collisions (Figure 5).
_Figure 5: Enforcement M
W I
am 1*»
Frontenac
Enforcement] MVCCorrelation
,m’J
1 ;1_qar.1’.‘i
a
1:.-.l
v
5
n 1’ In-,»:l:‘m\
as
For a detailed breakdown of the supporting
Click here for East Region Intelligence
data please refer to the South Frontenac 2013 2014.x|sx
file forwarded with this report.
intranet Daze
Click here for GHQ traf?c statistics page
Prepared by.‘ G. Mel/an Analyst, East Region Intelligence
included in this report, including mapping, is based on OPP Niche RMS reporting. The accuracy of the report reflectsthe accuroty ofinformation entered into the RMS system, information PROTECTEDA / Low sensitivity Routine information requiring protection‘ This report and the information contained therein is for the attention of any law enforcementagency and may be Third Party Rule Thisreport and the information contained therein is for the attention oftherecipient only and is not to disseminated at the discretion ofthe recipient. RESTRICTION LEVEL.‘ be furtherdisseminated without prior approval of the Of?cerin Charge, Intelligence unit, East Region Headquarters, DPP, —
Page 106 of 120
June 7, 2016
By E-mail Original to Follow Township of South Frontenac 4432 George Street Sydenham, Ontario KOH 2TO
Attention: Mayor Vandewal Councillors
Lindsay Mills, Planner Wayne Orr, Clerk Dear Mayor, Councillors, Mr. Mills and Mr. Orr
Re: Part of Lot7, Concession 7, Portland District. Township of South Frontenac Proposed Subdivision Development
Dear Mayor and Councillors:
We are writing with respect to Item #11 b on Council’s June 7, 2016 Agenda. Under this item appears a report from Chris Rancourt of Exp It is our understanding this report
was obtained pursuant to the following motion, which Council passed on March 1, 2016:
THAT Council defer this matter and instruct the township to engage an
independent environmental consulting firm to review the reports that have been
submitted to date and make a determination on the water quantity and quality in
the proposed development and surrounding areas and make recommendations as to any additional testing or monitoring that should be conducted.
After reviewing the documents that were made available to Mr. Rancourt, as set out on
£a??sla?d^- °! .his 3~page.re?°^’.we are frustrated £lt thelack of disclosure by the
Township to their own expert. In this regard, attached is a “Preliminary List of Pertinent Documents” concerning this matter, all of which have been provided to Mr. WilfRuland,
the karst and contamination expert retained by the community, which we note consisted of over 1200 pages of materials. All of the documentation indicated in the attached List
is either available to the Township or has been submitted to the Township directly. Yet
only those documents hi-lighted in yellow (approximately 15% of all available materials
regarding hydrology and hydrocarbon contamination) were apparently provided to Mr. Rancourt.
It is absolutely inexcusable on the part of the Township planning department to fail to
provide Mr. Rancourtwith a majority of documents available concerning this matter, including documents such as the first Mclntosh Perry report obtained by the community and dated September 1, 2015 or the Cambium Report obtained by the Township and dated January 4, 2016. Out of 7 peer review reports provided by Malroz Engineering,
the planning department only forwarded 2 to Mr. Rancourt. Likewise, out of 5 Quinte
Page 107 of 120 2
£^n?-^rY?!.’?^r??_ollT-or?ly.1 wa? forwarded to Mr- Rancourt. However, reports such as !h^P-r^n.Tn^s.t!afflc)stuljyand archaeolo9ical study were sent to Mr. Rancourt, who accordingtothe motion above was retained to examine the hydrogeology of the are. Most troubling is the lack of disclosure to Mr. Rancourt of the comprehensive and critical
report by the community’s expert, Mr.Wilf Ruland. Mr. Ruland’s report was provided to
^^s^s^as^a^^ not made available to Mr. Rancourt. For what purpose? Would it not be in the
Township’s and the community’s best interest to insure the Township’s expert’was made aware of all possible information concerning this matter?
