Published March 28, 2017
Word Count 15069 words
Reading Time 71 min read

Body: Committee of the Whole Type: Agenda Meeting: Committee of the Whole Date: March 28, 2017 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Committee of the Whole/2017/Committee of the Whole - 28 Mar 2017 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA

TIME: DATE: PLACE:

6:00 PM, Tuesday, March 28, 2017 Council Chambers.

Call to Order

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

Scheduled Closed Session

(a)

Litigation - Hartington Development

(b)

Verbal Report - Matters about an Identifiable Individual

***Recess - reconvene at 7:00 p.m. for Open Session

Introductions

(a)

Forbes Symon - Manager of Development Services

Delegations

(a)

Sheena & Leo Pillay, Owners of Desert Lake Resort Inc, re: Request for Noise By-law Exemption

(b)

Desert Lake Property Owners Association, re: Noise By-law Exemption

(c)

Kanji Nakatsu, re: Noise By-law Exemption Proposal

Reports Requiring Action

(a)

Lindsay Mills, Planner, re: Minimum Distance Separation: New Guidelines

9 - 14

(b)

Lindsay Mills, Planner, re: Development of Policy for Amount of Parkland Dedication Fee

15 - 19

(c)

Wayne Orr, Chief Administrative Officer re: Partnership for Climate Protection

20 - 24

(d)

Wayne Orr, Chief Administrative Officer, re: Notice of Motion Amendments to Building Code - Septic Systems

25 - 26

Reports for Information - n/a

Rise & Report

(a)

County Council

(b)

Arena Board

3

4-7

8

Page 2 of 48

(c)

Police Services Board

(d)

Portland Heritage

Information Items

(a)

Noise By-law 2015-41

27 - 31

(b)

Robert Brown, re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise By-law Exemption

32 - 34

(c)

Benjamin Applebaum re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise By-law Exemption

35

(d)

Brian Cumming, re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise By-law Exemption

36

(e)

Kelly Chesney & Sarah Torrible, re: Desert Lake Family Resort Request for Noise By-law Exemption

37

(f)

John Bonner, re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption

38 - 39

(g)

Carol & Yves Poinsignon, re: Desert Lake Resort - Request for Noise By-law Exemption

40 - 41

(h)

Julie Wise, re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise By-law Exemption

42

(i)

Peter & Kerry Hodson, re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise By-law Exemption

43 - 44

(j)

Corporation of the Municipality of Calvin, re: Building Code Changes

45

(k)

Chief Stephen Hernen, President, Ontario Association of Fire Chief, re: 2017 Municipal Officials Seminar

46 - 47

(l)

Jeff Leal, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, re: 2017 Premier’s Award for Agri-Food Innovation Excellence

Notice of Motions

Announcements

Question of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items)

Closed Session (if requested)

Adjournment

48

Page 3 of 48

—–Original Message—-From: General Information [mailto:info@desertlakeresort.on.ca] Sent: February-09-17 5:08 PM To: Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Subject: RE: Noise bylaw/ Desert Lake Resort Importance: High Good Day Wayne I hope the winter is treating you well. I am touching base with you in regards to our last year discussion about receiving an exemption for this coming summer camping season at Desert Lake Family Resort for the music activities we offer our clients. You had mentioned you wanted dates and times that we host events which i have provided below. Also i belive in past i had sent you a map of the park with the area marked out to the location of the events to ensure it is located away from the waters edge etc. We are committed to working with the township and bylaw officers to ensure we follow strict guidelines, the campground has been in operation for over 40 years, and we are an integral part of the tourism sector for the surrounding areas. Each year Desert Lake Family resort sees thousands of guests, day visitors and large scale family reunions from all over the province. We ultimately ask that we are permitted to continue a long tradition of offering a fun family environment for our guests and wish to extend offering music for entertainment purposes. We also want to note that we allow for all local community members to come down to the park when events are taking place, free of charge for their own pleasure. We are not out to create any disturbance for anyone and am happy to work with you to ensure we continue on a positive path. Event dates Saturday May 20th 8-11pm live band July 1 through September 2nd every Saturday from 8-11pm (mix of live bands and DJ music/ karaoke) i appreciate you time and look forward to your response Sheena & Leo Pillay Owners Desert Lake Resort Inc. www.desertlakeresort.on.ca 613-374-2196

Page 4 of 48

March 28, 2017 Good Evening Township Councillors and Mayor Vandewal. The generation of loud noise for recreational or commercial purposes is incompatible with the nature and use of Desert Lake. It also contravenes the Township’s noise bylaw, Official Plan and the Frontenac Economic Development Charter that was developed in March of 2015. My name is Rik Saaltink and I am making this presentation on behalf of the Desert Lake Property Owners Association. Our membership includes cottagers, permanent residents and several resort owners. Our association was formed more than forty years ago from a common desire to ensure our continued peaceful enjoyment of Desert Lake. We have contacted our membership regarding the request by the Desert Lake Resort for an exemption to the township’s noise bylaw. Our members have responded strongly and are united on this issue: The Desert Lake Property Owners Association members strongly oppose the granting of a noise bylaw exemption to the Desert Lake Family Campground.

The request should be denied because it is too broad and the impacts would be too widespread and severe. Furthermore, the Desert Lake Family Campground have not provided sufficient information to show why it is necessary, what the impacts would be and how they would manage these events to monitor and mitigate the effects on the natural lake environment and the people who live there.

General Concerns regarding noise, safety and security regarding this request:

  1. If these concerts are free and open to the public, it is fair to expect that they will attract revelers from the region and not just residents of the local Lakes system. o Does the resort have the washroom facilities and adequate septic tank and tile field to safely handle a large influx of visitors every Saturday night? o Does the resort have a management plan for solid waste? o Would the Cataraqui River Conservation Authority not be concerned with the potential runoff pollution and litter into the lake from each Saturday evening of festivities? o What measures are proposed to manage road safety and deter impaired driving (or boating)? o What measures are proposed to control liquor consumption? Will liquor be sold at these events? Will a liquor licence be required for each event? (Note that control of liquor consumption at the campground during a concert is difficult because the campground is a temporary residence for many people who can store and consume alcohol at their campsites.) o What measures are proposed for local traffic and parking during the concerts? o What measures are proposed for security and first aid, or emergency response in the event of a drug overdose?

Page 5 of 48

o o

Will the OPP and by-law enforcement be involved in supervising the events? Do they have the necessary resources to do so? Are there contingency plans to cancel events when thunderstorms and lightning are imminent?

  1. The noise pollution will carry great distances over the surface of Desert Lake. o Although the events are located inside the campground area, has the resort considered the location, power and orientation of the equipment in order to minimize the effects on other lake properties? o What measures has the township proposed to provide recourse for cottagers who are bothered by the concerts? o What measures have been put in place to respond to complaints during events? (Note that residents who have tried to contact the resort operator during past events were only able to access an after-hours recorded message, and these events are scheduled for weekends when the township offices are closed. Will the OPP respond to complaints? o Even if the concerts end promptly at 11:00pm, there is an extended period of noise while the revellers disperse, including automobile traffic and potentially boats on the lake. This means that noise levels are high well after each event has officially ended. o There are many studies that show that noise and light can have a deleterious impact on fish and wildlife. Similarly, the effects of noise on human health are well documented. The resort seems unaware of these potential impacts. Any bylaw exemption should be predicated on the mitigation of these impacts. (by reducing the level of noise and spillover lighting emanating from their site).
  2. This would be an unreasonable intrusion on the rights of other lakeside property owners for the peaceful enjoyment of their properties. o Concerts or other loud activities every Saturday night would be a special hardship for people who work during the week and can only access their cottages on the weekends. o Excess noise would be a particular hardship for families with young children if they are kept awake after their normal bed-time. o The potential impact on adjacent property values is a big concern. We wish to protect the natural environment that supports the value of our homes, cottages and businesses.
  3. Refusal of this request would mostly affect newly proposed activities and would therefore not result in an undue hardship o The resort operator can consider a host of alternative activities that will not affect their neighbours: woods lore, star gazing, wildlife interpretation, canoe paddling, nature walks, unamplified campfire singalongs, volleyball tournaments, etc.

Page 6 of 48

We note that the Desert Lake Family Campground (now Desert Lake Resort Inc.) is a commercial enterprise that boasts of thousands of guests, day visitors and large scale family reunions from all over the province. As such it benefits financially from the natural beauty and clean lake waters. It is also the establishment that has the greatest impact on the lake. It is therefore in their best interest and ours that they use some of their considerable resources to make sure that their business model does not have a detrimental impact on our lake environment and on the enjoyment of the lake by others.

What The DLPOA members can support: ● ● ● ●

A very limited number of concerts – maximum two per year. An earlier cut-off time, such as 10:00 pm to allow for revellers to disperse by 10:30 pm The Township providing a phone contact for the bylaw enforcement officer during the times that the any noise bylaw exemption is in effect. Contingency plans that show that all practical measures have been taken to mitigate the impacts and concerns identified above.