P-e-fallur^to.prop.e^lydocument this matter and provide full and complete disclosure to the consultants retained to advise the Township has played a critical role in preventing this matter from being fairly and competently handled. It has also significantlv
contributed to the cost to both the taxpayers as a whole and the community of
Hartington, which has had to expend significant resources to monitor and address the ongoing deficiencies in the planning department’s handling of this matter. It is not lost
?Ln-^c?TrTlu^y-?f_Hartin?to?.that,theywi11 havePaid twice for this matter, through
their taxes and their own retention of experts, which had the Township reviewed the
Western Cataraqui Region Groundwater Study conducted in 2007 by Trow Associates Inc., likely could have been avoided.
We further note that Mr. Rancourt does not appear to have had the benefit of the Trow
[?^.^^1^l ^LC-!LM^ ^I^(LC!i?-^ye-the.,bT?efit"Nol- does. Mr- Rancourt appear
to have had the benefit of all the materials available concerning the hydrogeologyofthe
area and the hydrocarbon contamination of the former gas station in Hartington We confirm these materials include, but are not limited to, all reports provided to the
Township by the community including all reports from Mdntosh Perry, Mr. Wilf Ruland’s May 10, 2016 report and all correspondence to the Township and the County from’the
community which as can be seen by the attached Index consist of at least 46 pieces of correspondence that have to date remain undocumented by the Township of South
Frontenac._Without the benefit of the pertinent documentation itemized in the attached Index, Mr. Rancourt’s preliminary thoughts are of little value to this discussion and most certainly not in keeping with the intent of Council’s March 1, 2016 motion. In this regard, it is telling that the only thought Mr. Rancourt has added to this discussion is to suggest that farming, in a long standing farming community, be
LT?,r.i^tT^<^?^!y^^rl.h!^.!:)^ ^^?!rlT^n^atLon’t? M.r’Rancourt of the Township’s
=S^ =Sat actiacen^agri?ultural-twrties wu’d be protect^I3Tr^-^hlls.?rflft Plan condltions re warning future residents of existing farming
operations. Not to mention the issue of how Mr. Rancourt was able to determine with the information available to him and no apparent site visit that human habitation was not
the source of the nitrate concerns, said concerns presumably being the focus of this sugge!t’onjt.’s mteresting tot.h’nkthe watersuPP’y warrants protection from farming activities, yet no mention of any recommendations to protect the water supply from known hydrocarbons.
Page 108 of 120 3
With_respect to said hydrocarbons, we note it has now been almost one month since
M.rL_Rula?d’? reP°rt was delivered to the Township of South Frontenac, yet the community has received no indication of what, if anything, the Township mtends to do to address the significant health and safety concerns set out therein. As per Mr; Ruland’s
meeting with Township and County staff and several Township Councillors, he highly
recommended the Township undertake a testing program of residents’ wells within a certain radius of the former gas station in Hartington to determine and monitor whether
T.n^cont.^n1lnati,of1 of individual wells has occurred or may occur. Mr. Ruland was very
dear ^^^ concerns forthe pos.ble contamination of the drinking water supply
in Hartington from the said site by hazardous chemicals such as benzene, which are
known carcinogens. At what point will the Township finally decide to take action on’this
matter? After Hartington is put on the map as another Flint or Walkerton? We expect
no less from those elected to represent our community than to demand our healtha’nd
^!y-^-p-Tt!^-!iret-^,dloITOSt ^" immediatejmonitoring program should be put in place for the Village of Hartington and we implore Township Council totakeaction’in
this regard immediately.
Finally, further to the Freedom of Information request submitted by Michelle Foxton to Wayne Orr on April 7, 2016, we understand Mr. Orr was to follow up with the
??J3a-?!71^t^c?n^e=rn^d}oin?u^e,they understood the nature of the request regarding records for contaminated materials removed from the site of the former gas station in Hartingtonand apparently deposited at the Portland landfill site. May we please’have
?n-U.P.d-a^-froTjv’.r.?,rr.int^regf(i’,as .we are ^ow we" Past the 3° day’time’period
provided for under the legislation for disclosure of same. Further to the said Freedom of
Information request we ajso request a copy of all documentation between
.OL^U?Lrr-?-n^^-?n-c!.t^!^iTS^_?f^he Environment and Climate Change (MOECC)^
which has not previously been provided, concerning the hydrocarbon contamination’of
the former gas station_inHartington_ including, but not limited to, any and all remediation plans submitted to MOECC by the Township and/or its agents.
We look forward to the Township’s prompt reply to the above.
/T^^B^T t{ A^ 0^—, Wade Leonard
Charlie Labarge
z ichelle L. F6xton
Jpr /
ec: Joe Gallivan, Frontenac County Planner
/
esperance
Page 109 of 120
PRELIMINARY LIST OF PERTINENT DOCUMENTS RE PROPOSED HARTINGTON SUBDIVLSJON **
Documents hi-lighted in yellow are only ones that appear to have been provided to
?^hl ^P^UJt^f^xP. as.per htsrecent f1ePori delivered to the Township on May 31,2016 t!lej^!otal 14/9e orapproximately only 15y° of the documentation available concerning this matter DEVELOPER DOCUMENTS
Application & SuDportina Materials
Application by Forefront Engineering Inc. (Doug Prinsen, PEng) 13/11/15 2 3
49 Lot Draft Plan by Forefront Engineering Inc.
Hydrogeological Study Servicing Options and Terrain Analysis
byASC Environmental Inc. (Paul Johnston, MSc, PEng) 4
13/11/13
13/10/31
Preliminary Stormwater Management Report by Forefront
Engineering Inc. (Doug Prinsen, PEng)
13/10/24
Responses to Commenting Agencies & PeeLReviews 5
47 Lot Draft Plan by Forefront Engineering Inc.
6
ASC (Paul Johnston, MSc, PEng) letter to Terry Grant and
14/08/29
attachments re Hydrogeological Assessment-‘comments re Peer Review
7
Preliminary Stormwater Management Report by Forefront
Engineering Inc. (Doug Prinsen, PEng) 8
14/09/15
14/11/05
Forefront (Doug Prinsen, PEng) letter to Tim Trustham of (Planner/Ecologist), Quinte Conservation
14/12/15
9
Additional Well Analyses / Decommissioned Well Documents
14/12/12
10
ASC (Paul Johnston, MSc, PEng) letter to Terry Grant re
11
Hydrogeological Assessment - comments re 2nd Peer Review
15/03/23
Planning Justification Report by Fotenn Planning & Urban Design (Mike Keene, MCIP, RPP)
15/06/11
Page 110 of 120 2
12
ASC (Paul Johnston, MSc, PEng) letter to Peter Young, Frontenac County Planner re Hydrogeological Methodology for Individual Lot Assessment
15/06/23
Developer’s Revised Proposal 13
14
15
Fotenn / Forefront Engineering Inc. Slide Presentation to South Frontenac Township Council
15/08/04
Fotenn (Mike Keene, RPP, MCIP) letter to Joe Gallivan, Frontenac County Planner re Application for Draft Plan of
Subdivision and Zoning By-Law Amendment Planning Relief
15/10/09
South Frontenac Township Nov 24/15 Planning Report (Lindsay Mills, Planner) Attachments
15/11/24
Responses to Mclntosh Perry Review 16
17
ASC (Paul Johnston, MSc, PEng) letter to Terry Grant re
Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analyses - Response to Technical Comments from Mclntosh Perry
15/10/29
ASC (Paul Johnston, MSC, PEng) letter to Lindsay Mills, South Frontenac Planner re Proposed 13 Lot Hartington Subdivision
15/12/03
MALROZ DOCUMENTS 18
19
20
21
Malroz (John R. Pyke, PGeo) letter to Peter Young, Frontenac
County Planner re Peer Review of Application for Subdivision
14/01/21
Malroz (John R. Pyke, PGeo) letter to Peter Young, Frontenac County Planner re Peer Review (#2) ofASC Response
14/10/17
Malroz (John R. Pyke, PGeo) letter to Peter Young, Frontenac County Planner re Peer Review (#3 Draft) ofASC Response
15/04/09
Mafroz (John R. Pyke, PGeo) letter to Peter Young, Frontenac
County Planner re Peer Review (#3 Final) ofASC Response 22
23
24
15/04/20
Malroz (John R. Pyke, PGeo) letter to Peter Young, Frontenac County Planner re Review of Mclntosh Perry Sept 1/15 Letter
15/09/24
Malroz (John R. Pyke, PGeo) email to Joe Gallivan, Frontenac County Planner re Review ofASC Dec 3/15 Letter to Mills
16/01/15
Malroz (John R. Pyke, PGeo) email to Joe Gallivan, Frontenac County Planner re Review of Hartington Gas Bar Comments (indicated date of 16/02/25)
undated
Page 111 of 120 3
MCINTOSH PERRY DOCUMENTS 25
Mclntosh Perry (Fraser Armstrong, PEng and Mark Priddle.