The DLPOA would be prepared to work with the township and the resort to find a suitable outcome for this proposal. South Frontenac has excellent planning tools to guide your decision on this matter. Two years ago an Economic Development Charter for the Frontenac Community was developed. I will quote two sections: “We value collaboration and pledge to work together to develop, gather support for, implement and measure the themes in this charter”. “We share a vision of an economy that is rooted in the character of the Frontenacs and its people: welcoming, healthy, clean, tranquil, entrepreneurial, and rural by choice and conviction.”

By working within this framework, the Desert Lake Resort would have no need for a noise bylaw exemption. Thank you for providing our association the opportunity to speak to you tonight on this important issue.

Page 7 of 48

Appendix A The Desert Lake Property Owners Association was founded over thirty years ago to provide a voice for our members to protect the natural environment and our rural lifestyle at Desert Lake. To this end, we have been monitoring water levels and nutrient levels in the water for more than twenty years. We have undertaken several environmental studies to understand how lakefront development might affect water quality. We have also conducted two detailed shoreline assessments to observe and document any improvement or degradation of the shoreline due to construction of other use. And we clean up trash and debris left behind by partiers on islands that are owned by the crown. In 2015, our association hand delivered a questionnaire to each and every property on the lake, more that 140 surveys in total. Our goal was to make each property owner aware of the association and to garner as much information as possible regarding people’s vision for the future use and development of the lake. We relieved 44 completed survey forms. The survey asked people to rank the things that the most strongly valued about Desert Lake. There were a variety of responses, which I attribute to the variety of people’s tastes but also to the fact that some people live in remote areas on the lake and others are in proximity to more intensive development. ●

Peace and Tranquility, 32 flagged it as Very Important, 5 as important, 1 as unimportant and 6 blanks

●

Sense of Wilderness, 28 indicated very important to them, 10 said it was important and 6 were blank

●

Night Time Noise, 6 indicated it was Significant, 11 Moderate, 17 Light, 4 no impact, and 6 blanks

Interestingly, many members raised concerns about one property in particular – Desert Lake Family Resort. These are comments that were written in: ●

The change of ownership of the campground has led to more noise at night and there seems to be an increase in traffic at the “boat launch”

●

ensure desert lake campgrounds and other commercial businesses meet all municipal and environmental regulations

●

Impose strict noise curfews on the Desert Lake Campground for their long weekend parties/concerts. 11:00 PM is a reasonable time for all but it seems they are getting later (over the Labour Day weekend)

●

Campground noise should end at 11 pm.

●

Make sure campground obeys noise regulations. Last year they had speakers blasting day and night some weekends. Outdoor speakers are illegal at any time.

●

Reduce length and number of live bands at resort - band noise travels a great distance.

Page 8 of 48

From: Kanji Nakatsu [mailto:kanji.nakatsu@gmail.com] Sent: March-11-17 1:12 PM To: Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Cc: Rik Saaltink riksaaltink@gmail.com Subject: Noise Exemption Proposal Mr. Wayne Orr: Dear Mr. Orr: We wish to register our objection to an application by Desert Lake Family Campground for an exemption to the township noise bylaw. Our cottage is about 600 metres northeast of the campground on the southeast shore of Desert Lake. Accordingly, we can hear the campground’s PA system very easily, especially when there is a southwest wind; as you know this is the prevailing wind in the summer. Under some conditions the volume on the southeast shore is as loud as standing in front of the convenience store at the campground. Some of the pleasures of having a cottage on Desert Lake are quiet evenings, listening to the loons and watching the sunset to the west. Listening to a loud band certainly destroys the quiet evenings. If we want to listen to chest thumping rock music, there are lots of bars in Kingston and vicinity where this is available. Please bring our concerns to Township Council for the meeting on March 28, 2017. If you think that it is necessary for one of us to make an oral presentation at the meeting, I (Kanji) would be willing to do so. Thank you, Kanji & Susie Nakatsu -Kanji Nakatsu (pronounced Kunji) 1089 Sassy Tree Lane South Frontenac and 10 Holland Crescent Kingston, ON Canada K7M2V8

Page 9 of 48

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGENDA DATE: March 28, 2017

REPORT DATE: March 22, 2017

SUBJECT: Review: ‘Minimum Distance Separation: New Guidelines’

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee receive for information the Planning Report dated March 22, 2017, regarding a review of the New Guidelines for determining minimum distance separation issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs and consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning By-law to acknowledge that existing vacant lots in proximity to farm facilities may still construct a residence.

BACKGROUND A document containing new guidelines for determining Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) has been issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA). It replaces all earlier versions of the MDS Formulae and Implementation Guidelines and it took effect on March 1, 2017. The MDS document is a tool for land use planning developed by OMAFRA with the intent of preventing land use conflicts and minimizing nuisance complaints from odour. It is applied whenever new residential development is proposed near existing farm facilities and whenever farm facilities propose to expand near existing residences. The document provides technical guidance for implementing the MDS Formulae and interpreting the guidelines as required by the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). There are eight sections to the document. Sections 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 are for information and background purposes. Sections 3, 4 and 5 contain the MDS formulae and definitions The new guidelines document is very similar to the previous guidelines but there are three notable modifications for clarity and better implementation as follows:

  1. it aligns the MDS calculations with the Nutrient Management Act and with the Provincial Policy Statement of 2014 (this is mostly consistent terminology),
  2. it defines and clarifies what is meant by ‘unoccupied livestock barn’,
  3. it describes how to apply MDS to existing vacant lots of record. The review of the document set out below cites the policies that are most often used in South Frontenac and that have been clarified. Section #2 ‘Introduction and Background’ - gives and interesting history of how the requirement for MDS was established in Ontario and explains its legislative authority. It also explains the two types of MDS - those being MDS 1 which is applied when new non-agricultural development eg., dwellings are proposed near existing farm facilities and MDS 2 which is applied when new farm facilities are proposed near existing dwellings. This section is similar to the older OMAFRA Guidelines but, for clarity, two flowcharts are provided to illustrate how MDS1 and MDS2 are applied. Attachment #1 shows these flowcharts.

Page 10 of 48 Section #3 ‘Definitions’ - includes a definition of unoccupied livestock barn. The definition reads: “Unoccupied livestock barn: is a livestock barn that does not currently house any livestock, but that housed livestock in the past and continues to be structurally sound and reasonably capable of housing livestock.” This is a valuable clarification for municipal staff working with MDS because it has always been difficult to determine if MDS applies if the barn is structurally unsound. Some of these structures in South Frontenac for example are in disrepair and have even collapsed. It was never clear when MDS would still apply if development is proposed nearby. This new definition now clarifies the applicability of MDS and essentially would require the Building Inspector to ultimately make the determination. Section #4 - contains the ‘Implementation Guidelines’. Guideline #7 addresses MDS1 setbacks for building permits on existing lots. The guidelines state that MDS1setbacks are required for all building permit applications for dwellings on lots that existed prior to March 1, 2017 unless otherwise specified in a municipality’s zoning by-law. It further describes that, if local exemptions are supported for building permits on existing lots, a municipality shall adopt provisions in their comprehensive zoning by-law which specify what the exemptions are. Examples of when such exemptions would apply are:

  1. when the existing lot is above a certain size threshold eg. 4 hectares,
  2. on existing vacant lots where the setback cannot be met. In 1 & 2 above, the guidelines state that a dwelling should be permitted as long as the dwelling is located as far as possible from the livestock facility and provided that a planning application be processed to permit this reduced setback. Thus, the guidelines require that a special provision be included in the Comprehensive Zoning By-law. It should be noted that it has been the policy of South Frontenac to issue a building permit on such lots as long as the building is located as far as possible from the farm facility. However, special Planning permission has never been required. Perhaps a provision should be included in Section 5 ‘General Provisions’ of the zoning by-law to simply state that, in such cases, the proposed dwelling should be located as far as possible from the adjacent farm facility. The Building Department would ensure that this requirement is met when processing the subject building permit. Also, as a condition of issuing a building permit the property owner should enter an agreement to be registered on the title of the property acknowledging that a farm operation is located in proximity and that it may cause associated odours. Guideline #12 - requires an MDS setback for proposed development or dwellings even though there may be existing dwellings nearby that do not conform to the MDS requirements. This guideline further explains that a reduced setback may be permitted when there are already four or more dwellings (or non-agricultural uses) closer to the livestock facility than the proposed development. This provision in the new guidelines is unchanged from the previous guidelines. However, it was always difficult for Planning and Building staff to determine whether this means that the existing dwellings needed to be between the barn and the proposed dwelling or whether it meant just closer in any direction from the barn. The new guidelines clarify this by providing an illustration which shows that the four existing intervening dwellings must be a 1200 field of view between the closest part of the proposed dwelling and the nearest barn. Attachment #2 is a copy of the illustration. In the opinion of Planning this illustration will be very helpful in applying the required MDS setbacks especially using the Township’s existing GIS system.

Page 11 of 48 Guidelines #34 & 36 - these guidelines deal with development proposed in Settlement Areas. They state that MDS setbacks are not required for proposed land use changes within settlement areas as it is generally understood that the long-term use of the and is non-agricultural (eg., residential, commercial, institutional). This is similar to the provisions in the previous guidelines but the new guidelines talk of proposed expansions of settlement areas boundaries. It explains that, because settlement areas accommodate higher sensitive uses (called Type B uses eg., multi-residential etc.), any expansion of a settlement area would need to consider an MDS setback from existing nearby barns of twice the normal MDS setback. This may prove to be a significant restriction to any expansion of the hamlet boundaries in South Frontenac. To assist in the calculation of MDS setbacks OMAFRA has developed a new software program - Ontario Agricultural Planning Tools Suite (“AgriSuite”) for use with the MDS document. Information can also be found at OMAFRA’s website ontatio.ca/omafra.

FINANCIAL and STAFFING CONSIDERATIONS Staff time will be required to draft zoning by-law provisions. Also public meetings are required. Over the longer term more administration and monitoring tasks will result requiring additional staff time.

ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1 - is MDS Flowcharts. Attachment #2 - is an illustration showing how to apply MDS with consideration to existing development. Submitted/approved by: Lindsay Mills MDSNewGuidelinesReportToCofW

Prepared by: Lindsay Mills

Page 12 of 48

ATTACHMENT #1 €'-

a

47

r

m !

l

I

ia

€/) o

ea

art o

o

J:l

0

c 6 a m a>

o

’m

a:

s

l

e*

Ilw

I

l

l

?B s 25 ‘6# ?l-

t

l

,4

i

pffl

&1

t !

q%

is !

og &o

ffi

al

:es

l

l

i W ;

l

i U ffil t fj

i i

m

rri

ffi

ua a

a

l

ICI!

l ‘!’e5 llJa):!: I’aaa)’#

%:ia

-W

ty

l;b

{

l

T}

it

q

I?‘Fj’i

’e a

0g

l f

7:3

7

lo:5 ;,-im 4q

s

-W

HE4J @€

:4=

E

mun!: s f::zo

c

T,

it

i :85

4d

N

l i’Sb

j%

g ? -ffl ‘!?w .1

?i

-a

ff

s

o

c(?

t

o@> >

!‘o

i

F}

v

l

r !

€-"

i N N

l

W

1

t

t

*-ia)

mi g

3

l

l

gA

!l

I

:h

l

€/)

I

r

S

a

‘?

1

I

I

3

mg E

m

t

OQ CIGI

l

l al c

l

t

mm wwm

(/) 0

a

ra

a

x

im

l? fl c

a)

m

l

t

aaB’@

W

[4 -m a’it [.-

7El

!F’NN I H’r’a l m

3Ul

iEl

t) -

Fari;9’la

eJ: eg (!}g 11111! W(fl

W’!R l

l@6cB l jt l E(p€>IR I

Wffi

a}[

-? fi -

63

m 16 '

kz E4 m"

@35o

ym3 % 8g :l’e

’ :N,9 m @

UW’p

Q.‘aao.

m@(g J (f} ffl S

Jg

la:3g i

$ iJ

li!? Q am. [- i. Im=W

C@)

aJlfflp

’t = ‘Q j '

sw> . 5u) m t)= i

,?1 ! (l) i-.m %‘Q-? (H !l )!

!l’a m ' ;8q ffle

5,*

BNg.

I> N ?3 3 Q.;%

@a J:ffi m@

l i l

l

c8

., M €w

90 u

9,

5= g

(aa

i

t

Qt=. l v c

art

41

NE- i

a HIQ a l

l

%o'5o

5g

!l’s 5c

gQ

b,N aJ ’ y

r

el!k 7 r’ s

a)J

€(6

t;

1

si’a"‘a?m

4@B@Byc1 wa aaaa@ i

‘a .!N?? ::‘6 fflg

T,8 5@(

I

N’;iji

IICI

3% 4%

iiiilii

fflll

lili’

–5:l

Wtig5’, ’t;mB , M S!2’

m -, ,,

i%l’B

?xTW

Page 13 of 48

(‘0

m s

o

0

mS’

ffi

i

C

A

sg m

W7

E,

(f) g

m

pW

ffl

k

l

m

T; :i’

m€ H

sG !

l

(Th a

li a [

l

W

mi !l (,

l

C

l l

J5

l

!tti

€

l

€/) o

?m

l

12 g3

l l l

3

3 m .qlE [ E

mi 3 mi ‘J

o !

3 mm

i? ?

€/) 0

r,

q>

o! l :"" . l

€J

!N

l

Fij

e

a

.Ni#ml y4=Nl

smi E

ffl@

5Ba) ge

=iiffl

ui!

5Q)

ic fl

@h gm 613’ i%@}

G’M

i j,l aa) ‘a’m ’l m @ E

R"-u v’

81! :l(1

o

ba@

(;€

ej ffl # m q5

ffi

I HE E ai ! m

B?; '

W!

g

l

tlDEE

ff!! m ‘QE (! ‘ZQ [i

NS

c

art

E%E I

fl ? ? ? l @?4?D ,’

e!@a

(ajti

LbB0 .

5.[

<oa g 9 a) @ H:5.@ ?

ffi=aa l

g.g2l

‘i€ffl!1 ‘! s l

E E

! ffi

:ad U

!Q .’l.

S 9, ;},

i3. il Jffi;

, V

J 2GF- ,% e(W A

Hg

on ‘??. .3

O.,–,

3? 3

m";!l (’

m

“"‘B

lVaqil

€I

IJL;N’!’l

l a j N ‘j l

!T:” !]qV

1 sww ? 1 @-

ill)l

60

R

HB @ Bl

@§

e e B

IgHail

llml

ljim]l

I€Rd l !

r U o

a e

7

Page 14 of 48

A’?TACHMENT #2

The Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Document - Fori’nulae and Guidelines for Livestock Faciltty and Anaerobic Digester Odour Setbacks

?

0

‘yiffliim

[2

NAla

!N?

Legend

a

0

MA’S-A

Exism@ Iiveskxk barn

@

,a,, ExistJ

NAU

NAU

l?? . Non?cultural rise 60"

5%Jl

‘S

.’,Mj .?: L?yoy:med dwllrng W

Sub? ur6s

El

l?

11 Exist% aweiiing

f

‘)w

[-

i ?

i

%l

k

El

120’ fiekl of vkm

OAaual MDS l setback

5]

Reduced MDS l setback Q

l

Lo{ Iines

l l

jl

NAU

El

Road W

El

? k

Figure 4. Implementation Guideline #12 - existing uses that do not conform to MDS. Step 1: Draw a Iine (orange arrow) connecting the livestock occupied portion of the existing livestock barn and the nearest edge of the proposed dwelling’s building envelope (or the proposed development - not this example). Step 2: At the base of the arrow, Iooking in the direction the arrovi is pointing and using a protractor, plot 60o to the right of the arrow and another 60o to the Ieft of the arrow, effectively creating a 120o ‘field of view’ from the base of the arrow.

Step 3: Draw an arc using the length of the arrovt from Step 1 as the radius and connect the two edges of the 120o field of View, forming a wedge shape. This wedge comprises the ‘intervening area’ referenced in Implementation Guideline #12.

Step 4: Count the number of existing or approved dwellings or development partially or entirely captured within the intervening area.

Step s: If there are 4, or more, non-agricultural uses (NAUs), residential uses, and/or dwellings that fall within the intervening area, the actual MDS I setback may be reduced to become the distance of the furthest of the qualifying non-agricultural uses, residential uses and/or dwellings. In this example, there is one qualifying NAU and three qualifying dwellings totalling four. So a reduced MDS l may be permitted and the proposed dwelling can be constructed despite it not meeting the actual MDS I setback generated by the subject IiVestock barn. This process may need to be repeated for manure storages and/or anaerobic digesters that may also be located in the investigation distance area established in Implementation Guideline #6.