PGeo) letter to Community re Review Technical Support
26
Documentation
15/09/01
Mclntosh Perry ([Fraser Armstrong, PEng and Mark Priddle, PGeo) letter to Community re Review of Rebuttal Responses
15/11/23
QUINTE CONSERVATION DOCUMENTS
27 Quinte (Tim Tmstham, Planner/Ecologist) letter to Peter Youna, Frontenac County Planner re Proposed Plan of Subdivision
File 10T-2013/002 28
14/01/31
Quinte^Christine McClure) Engineering Department Review re Hartington Subdivision
15/04/24
29 9uin,te ^TiTLTruTth??T1’ planner/Ecologist) letter to Peter Young,
Frontenac County Planner re Proposed Plan of Subdivision File 10T-2013/002
15/04/30
30 9uinte (Mark Boone’ Hydrogeologist) letter to Peter Young,
Frontenac County Planner re Proposed Plan of Subdivision’ File 10T-2013/002
31
15/06/02
Quinte(Tim Tmstham, Planner/Ecologist) letter to Peter Young Frontenac County Planner re Proposed
Plan of Subdivision File 10T-2013/002
15/09/30
FORMER GAS STATION DOCUMENTS
Specialized Onsite Services IncJSOS) 32
SOS (Cam Monk/Derek Maat, MASc, PEng, QP) letter to
^^?^^nlcliFj?ntra?tin9 services Inc re Investigation and
Verification Soil Sampling - Underground Fuel Storage Tanks Removal- 5598 Highway 38, Hartington
33
15/02/09
SOS (Cam Monk/Derek Maat, MASc, PEng, QP) letter to Environmental Contracting Services Inc. re Soil and Ground
Water Assessment Report 34
15/09/28
SOS (Cam Monk/Derek Maat, MASc, PEng, QP) letter to
Township of South Frontenac re Soil and Ground Water
Assessment Letter
16/01/18
Page 112 of 120 4
35
SOS (Cam Monk/Derek Maat, MASc, PEng, QP) letter to Township of South Frontenac re Soil and Ground Water 16/01/28
Contamination
Disclosure Materials from Townshje 36
Disclosure Packages x 3
14/02/23 to 15/02/25
37
Invoices
14/03/06 to 15/10/16
38
Cambium Report to Township of South Frontenac
16/01/04
HEALTH UNIT DOCUMENTS 39
KFL&A Public Health (Don Allan, CPHI(C)) letter to Terry Grant re Hartington Subdivision Proposal
14/12/12
PHOTOS - MAPS
Hydrogeology 40
41
42
ASC Drawings 7 and 8 from October 31, 2013 Hydrogeology Report re Preliminary Septic Locations
13/10/31
ASC Drawings 3 to 8 from October 31, 2013 Hydrogeology Report re Test Wells and Pit Locations
13/10/31
ASC Drawings 1 to 7 and Forefront Layout Concept from ASC
March 23, 2015 Comments re 2nand Peer Review re Interference
and Proposed Revised Layout 43
15/03/23
ASC Drawing 6 from ASC March 23, 2015 Comments re 2 nd Peer Review re Revised Well Locations
15/03/23
Mas 44
Ontario Geological Survey Map of Karst Study for Southern
Ontario (2008) and 5 Google Earth/Ontario Geological Survey Maps showing areas of Karst in Association with Hartington, Ontario (2016) 45
46
2008 & 2016
3 Images of Sections of the Pleasant Valley Municipal Drainage Works - Portland Township (former) Site Plan (East) from July 2, 1985 byA.D. Revill & Associate
85/07/02
2 Images of the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network in the Hartington area
15/11/13
Page 113 of 120 5
47
Images of the subject site from the County of Frontenac
Interactive Web Mapping page and from the Township of South Frontenac 2011 Official Plan Map
13/01/07
48
4 Images of the Canada Land Inventory Map for Kingston (1966), 1 Image of the Canada Land Inventory Map for Kingston (1975), 1 Image of the Frontenac Soil Capability Survey (1967) and 1 Image of the Frontenac Soil Capability Survey (1965) 1965 to 1975