86

Page 15 of 48

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGENDA DATE: March 28, 2017

REPORT DATE: March 23, 2017

SUBJECT: Development of Policy for Amount of Parkland Dedication Fee

RECOMMENDATION The recommendation is that the Committee receive the Planning Report dated March 23, 2017 and consider the attached draft by-law to establish a policy for determining the value of parkland cash-in-lieu payment

BACKGROUND On December 6, 2016, Council directed staff to draft a policy to clarify the process for establishing the baseline property value for use in the calculation of parkland fees. On February 14, 2017 the Committee considered a Planning report which included a review of the process presently followed and a summary of the process of other adjacent municipalities. A draft by-law was attached for a proposed draft policy for South Frontenac. At the February 14, 2017 meeting the Committee considered the draft by-law but decided that it should be re-drafted to specify that the cost of any required appraisal should always be charged back to the owner and that any appraisal should be undertaken by a professional chosen by the municipality. It was also decided that an appraisal of any new lot created by consent should be based on the completed new lot and not simply on an evaluation per acre of rural land. As explained in the previous Planning report, section 51.1(4) of the Planning Act permits a municipality to require parkland or cash-in-lieu of parkland. The municipality may take up to five percent of the value of the land for residential lot creation and up to two percent for industrial or commercial lot creation. Present Practice Following the provisions of the Act, it has been the Township’s practice to require an appraisal from a real estate agent for lots created by consent. The Township then requires payment of five percent of this value for creation of residential lots and two percent for creation of industrial or commercial lots. This process has worked well but on the few occasions where Township staff have had to question the valuation from the realtor we have requested a full professional appraisal at the owner’s expense. Land valuation for plans of subdivision or condominium is based on a market value appraisal from a professional appraiser. Based on this, the Township would require payment of five percent of the value. Also, a flat fee of $100.00 is required as cash-in-lieu for any lot addition application. The Township always reserves the right to require a second or third professional evaluation for any cash-in-lieu of parkland payment. When this was brought to the Committee of the Whole members appeared to be generally in agreement with the present method described above. However, they

Page 16 of 48 preferred that there be at least two opinions for any valuation for plans of subdivision/condominium. The Planning Department conducted a survey of adjacent municipalities to determine their method for parkland valuation. The following table summarizes their methods (South Frontenac included):

Municipality Township of South Frontenac

Town of Mississippi Mills Township of Elizabethtown-Kitley

Rideau Lakes Township Loyalist Township

Method of Valuation Based on an appraisal from a realtor for single consents and a professional appraisal for subdivisions or condominiums Flat fee of $2,000.00 on public road and $1,500.00 on private lane Flat fee of $500.00 Based on letter of opinion from a real estate agent or a professional appraiser or MPAC info. Flat fee of $1,750.00 for a single lot or a market appraisal for a shoreline lot.

The list indicates that many of the adjacent municipalities prefer to simply require a flat fee for parkland cash-in lieu applied to all applications. However, the Committee agreed that it would not be practical to adopt this method in South Frontenac because land values vary so greatly between waterfront and nonwaterfront lots and because lots can vary so much in size and development potential eg., swamplands and other restricted lands. As described in the previous Planning report, in South Frontenac, parkland cashin-lieu was collected on fifty-six consent applications in 2016. A total of $183,911.14 was collected as parkland cash-in-lieu working out to an average payment of $3,284.13 to the Township per lot created by consent (note this figure does not included cash-in-lieu for subdivisions/condominiums in 2016). Thus, it appears that the amounts collected by South Frontenac compare favourably to those collected in other municipalities recognizing that the average figure is skewed higher because of some particularly valuable lots created on Big Clear Lake and Wolfe Lake in 2016. Proposed Practice The present system used by the Township of South Frontenac to calculate the amount of cash-in-lieu of parkland should be retained with three provisos as follows:

Valuations for lots created by consent may continue to be provided by a qualified professional realtor chosen by the Township but must include comparables to recent sales in the area to provide a justification for the value figure;

Valuations for plans of subdivision/condominium must be provided by two separate appraisals prepared by a qualified and certified professional appraiser or valuator such as someone with an OA-AIC, AACI, P. App or CRA designation – chosen by the Township;

The two valuations noted above shall be brought to Council for a final determination of the value of the land;

All valuations must be undertaken at the owner’s expense.

In any case, the Township should always reserve the right to require an additional appraisal by a qualified certified appraiser or valuator – again to be undertaken at the owner’s expense.

Page 17 of 48

FINANCIAL and STAFFING CONSIDERATIONS N/A

ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1 - is a draft by-law for parkland fee calculation. Submitted/approved by: Lindsay Mills attachment ParklandFeeProcessReportToCofW3

Prepared by: Lindsay Mills

Page 18 of 48 TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW NUMBER 2017BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR VALUATING PARKLAND CASH-IN-LIEU PAYMENTS REQUIRED AS A CONDITION OF CONSENT APPLICATIONS OR PLANS OF SUBDIVISION OR CONDOMINIUM:

WHEREAS, section 51(25) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990 (the Act) authorizes the Approval Authority to impose as a condition of approval of a plan of subdivision that lands be conveyed to the municipality for park or other recreational purposes; AND WHEREAS, section 51.1(3) of the Act authorizes the municipality to require the payment of money by the property owner in lieu of accepting a conveyance where the Approval Authority has imposed a condition under section 51(25); AND WHEREAS section 53(12) of the Act authorizes the Council of a municipality or delegated Committee to give consents to sever lands, to impose conditions in the same manner as under section 51(25) of the Act; NOW THEREFORE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY ITS COUNCIL, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

  1. THAT the Township of South Frontenac may require up to two percent of the land value as a condition of a consent or plan of subdivision or condominium application to create industrial or commercial lots and up to five percent of the land value for a consent application or a plan of subdivision or condominium to create residential or institutional lots.
  2. THAT valuations for parkland cash-in-lieu payments for lots created by consent may be provided by a qualified professional realtor chosen by the Township, must be based on a valuation of the created lot and must include comparables to recent sales in the area;
  3. THAT two separate valuations for parkland cash-in-lieu payments for plans of subdivision or plans of condominium shall be provided by a qualified and certified professional appraiser or valuator with an OA-AIC, AACI, P. App or CRA designation – both appraisers to be chosen by the Township of South Frontenac;
  4. THAT the two valuations noted in item #3 above shall be brought to Council for a final determination of the value of the land;
  5. THAT all required valuations shall be undertaken at the owner’s expense;
  6. THAT a flat fee of $100.00 shall be required as the amount of parkland cash-in-lieu as a condition of approval for any consent application for a lot addition;
  7. THAT the Township of South Frontenac may require an additional valuation from a certified professional appraiser at the owner’s expense for any of the above noted applications at its discretion;
  8. THIS BY-LAW shall come into force in accordance with sections 51, 51.1 and 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O.1990, either on the date of passage or as otherwise provided by sections 51, 51.1 or 53.

Dated at the Township of South Frontenac this 2017.

day of April,

Page 19 of 48 Read a first and second time this

day of April, 2017.

Read a third time and finally passed this

day of April, 2017.

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Wayne Orr, Clerk-Administrator

Page 20 of 48

REPORT TO COUNCIL CLERKS DEPARTMENT

AGENDA DATE: March 28, 2017 SUBJECT: Partnership for Climate Protection. RECOMMENDATION That Council acknowledge the limited staffing resources and take no specific action at this time towards the five milestones under the Partnership for Climate Protection Program.

BACKGROUND In December 2000, the Council of the day passed a motion to form the South Frontenac Sustainability Working Group and to join the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Partnership for Climate Protection Program. The minutes of the meeting read “It was the consensus of Council that no money would be spent on these initiatives without specific Council approval”. Over the years no concerted effort has been made to submit updates or reach the various milestones of the program. It was only when the FCM recently contact the Township did current staff become aware of the Township’s formal membership. The program has five milestones and member municipalities are expected to complete all 5 with in a 10 year period. The FCM is following up with all members to encourage ongoing participation and to offer support in reaching the milestones and to advise members that the FCM have changed the benefits, responsibilities and reporting requirements. There are a total of 73 Ontario municipalities (16% of Ontario’s 444 municipalities) that have joined the program with the earliest being in 1990. To date only 6 municipalities that have completed the process (all with populations greater than 100,000). Of note over 1/3 of members (24) have not reported on any milestones, with 8 of those have populations over 50,000. A copy of the FCM’s Ontario Status is attached for your review. The 5 milestones are titled as follows and each has a corporate and community component all with numerous activities and measures:

  1. Creating a greenhouse gas emissions inventory and forecast
  2. Setting an emissions reductions target
  3. Developing a local action plan
  4. Implementing the local action plan or a set of activities
  5. Monitoring progress and reporting results The Township’s Strategic Plan references the importance of the environment to this community. One of the guiding principles is to help address climate change by improving energy efficiency and supporting renewable energy production. While not specific to the FCM program, over the years Council has supported a number of initiatives that have contributed to reducing the Townships’ carbon footprint including, supporting LED principles in the construction for the Library, the conversion of all street lighting to LED, support for trails and multi modal transportation, support for solar projects in various locations throughout the Township, and most recently identifying energy efficiency as a priority for the new Fire hall.

Our strength is our community.

Page 21 of 48

REPORT TO COUNCIL CLERKS DEPARTMENT

FINANCIAL and STAFFING CONSIDERATIONS There are insufficient staffing resources to commit to the Partners for Climate Protection Program, without taking away from other Council identified priorities.

ATTACHMENTS FCM – Partners for Climate Protection - Ontario listing

Submitted/approved by:

Prepared by:

Wayne Orr, CAO

Wayne Orr, CAO

Our strength is our community.