49
1 Image of Ministry of Natural Resources Map showing Wetlands in the Hartington area and on the subject site
13/02/06
COMMUNITY WATER CONCERNS 50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
Letter from Dan and Sandra Bell to Township of South Frontenac re quantity and quality of water
12/12/21
Letter to the Editor from Dennis Saunders re quantity and quality of water in Hartington area
13/01/07
Letter from Cindy Carr and Gord Mylks to Township of South Frontenac re quantity and quality of water
13/01/16
Email from Richard and Lynn Cilles to Township of South Frontenac Councillors re quantity and quality of water
13/01/22
Letter from Nicole Kasserra and David White to Lindsay Mills, Township of South Frontenac Planner re quantity and quality of water
13/03/14
Letter from Michelle Foxton to Township of South Frontenac re quantity and quality of water
13/11/11
Email from Foxton to Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner re concerns about well testing results
13/12/16
Letter from Shari Hasler to Peter Young and Joe Gallivan,
County of Frontenac Planners re quantity and quality of water 58
59
60
13/12/24
Letter from John Lesperance, PEng to Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner re quantity and quality of water
13/12/26
Letter from Gary Hasler to Township of South Frontenac Re water quantity and quality
14/01
Email from Michelle Foxton to Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner re pump test and stormwater report concerns
14/01/03
Page 114 of 120 6
61
62
63
64
Letter from John Lesperance, PEng to Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner re hydrocarbon concerns
14/02/07
Email from Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner to John Lesperance, PEng re hydrocarbon concerns etc
14/02/12
Email from Charlie Labarge/Brian Wartman to Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner re quantity and quality of water
14/02/13
Email from Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner to Brian Wartman re MOE status of wells
65
Email from Peter Young, County of Frontenac Planner to Hanne and Dennis Saunders re work on site
66
67
68
69
Email from Michelle Foxton to Peter Young, County 14/09/29
Letter from Wade Leonard to Joe Gallivan, County of Frontenac Planner re concerns about quality of water following testing
15/01/27
Email from Joe Gallivan, County of Frontenac Planner to Wade Leonard re water testing concerns
15/02/02
Email from Stephen Leonard to Lindsay Mills, Township of
73
74
75
15/07/07
Public Meeting Presentation by Michelle Foxton to Township of South Frontenac
72
15/06/22
Public Meeting Presentation by Dennis Saunders to Township of South Frontenac
71
14/06/11
of Frontenac Planner re concerns about ASC testing
South Frontenac Planner re concerns about Agricultural activities within vicinity of proposed site 70
14/02/14
15/07/07
Public Meeting Presentation by Wade Leonard to Township of South Frontenac
15/07/07
Email from Ruth Gultekin to Wayne Orr, CAO, Township of South Frontenac re quantity and quality of water
15/07/08
Letter from Michelle Foxton to Township of South Frontenac re proposed revisions to plan, quantity and quality of water etc.
15/08/01
Letter from Gary and Christina Hasler to Township of South Frontenac re quantity and quality of water and Pleasant Valley Drain
15/08/02
Page 115 of 120 7 76
Letter from Shari Hasler to Township of South Frontenac re
quantity and quality of water 77
15/08/02
Email from Ross Sutherland, Councillor, Township of South Frontenacto Michelle Foxton re area of sensitive water
78
15/08/03
Email from Ron Sleeth, Councillor, Township of South
Frontenac to Gary Hasler re importance of water and drain 79
15/08/03
Letter from Robert Leonard to Township of South Frontenac re
history of water quantity and quality concerns in Hartingtonarea 1 5/08/04 80
Email from Ruth Gultekin to Councillors, Township of South
Frontenac re interference with wells 81
15/08/04
Letter from Nicole Kasserra and David White to Township of
South Frontenac re quantity and quality of water 82
^a-il.!??_Lir?da_8tewartto councillors and Staff of Township of South Frontenac re past experience with water contamination associated with agricultural activity, car wash and well fracturing 1 5/08/21
83
Email from RuthGultekin to Councillors, Township of South
15/08/20
Frontenac rejack of attention to community concerns re quantity
and quality of water 84
15/08/21
EmailfromLinda Stewart to Township of South Frontenac and
County of Frontenac re concerns with well testing results and usage assumptions 85
15/08/22
Letter^rom Leonard, Labarge, Foxton and Lesperance on
behalf of Community to Township of South Frontenac re water quantity and quality concerns 86
Letter from Richard and Lynn Cilles to Township of South Frontenac re quantity and quality of water
87
15/08/24
Email from RuthGultekin to Councillors, Township of South
Frontenac re Mclntosh Perry Report 88
15/08/24
15/11/17
Lette^from Leonard, Labarge, Foxton and Lesperance on
behalf of the Community to Township of South Frontenac
renitrates, hydrocarbons, hydro fracturing, well by well
hydrogeological analysis, etc
16/01/17
Page 116 of 120 8 89
Email from Ruth Gultekin to Councillors, Township of South
Frontenac re concerns about nitrates and reduced frontages 90
16/01/18
Email from John Lesperance, PEng to John McDougall,
Councillor, Township of South Frontenac re lack of nitrates
in past agricultural practices on subject site 91
Email from M^chelle Foxton to Alan Revill, Councillor,
Township of South Frontenac re instances where water treatment requirements referred to in reports 92
16/01/19
16/01/19
Email from Ross Sutherland, Councillor, Township of South
Frontenac to Michelle Foxton re nitrates, Karst, hydro fracturing 16/01/23 93
Email from Dennis and Hanne Saunders to Councillors and
Staff at Township of South Frontenac and County of Frontenac re hydrocarbons and Karst 94
16/02/28
Letter from Leonard Labarge, Foxton and Lesperance to
Township of South Frontenac re hydrocarbon contamination, hydro fracturing, well testing, effects on groundwater etc.
95
16/02/29
Notes of Comments by Councillor Alan Revill at South
Frontenac Township Council meeting on March 1,2016
16/03/01
CONSERVATION DOCUMENTS 96
YYe-^Tr.n F-at??_clui-f?e9ion ?ro.ur?^?ter study comPleted by Trow Associates Inc. in April 2007
04/2007
Page 117 of 120
TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC P.O. Box 100
4432 George Street Sydenham, Ontario, KOH 2TO
Telephone 376-3027 /1-800-559-5862 FAX (613) 376-6657 E-mail: worr@8oudifrotitenac.net
June 8, 2016
Kelly Render Chief Administrative Officer
County of Frontenac 2069 Battersea Rd Glenburnie ON KOH 1 SO
Dear Mr. Fender:
At the June 7, 2016 meeting, the Council of the Township of South Frontenac passed the following resolution:
“THAT Council establish a goal seeking delegated authority for the approval of subdivisions and plans of condominium effective in 2019. Carried”
trust this meets with your approval. Yours sincere
r
c
f/AdmTftfetrative Officer
I
W0:am
Page 118 of 120 The Corporation of the
V,
City of Kawartha Lakes
AWARTH/
A<
^ ^ S–
P. 0. Box 9000, 26 Francis St, LINDSAY,ONK9V5R8 Tel. (705) 324-9411 Ext 1295, 1-888-822-2225 Fax: (705)324-8110
Judy Currins, City Clerk May 26, 2016
|"-L’ A,
r^".
rft
.^
MW < .h^
/nfc
a’*
^
f
a t*
Township of South Frontenac PO Box 100
Sydenham, ON KOH 2TO
j C 3 -^ »
»
‘*?