FCM - Ontario

Page 22 of 48

Skip to main content

Ontario Share This Page AAA

Milestones “_…. _..,.,, Documentation CorporateCommunity

Municipality

Inventory Aiax

109, 600

2010 Implementation Update

Brock (Township)

4, 041 3, 880 103, 710 6,989 86, 417 9,658 11979

2015 2013 2001 2016 1996 2007 2009

Burlington

175,779

2002

Asohodel-Norwood (Township) Bancroft (Town) Barrie

Bayham Brantford Brockton

Action plan

Inventory and Actmn plan Inventory

Action plan - corporate Action plan - community

Inventory - community

Action Plan - community Caledon

59, 460

2003 Action Plan - corporate Progress Report - corporate

Inventory -

Cambridee

126, 748

2012

Cavan Monaehan Coboure (Town) Colliniwood Corporation ofthe Town ofPrescott

8,601 18,210 16, 039 4,284

2015 2011 1998 2013

Douro-Dummer (Township)

6, 805

2015

Durham (Reaional Municioalitvl

531,000

2008

East Gwillimburv

20, 478

2007

community

Inventory - corporate Action plan

Inventory - community

Action plan - community

http://www.fcm.ca/home/programs/partners-for-climate-protection/members-partners-fo… 21/03/2017

Page 23 of 48

FCM - Ontario

Milestones " Documentation

Municipality

CorporateCommunity

Essex (Town) Frontenac (County)

FrontenacIslands (Township)

Guetoh

20,500 25, 000 1,636

106, 170

2008 2008 2008

1998

Action plan Inventory Update Community Progress Report

Monitoring Spreadsheet

Halton Region Halton Hills

375,229 59, 008

2005 2001

Hamilton

519, 949

1996

Action plan Inventory

Havelock-Belmont-Methuen

(Townshiot 4, 523

2015

Hearst

6, 000

2006

Huntsville Kawartha Lakes Kenora Kineston

19, 056 73,214 15, 177 123, 363

2012 2016 2013 2001

Kitchener

190, 399

1997

Action plan - corporate Emissions reduction report - corporate Inventory

I nventorv - community Inventory - corporate

Climate Action Plan

London

65,667 432, 451

2015 1994

Markham

208,615

2007

Minto (Town)

8, 165

2008

Mississausa

700, 000

1999

Newmarket

65, 788

2001

Lanark(County)

Community Energy Action Plan Inventory

Action Plan - Corporate

Action plan Progress Report - Corporate

Inventory Niagara Region

435,000

2009

North Kawartha(Township)

2, 342

2015

Oakville

182,520

2004

corporate

Inventory - community

Action plan - corporate Action plan - community

Inventory Action plan - corporate

Action plan - community Oshawa

149, 607

2009

Otonabee-South Monaehan (Township) 6,581

2015

Ottawa Peel (Reeion ofl Perth Perth South Peterboroueh (City)

1997 2001 1998 2001 2000

774, 072 998,948 5, 840 4,304 78,777

Inventory

Action plan

http://www. fcm. ca/home/programs/partners-for-climate-protection/members-partners-fo…

21/03/2017

FCM - Ontario

Page 24 of 48

Milestones

Municipality Peterborough (County)

134,933

2014

1

“___. . _^,

Documentation

1

Action plan Corporate Implementation Update Pickering

94, 200

2005 Community Implementation Update Corporate and Community Progress Report

Port Hope

15, 605

1997

Prescott (Town)

4,284

2013

Red Lake (Municipality)

4, 600

2010

Richmond Hill

185, 541

2000

Action plan - corporate

Action plan Emissionsreduction report - corporate Emissions reduction report - community

Scugof

Selwyn (Township) South Frontenac St. Catharines (City of) Stratford Sudbui The Blue Mountains

20, 173 16, 846 16,415 131, 989 29,676 155, 219 6, 100

1997 2015 2000 2009 2004 1997 2006

Inventory and Action plan

Action plan Action plan

Action plan Thunder Bay

109, 102

1997

Inventory Update Progress Report

Trent Lakes

2, 615, 060 1990 5, 105 2015

Uxbridge(Township)

19, 169

2009

Vayghan (City of)

288, 301

2011

Action plan - community

1999

Inventory - community CorBorale Action Plan Climate Action Plan

Toronto

Waterloo (City ofl

113, 100

Inventory and Action plan Implementation and Progress Report

Inventory -

community

Inventory and Action plan - corporate

Waterloo (Regional Municipality)

525, 000

2010

Wawa(Municipality)

4, 100 48,402 111, 184 208, 402 889,600

2010 2000 2011 2002 2002

Welland Whitbv (Town of) Windsor York Region Page Updated: 07/03/2017 FederationofCanadianMunicipalities

Climate Action Plan Proaress Report - Corporate Appendixto Progress Report - Corporate

Inventory and Action_Blan

24 Clarence Street

Ottawa, Ontario

http://www. fcm. ca/home/programs/partners-for-climate-protection/members-partners-fo…

21/03/2017

Page 25 of 48

REPORT TO COUNCIL CLERKS DEPARTMENT

AGENDA DATE: March 28, 2017 SUBJECT Notice of Motion – Amendments to Building Code – Septic Systems.

RECOMMENDATION Whereas an amendment to the Building Code stating that septic tanks shall be pumped at least every 5 years or when 1/3 full is currently before the provincial legislature; and, Whereas the current Building Code complicates, if not restricts, the Township’s options to protect water resources through ensuring proper septic system operation, and, Whereas including the inclusion of a pumping regulation in the Building Code would provide the Township with other options that could provide a very low cost method of ensuring safe septic systems, and, Whereas well-functioning septic systems are important to protecting the ground and lake water quality, Therefore, be it resolved that the Township of South Frontenac support the proposed change to the 2012 Building Code O. Reg. 332/12 as amended that states “Septic Tanks and other treatment units shall be cleaned whenever sludge and scum occupy one-third of the working capacity of the tank or within five years of the last pump out, whichever comes first,” and, Further be it resolved that the Province be asked to include in regulations that exemptions for longer periods of time between pump-outs can be granted for septic tanks with demonstrably low use, and Further be it resolved that this motion be sent to the Three Provincial political party leaders and the AMO.

BACKGROUND Council’s Procedural By-Law 2016-71 establishes the process for Notice of Motion as outlined below. At the Council meeting on March 21, 2017, Councillor Sutherland served notice of motion to have Council support a resolution in favour of amendments to the Building Code as it relates to septic systems. A notice of motion requires a seconder at the next regular Council meeting. If seconded, the motion is debated and then voted upon. The matter of septic re-inspections was referred to the Corporate Services Committee and now with a Chief Building Official in place this matter is being worked on. Councillor Sutherland has requested discussion of his proposed motion at a preceding Committee of the Whole meeting to possibly fine tune the wording of the motion prior to coming before Council for a vote. Council is asked to note that under Information items on this agenda there is a request from Calvin Township advocating opposition for the amendments to the Building Code due primarily to the cost implications. Our strength is our community.

Page 26 of 48

REPORT TO COUNCIL CLERKS DEPARTMENT

FINANCIAL and STAFFING CONSIDERATIONS Undetermined

ATTACHMENTS

Submitted/approved by:

Prepared by:

Wayne Orr, CAO

Wayne Orr, CAO

Our strength is our community.

Page 27 of 48 TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

BY-LAW 2015-41 A BY-LAW TO PROHIBIT AND REGULATE NOISE WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

WHEREAS Council deems it necessary to prohibit or regulate, within the municipality or

within any defined area or areas thereof, the ringing of bells, the blowing of horns, shouting and unusual noises, or noises likely to disturb the inhabitants: NOW THEREFORE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH

FRONTENAC, BY ITS COUNCIL, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: DEFINITIONS: 1.

For the purpose of this by-law, a)

“construction” includes erection, alteration, repair, dismantling, demolition, structural maintenance, painting, moving, land clearing, earth moving, grading, excavating, the laying of pipe and conduit whether above or below ground level, street and highway building, concreting, equipment installation and alteration and the structural installation of construction

components and materials in any form or for any purpose, and includes any work in connection herewith:

b) “construction equipment” means any equipment or device designed and intended for use in construction, or material handling, including but not limited to air compressors, pile drivers, pneumatic or hydraulic tolls, bulldozers, tractors, excavators, trenchers, cranes, derricks, leaders,

scrapers, pavers, generators, off-highway haulers, trucks, ditches, compactors and rollers, pumps, concrete mixers, graders or other material handling equipment; c)

“clearly audible” shall mean a noise level that a reasonable person would, in all of the circumstances, consider to be excessive or unnecessary, or intrusive, or disturbing or unacceptable;

d) “council” means the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac

e)

“consumer firework” means an outdoor, low.hazard, recreational firework that is classed as a subdivision 1 of Division 2 of Class 7 Fireworks under

the Act and includes fireworks showers, fountains, golden rain, lawn lights, pin wheels, Roman candles and volcanoes, but does not include Christmas crackers and caps for toy guns containing not in excess of twenty-five one-hundredths of a grain of explosive used per cap: f)

“discharge” means to fire, ignite, explode or set off or cause to be fire, ignited, exploded or set off and the words “discharged” and “discharging” have a similar meaning;

g) “display firework” means an outdoor, high hazard, recreational firework that is classed as a subdivision 2 of Division 2 of Class 7 Fireworks under

the Act, and includes rockets, serpents, shells, bombshells, tourbillions,

Page 28 of 48

maroons, large wheels, bouquets, bombardos, waterfalls, fountains, batteries, illumination, set pieces and pigeons but does not include firecrackers;

h) “firecracker” means a pyrotechnic device that explodes when ignited and does not make any subsequent display or visible effect after the explosion, and includes those devices commonly known as Chinese firecrackers “fireworks” means display fireworks, consumer fireworks and firecrackers j)