^
OF
SOOTH ^OKTENAC
Attn: Wayne Orr, Chief Administrative Officer Dear Mr. Orr,
RE: Township of South Frontenac Resolution Regarding Large Renewable Procurement Initiatives
Please be advised that the Council of the City of Kawartha Lakes adopted the following resolution at their meeting held May 10, 2016: CR2016-409
RESOLVED THAT the April 21 , 2016 correspondence from the Township of South Frontenac regarding the Resolution relating to Large Renewable Energy Initiatives, be received and supported. CARRIED
If you have any questions with respect to this matter please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Yours very truly, ^
CAA^^^O .
Jtfdy Currins City Clerk City of Kawartha Lakes
Page 119 of 120
My cottage property is 150 ft wide by 100ft deep. There is no available land to purchase anywhere near my cottage and the lane borders my front lawn. So we are stuck. As a seasonal cottage owner, I have some serious concerns about the proposed changes that will in effect remove the “grandfather” clause re dwelling set back. We purchased our wonderful little cottage about 16 years ago with the intent that when we both retired, we would probably tear down the little 600 sq ft , dwelling and put up a small retirement bungalow. We have over the years upgraded and maintained our little dwelling as best as we could , but the bones of the structure are approx 75 years old, so it is difficult to work with. Over the years we have spent a lot of money in retaining walls, to ensure our hill does not fall into the lake, as our cottage sits high up in a hill. Well, as of this week, we are both officially retired, so if the changes go thru, we are literally screwed. Now we can’t rebuild, nor can we resell the property for the amount we would have received a year ago, once word gets out to perspective buyers that the lot will only be an old cottage. Why would you even consider doing this to your current tax payers? Does the township not want to generate more tax revenue? There would be nothing stopping us from walking away from our property and abandoning it, as it won’t be worth anything in a few years if the changes go thou. I can see lots of unpaid tax bills in the future, why should we pay them, with no future for the property, that won’t be worth anything. Our retirement dreams and financial future would be ruined by your proposed changes, I ask that you do not vote for them. Respectfully, Louise & Daniel Ouellet
Page 120 of 120
TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH - WEST OXFORD R. R. # 1, Mount Elgin, On. N0J 1N0 312915 Dereham Line Phone: (519) 877-2702; (519) 485-0477; Fax: (519) 485-2932 Thursday, June 2, 2016 Rural Ontario Municipal Association Attn: Chairperson Ronald Holdman 200 University Avenue Suite 801 Toronto, ON M5H 3C6 Dear Board of Directors: The Council of the Township of South-West Oxford duly moved and carried the following resolution at the regular council meeting held on May 17, 2016: Resolved that staff be directed to write a letter to ROMA indicating the Township’s opposition to the division of the Conferences and that this be sent to all municipalities in Ontario, AMO and Oxford MPP Ernie Hardeman. Council has expressed concern that two separate conferences…only weeks apart…will have a negative impact on resources without a significant improvement in results. Provincial Ministers and support staff, Members of Provincial Parliament, Council members, municipal staff, vendors as well those sponsoring the conferences will see a doubling of costs as there is now an expectation to appear at two separate events. The previous partnership provided diversity of content while streamlining costs between two important groups. Council does not see what efficiencies are to be gained by splitting the conferences. There has always been the opportunity to address Rural Ontario issues at the combined conference. It is questionable whether a separate conference will offer rural municipalities a clearer voice when dealing with the Province or other agencies or provide better educational opportunities to members. Diversity in a conference offers a great deal to the participants to bring back to their communities. Council is hopeful that the ROMA Board of Directors will reconsider and reunite with OGRA for future conferences. Yours truly, Mary Ellen Greb, CAO A leader in the development and delivery of municipal services for the growth & well being of our community