“livestock” includes, but is not limited to chickens, turkeys or other fowl, swine, goats, sheep or cattle;

k)

“motor vehicle” shall mean a vehicle or any other device employed to transport a person or persons or goods from place to place propelled, driven or drawn by any means other than by muscular, gravitational or wind power, including but not limited to motor vehicle, motorcycle, motorized snow vehicle, motor assisted bicycle, trailer, farm tractor, road building machine; “municipality” means the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac;

m)

“noise” means unwanted sound

n) “other areas” means any area other than a residential area as defined in the municipality’s zoning by-law;

o) “point of reception” means any point on a premises where noise from other than those premises is received;

p) “residential area” means any area of the Municipality that is zoned residential in the Zoning By-law of the Municipality. GENERAL PROHIBITIONS

No person shall emit, cause or permit the emission of noise resulting from an act listed herein, and which noise is clearly audible at a point of reception; a) Racing a motor vehicle other than in a racing event regulated by by-law; b) The operation of a motor vehicle in such a way that the tires squeal: c) The operation of a combustion engine, pneumatic device or construction equipment without an effective exhaust or intake muffling device in good working order and in constant operation; d) The operation of a motor vehicle resulting in banging, clanking, squealing or other like sounds;

e) The operation of an engine or motor in, or on, any motor vehicle or item of attached auxiliary equipment for a continuous period exceeding five minutes, while such vehicle is stationary in a Residential Area unless: (i)

The original equipment manufacturer specifically recommends a stronger idling period for normal and efficient operation of the motor vehicle in which case such recommended period shall not be exceeded;

Page 29 of 48

(ii)

The operation of such engine or motor is essential to a basic function of the vehicle or equipment, including but not limited to operation of a ready-mix concrete truck, lift platforms, or refuse compactors and heat exchange systems normal operation;

(iii)

Weather conditions justify the use of heating or refrigerating systems powered by the motor or engine for the safety and welfare of the operator, passengers or animals, or the preservation of perishable cargo;

(iv) Prevailing low temperatures make longer idling periods necessary immediately after starting the motor or engine; (v) The idling is for the purpose of cleaning and flushing the radiator and associated circulation system for seasonal change of antifreeze, cleaning of the fuel system, carburetor or the like, when such work is performed other than for profit; f) The operation of any electronic device or group of connected electronic devices incorporating one or more loudspeakers or other electromechanical transducers, and intended for the production, reproduction or amplification of sound in such a manner as to disturb the peace and comfort of a person or persons at the point of reception; g) The sounding of any bell, steam or air whistle, horn, siren or signal device on or off a vehicle;

h) The selling or advertising by shouting, or loud speaking; i) The keeping of any animal or bird LIMITATIONS BY TIME AND PLACE 3.

No person shall emit, cause or permit the emission of noise resulting from any act listed in Schedule 1 - Prohibitions by Time and Place if clearly audible at a point of reception located in an area of the Municipality specified in Schedule 1 within a prohibited time show for such an area.

EXEMPTION 4.

Notwithstanding any other provisions of this by-law to the contrary, this by-law does not apply to a person who emits or causes or permits the emission of noise in connection with:

a) Emergency vehicles; b) The immediate health, safety or welfare of the inhabitants c) Races, authorized by the Municipality; d) Regimental salutes;

e) Parades authorized by the Municipality;

f) Fireworks displays authorized by the Municipality; g) Community public events authorized by the Municipality; h) Sporting, recreational and entertainment events in or on public parks or buildings;

Page 30 of 48

i) Musical and other performances in public parks or buildings authorized by the Municipality; j) Municipal maintenance vehicles, including but not limited to snow clearing, street cleaning and garbage collection vehicles; k) The raising or herding of livestock I) Blasting authorized by the Municipality; PENALTIES 5.

Every person who contravenes any of the provisions of this by-law is guilty of an office and shall, upon conviction, be liable to a fine pursuant to the Provincial Offences Act.

ENFORCEMENT 6.

This by-law shall be enforced by the by-law enforcement officers of the Municipality.

Schedule 1 to this By-law forms part and parcel of this By-law.

VALIDITY 8.

If any section, clause or provision of this by-law, is for any reason declared by a

court of competent jurisdiction, found to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this by-law as a whole or any part thereof, other than the section, clause or provision so declared to be invalid and it is hereby declared to be the intention that all the remaining section, clause or provision of the by-law remain in effect until repealed. REPEAL 9.

By-law 2001-67 is repealed.

EFFECTIVE DATE

  1. This by-law shall come into effect on the date of passing thereof. TITLE OF THE BY-LAW

  2. This by-law may be cited as the “noise by-law’.

READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 4TH DAYOF AUGUST, 2015 TH

READ A THIRD AND FINAL TIME THIS 4m DAY OF AUGUST, 2015.

Vf

.^^^

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

A Wayne^p?^h

dministrative Officer

Page 31 of 48 SCHEDULE 1

PROHBITING BY TIME AND PLACE

PROHIBITED PERIOD OF TIME Residential Areas

Other Areas

C&E

C&E

D

D

c

c

A

F

B&E

B&E

  1. Yelling, shouting, hooting, whistling or singing

D

D

  1. The discharge of fireworks (except as permitted by the Municipality)

G

G

  1. The operation of any construction equipment in connection with construction

  2. The operation of any powered or non-powered tool for domestic purpose other than snow removal

  3. The operation of a solid waste bulk lift or refuse compacting equipment

  4. The take-off or landing of a power assisted hang glider, parafoil or aircraft of any type

  5. The operation of a pit or quarry.

Prohibited Periods of Time A B

c D

E F G

at any time 19:00 Hrs. of one day to 07:00 Hrs. the next day 21:00 Hrs. of one day to 07:00 Hrs, the next day (09:00 Hrs Sundays) 23:00 Hre. of one day to 07:00 Hre. the next day (09:00 Hrs Sundays) all day Sunday between the hours of sunset and sunrise. st

Any time from January 1 sl to the Friday of the Victoria Day weekend, and from

the Tuesday following the Victoria Day holiday to June 30 and from July 5 to December 31.

Page 32 of 48

From: Robert Brown [mailto:stan.brown@chem.queensu.ca] Sent: March-10-17 1:32 AM To: Donna Brown donnabrownartist.com@gmail.com; riksaaltink@gmail.com Cc: Ross Sutherland 7846elbe@gmail.com; Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Subject: Re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption Dear Rik: The original contact from you regarding this issue did not reach me, but was forwarded from Donna to me: perhaps I am not on the DLPOA list, but should be. Thanks for these informative items. I can tell you that Donna and I live at the southern part of the lake and oppose the Campground’s request for exemption from the noise bylaw for all the reasons that you have given in your original list. Unfortunately, we cannot attend the meeting on March 28 since we are in South Africa. We thank you for hearing our concerns and bringing them to the meeting: 1.The stated ‘concerts’ will be loud bands as has been the case in the past. 2. We are glad that you mentioned the lack of knowledge of the business case for the Camp-ground. This has to be clearly established at the meeting. As we see it, the request makes no sense if there is not additional revenue for the campground. The revenue has to be from admission fees and, more lucratively, on-site sales of something (liquor permits required?). Sales of food will be minimal since the proposed time slot is after the dinner hour. 3. As for security, we don’t see how this will work in a practical sense. OPP will not be anxious to set up ride programs for this as they are strapped already to fulfil their mandate in the SFT area. Telephone hot-lines will not be effective or practical. Respectfully submitted, R. Stan Brown Emeritus Professor of Chemistry Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario Canada, K7L 3N6 Ph. 613 533 2400 rsbrown@chem.queensu.ca http://www.chem.queensu.ca/brown-r-stan From: Donna Brown donnabrownartist.com@gmail.com Sent: March 10, 2017 12:49 AM To: Robert Brown Subject: Fwd: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Hendrik Saaltink riksaaltink@gmail.com Date: March 10, 2017 at 2:27:12 AM GMT+2 To: undisclosed-recipients:; Subject: Fwd: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption Hello DLPOA members I have been getting a lot of messages regarding the campground’s request for a noise bylaw exemption. People are relating some of their experiences with noise from past years. There is a high level of concern with the noise and also the seeming growth of the campground and their docks. Attached is the township’s noise bylaw for your information.

Page 33 of 48

Please consider attending the meeting on March 28. Rik Saaltink On 8 March 2017 at 22:38, ggbrown@rogers.com wrote: Bylaw attached. Graham Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers network. From: Hendrik Saaltink Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 9:53 PM To: hbsaaltink@gmail.com Subject: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption

Hello DLPOA members: The township of South Frontenac (committee of the whole) will be having a meeting on March 28 to consider a request by the Desert Lake Family Resort for an exemption to the noise bylaw. The resort wants to host concerts on the Saturday of the May 24 long weekend and then every Saturday from July 1 to Labour Day. Music would play from 8 to 11 pm. Apparently anyone from the community will be welcome to enjoy these concerts free of charge. The Lake Association has no information regarding the business case for the concerts or how they could benefit the campground, the Desert Lake community, or the township. Your association executive discussed this issue as one of the items of business at our meeting on March 5. Several concerns were noted, including:

Page 34 of 48

Your comments will help the Lake Association to have an effective presence at the March 28 meeting. Finally, consider attending the meeting to add additional weight to our presentation. Rik Saaltink DLPOA director - communications

Page 35 of 48

From: apple1@rogers.com [mailto:apple1@rogers.com] Sent: March-09-17 2:29 PM To: Hendrik Saaltink riksaaltink@gmail.com Cc: Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net; Debbie Redner dredner@rogers.com Subject: Re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption Hi Rik and by cc Wayne, Thank you for your efforts on behalf of DLPOA. My name is Benjamin Applebaum and, along with my wife Debbie Redner, we own the property at 141 Timmerman Rd. at the north west end of the lake. It would be very disconcerting if the peaceful nature of the Lake was disrupted on a regular basis over the summer as we are, for the most part, weekend cottagers. But this issue raises a greater concern. It seems to me that over the past 10 years the level of activity at the campground has consistently increased - additional campers, additional structures, additional traffic on the lake, and most troubling, additional moorage. I believe that this increased level of activity is already stressing the ability of the lake to accommodate it and I am strongly against anything that further expands the scope of activity at the campground. Best regards Benjamin

Page 36 of 48

From: Brian Cumming [mailto:Brian.Cumming@queensu.ca] Sent: March-09-17 9:41 PM To: Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Subject: Desert Lake Family Campground noise exemption Dear Wayne, As a property owner on Desert Lake, I am not in favour of the exception for the Desert Lake Family Campground for concerts every Friday night, There are two simply reasons I am against this: 1) the noise; and 2) safety. As you know, sound travels easily across the lake, and even though we are a good km away, the noise from concerts in the past were simply annoying. One of the reasons we enjoy the lake are the night sounds, and the night that we are most likely to stay over is a Saturday night. I am fine with the currently existing exception for one concert, and on that weekend I simply stay over. More noise is not acceptable. Safety is the second reason. At many concerts there is drinking. To curb any attempt of people thinking drinking and driving would be acceptable, it would be expected that the township would setup a RIDE program every week. This would be costly for the township, but necessary. In summary, the name of the campground is Desert Lake Family Campground – Why the campground thinks this is a good idea, given the nature of the clients is crazy. Having to hear a concert every Saturday is simply not unacceptable. Has there every been a blanket request for a noise violation every Saturday night for the entire summer on an Ontario Lake?? – likely not, and South Frontenac certainly shouldn’t be the first township to allow such nonsense. Many thanks for listening, I’m sure you will get many more letters. Brian Cumming Property Owner Desert Lake

Page 37 of 48

—–Original Message—-From: Kelly Chesney [mailto:kechesney@icloud.com] Sent: March-09-17 12:03 PM To: Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Cc: Sarah storrible@mac.com; riksaaltink@gmail.com Subject: Desert Lake Family Resort request

Mr. Orr We have recently been informed by the Desert Lake Property Owners Association that the Desert Lake Family Resort is seeking exemptions to the by-law regarding noise in order to host music concerts during the summer months, in addition to the May long weekend. As owners of property on the lake and as a family who spend significant time there, you can understand our reservations in the approval of such a request. Desert Lake is a peaceful refuge for many families and although we are very much in favour of business development, the manner in which such an approval could be used is concerning. I think we would be naive to think that concerts would not attract more vehicle and boat traffic (in addition to more noise) which is detrimental to the environment and the ambiance of Desert Lake. In addition, we are concerned of the safety hazards associated with concerts. These hazards include but are not limited to alcohol consumption, and potentially the consumption of illegal substances, which affect people’s decision making and ability to safely operate boats and vehicles. How would this be monitored and controlled, particularly given the limited resources that the OPP have? As property owners, tax payers and voters in the county we can’t support approval of this request to have permission to have concerts every summer weekend. Respectfully, Kelly Chesney & Sarah Torrible

Page 38 of 48

From: JOHN E. BONNER [mailto:je.bonner@rogers.com] Sent: March-19-17 5:02 PM To: Ron Vandewal rvandewal@southfrontenac.net; Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net; Alan Revill councillorrevill@gmail.com; Ross Sutherland 7846elbe@gmail.com Cc: Hendrik Saaltink riksaaltink@gmail.com Subject: Desert Lake Campground Concert Permit Wayne, Ron, Ross and Alan I cannot attend the council meeting on March 28th, but will make a written submission in advance of the meeting. We have had a cottage at Desert Lake since 1975, and my in-laws have been there since the early 1950’s, and the noise from the campgrounds have always been a problem. Please do not exacerbate this situation by granting a permit for live concerts every Saturday night. As I will show you below, a significant number of cottagers on Desert Lake have indicated that their main interest is the quiet enjoyment of the lake environment with no disruptions from live concerts running till very late at night. These cottages probably contribute 100 times the tax $ that the campgrounds pay, and also spend significant repair/renovation/grocery etc $ with your local merchants. Long weekends are a prime time for most cottagers to have guests, and are less than happy when a pleasant evening socializing on the deck is interrupted by this extremely loud music. We currently have to close all the windows in the cottage when the Campgrounds have concerts in order to hear each talk or try to go to sleep. Please don’t make it any worse. In conclusion, I would support concerts on 2 nights, however I don’t believe we should all have to endure concerts every week in order to allow the Campground owner get richer. Please see below for more information: In the summer of 2015, the Desert Lake Property Owners Association hand delivered a survey to each cottage on the lake asking for input on many subjects concerning the lake. Here are some observations from that survey. Please rate how the following values add to your personal enjoyment of Desert Lake. Peace and Tranquility Of 44 surveys, 32 flagged it as Very Important, 5 as important, 1 as unimportant, and 6 blanks Sense of Wilderness Of 44 surveys, 28 indicated very important to them, 10 said it was important and 6 were blank Night Time Noise Of 44 surveys, 6 indicated it was Significant, 11 Moderate, 17 Light, 4 no impact, and 6 blanks Here are some comments from the “Write In” areas The change of ownership of the campground has led to more noise at night and there seems to be an increase in traffic at the “boat launch” ensure desert lake campgrounds and other commercial businesses meet all municipal and environmental regulations

Page 39 of 48

Impose strict noise curfews on the Desert Lake Campground for their long weekend parties/concerts. 11:00 PM is a reasonable time for all but it seems they are getting later (over the Labour Day weekend) Campground noise should end at 11 pm. Make sure campground obeys noise regulations. Last year they had speakers blasting day and night some weekends. Outdoor speakers are illegal at any time. Reduce length and number of live bands at resort - band noise travels a great distance. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Page 40 of 48

From: Hendrik Saaltink [mailto:riksaaltink@gmail.com] Sent: March-20-17 8:46 AM To: Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Cc: yves poinsignon yves.poinsignon@wanadoo.fr Subject: Re: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption Hello Wayne This letter is typical of the responses that I have been receiving from our lake association members. Rik Saaltink communications, DLPOA On 20 March 2017 at 05:06, yves poinsignon yves.poinsignon@wanadoo.fr wrote: Dear Sir, In late response to your e-mail, we wish to state that we are in total agreement with the concerns raised by the DLPOA executive leading to objectionable noise levels , impairment of people’s right to the quiet enjoyment of their property and potential reduction in property values etc. We live in the Snug Harbour area as you may remember and clearly are disturbed by the July 1st festivities. We have to close all our windows in order to sleep, whatever the temperature. A few years ago, we were delighted to receive some German visitors who were looking forward to a night sleeping in a cabin plunged in the silence and the natural light of the forest. Unfortunately, that night in particular, we heard an announcer/ rock band leader scream into the micro-phone til 11.55 pm!! We are all on this exceptional lake to enjoy it to the fullest. However, our enjoyment whatever it entails (tubing, etc..) should draw its limit where we start to destroy someone else’s enjoyment of this lake. We all constantly make an effort as to the noise we may cause, even if its lowering our voices around the campfire at 9pm at night, and this, not to disturb the neighboring commercial endeavor on Snug Harbour among others whose customers come to our lake for its superb natural qualities and exceptional silence, TO GET AWAY FROM IT ALL. The question was asked « Are these weekly concerts vital to the survival of this campsite? » Perhaps, one could ask another question instead « What has been attempted to define this site’s offerings more in line with our lake’s proximity to Frontenac park and consequent clientèle seeking a true natural experience? » We are therefore opposed to the development or banalization of disco/rock noise on the lake. For outdoor concerts, one has to simply move back to the Ontario Park in Kingston or attend surrounding village festivals. Our lake should be kept a haven in compliance with its specific location (giving access to Frontenac Park) and pristine waters. Commercial activities should be encouraged to pursue their offering in consequence. As we live in France, we won’t be able to attend the meeting on March 28th. However, we fully support any action to prevent this from happening. Carol and Yves Poinsignon PS We saw that Desert Lake Resort was up for sale in 2016 and are wondering if this noise exemption request has been made to favor future sale of this property, which means it’s all the more vital now to define its « profile » for the future. Le 10 mars 2017 à 01:27, Hendrik Saaltink riksaaltink@gmail.com a écrit : Hello DLPOA members I have been getting a lot of messages regarding the campground’s request for a noise bylaw exemption. People are relating some of their experiences with noise from past years. There is a high level of concern with the noise and also the seeming growth of the campground and their docks. Attached is the township’s noise bylaw for your information. Please consider attending the meeting on March 28. Rik Saaltink On 8 March 2017 at 22:38, ggbrown@rogers.com wrote: Bylaw attached. Graham Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers network.

From: Hendrik Saaltink Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 9:53 PM To: hbsaaltink@gmail.com Subject: Desert Lake Family Resort - Request for Noise Bylaw Exemption

Hello DLPOA members:

Page 41 of 48

The township of South Frontenac (committee of the whole) will be having a meeting on March 28 to consider a request by the Desert Lake Family Resort for an exemption to the noise bylaw. The resort wants to host concerts on the Saturday of the May 24 long weekend and then every Saturday from July 1 to Labour Day. Music would play from 8 to 11 pm. Apparently anyone from the community will be welcome to enjoy these concerts free of charge. The Lake Association has no information regarding the business case for the concerts or how they could benefit the campground, the Desert Lake community, or the township. Your association executive discussed this issue as one of the items of business at our meeting on March 5. Several concerns were noted, including:

Page 42 of 48

From: Julie Wise [mailto:wise.j.julie@gmail.com] Sent: March-21-17 8:20 PM To: Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Cc: Waterloo Gauge and Prototype ralph@waterloogauge.com; riksaaltink@gmail.com Subject: noise bylaw exemption application Dear Mr. Orr, My partner and I recently purchased a house on Desert Lake. One of the main reasons we decided to buy the property was the peace and quiet of the surroundings. Imagine our dismay to discover that the family campground has applied for a noise bylaw exemption to hold a series of concerts on Saturday evenings, starting on Victoria Day and running each summer weekend! If we wanted to be close to a concert venue, we would have bought a home in the city. We did drive all around the area, and we did see the campground. However, it appeared to be a family campground, and nothing that would create a serious and sustained level of noise like regular Saturday night concerts would. We are concerned about • • • • •

the potential volume of noise (sound travels so clearly over water) increased traffic on Desert Lake Road increased trash at the side of the road and in the lake the impact on our enjoyment of our own property (not being able to sit out and enjoy a peaceful evening on the deck or by the water) the potential decrease in property values if this becomes an ongoing event

The campground owners may see this as a way of drawing crowds and, therefore, revenue to their facilities. However, they will be alienating their neighbours all around the lake. The people who come will not be primarily from South Frontenac; they will be from elsewhere and will not have any interest in respecting the lake, the land, and property owners. They will only be interested in having a good time, regardless of the impact. If it does get approved, we would hope that Council would respect property owners enough to insist on certain restrictions such as • • • •

limited decibel level limited wattage of amplifiers limited concert time (8 p.m. - 10 p.m.) limited number of concerts (one on Victoria Day weekend, and one on Labour Day weekend to mark the start and end of the “summer” season)

However, we wish to stress that we do not support this application at all. Thank you for taking our concerns into consideration. Julie Wise and Ralph Morgan

Page 43 of 48

Peter and Kerry Hodson 1205-185 Ontario St Kingston, Ontario K7L 2Y7 March 21, 2017 Mayor Vanderwal and Members of Council, Township of South Frontenac Re: An application by the Desert Lake Campground for an exemption to the Township noise by-law 2015-41 to permit Saturday night concerts As owners of a cottage on Desert Lake, we are opposed to the granting of a blanket permit to stage evening concerts at the Desert Lake Campground. Our cottage is situated on the west side of the lake at a point known as the narrows, about 1.5 to 2.0 km north of the campground. Concerts held in previous years have been clearly audible at our winterized cottage, even with all of the double-paned windows closed. The music was loud, objectionable, prevented sleep, and certainly reduced our enjoyment of summer evenings best experienced with the windows open. Like many others, we purchased a property and constructed a cottage because we were seeking peace and quiet, a connection with the natural world, and a place to relax and unwind. Desert Lake is a jewel in South Frontenac, and indeed in southern Ontario. There are few regions south of Highway 7 where people can experience a classic Ontario cottage lake, complete with superb water quality, outstanding fishing, swimming, and boating, and the peace and quiet typically associated with lakes much further to the North. Most cottagers refer to their properties as their ‘get-away’, a clear message that time at the cottage is time away from the pressures of city life, including non-stop traffic and noise. No cottager expects perfect stillness or absolute silence. Summer at the cottage includes the sounds of motorboats, children having fun, and people maintaining their properties. However, these sounds are largely absent after 6 pm, when the lake is calm and everyone relaxes. The noise of an evening concert at the campground is intrusive, highly disturbing, and quite out of character with the experience most of us seek. The noise issues caused by concerts might be managed several ways:

  1. Refuse a permit altogether and leave in peace the 100 + property owners on the lake;
  2. Issue permits on an event-by-event basis, and stop issuing permits if there are complaints about noise; or
  3. Restrict concerts to summer afternoons when normal lake activities, winds, and waves dampen noise to a tolerable level. Although the noise issue is our primary concern, we also have questions about security related to: consumption of alcohol and drugs; crowd control and emergency response should someone fall ill; night-time traffic safety on narrow and twisty township roads frequented by deer; the adequacy of the campground sewage system when crowds exceed the normal population of campers; littering and solid waste management; unsafe parking on the edge of Desert Lake Road and the causeway; and the hazards to children of increased traffic.

Page 44 of 48

Peter and Kerry Hodson 1205-185 Ontario St Kingston, Ontario K7L 2Y7

Has the Township consulted the OPP, the fire department and ambulance services about their capacity to respond to emergencies during concerts, and their concerns about public security? Has the applicant proposed a security plan detailing how the events will be managed safely, including contingency plans should there be an incident? Have there been issues in the past with alcohol at these concerts, and will alcohol be sold on-site? We would appreciate it if the Township could provide us with plans on how these issues will be addressed, whether the campground has been issued an exemption for concerts in past years, and the record of complaints about previous concerts and how these were resolved. Thank you for considering our concerns, and we look forward to your responses to our questions. Yours sincerely, Peter and Kerry Hodson 613 544 6809

Page 45 of 48 CORPORATIONOF THEMUNICIPALITY OF CALVIN

Resolution

fl V/V //

DATE: March 14 2017 MOVED BY

T,/,

,, /

»

NO.‘

.

2t>t’7=«»:»~/~b/

TC’eiftitied

true copy

_///

BY / l/ V

SECONDED _

1

”WHEREASthe Ministry of Municipal Affairs and housing has proposed a chgiigfa?id?p??ilgjna?qggpvin 08-09-03, requiring mandatory five year septic tank pump out and records retention by the owner; AND WHEREASthat same change requires Municipalities to administer and enforce this change; AND WHEREASthe change document fails to identify the administrative costs to Municipalities;

AND WHEREASthe change document fails to identify any transfer of Provincialfunding to offset these downloaded costs; AND WHEREASmany Municipalities already have bylaws to regulate septic systems especially near waterways;

AND WHEREASthe majority of homeowners pump out their septic tanks on a regular basis whether regulated or not; AND WHEREASthere are many more important issues on which to spend taxpayer’s money than ”enhancing” maintenance on existing functioning systems; AND WHEREAS adequate legislation already exists to correct malfunctioning systems; AND WHEREASPremier Wynne stated on Monday, January 30”‘,2017 at the ROMA conference that the province recognizes that ”one size fits all” solutions do not always work in rural Ontario; THEREFOREBE IT RESOLVEDTHAT the Council of the Municipality of Calvin hereby supports the United Townships of Head, Clara and Maria and hereby also requests the Honourable BillMauro, Minister of Municipal Affairs, to rescind proposed BuildingCode change B-08—09-O3; _

NOW THEREFOREBE IT FURTHERRESOLVEDTHATa copy of this resolution be sent to the Honourable BillMauro, Minister of Municipal Affairs, Mr. Patrick Brown, Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, Ms. Andrea Horwath, Leader of the New Democratic Party, and all Members of Provincial Parliament in the Province of Ontario; AND FURTHERTHATa copy of this resolution be sent to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA),the Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities (FONOM) and all Ontario Municipalities.

CARRIED

LL) 1/ixayor(DN G.’-£J\i\i.?‘ G

Page 46 of 48

.

ONTARIO

ASSOCIATION OF FIRE CHIEFS

ECEiV

,

^nmi TOWNSH’^,., ^M

SOUTH’FRONTES^C

LeadinginnovationandexcellenceinpublicandKfesafety March 10, 2017

Dear Mayorand Members of Council,

RE: OAFC2017 Municipal Officials Seminar: The Essentials of Firefightingand Firefighting 101 Saturday, May 6th and Sunday, May 7th, 2017, Toronto Congress Centre, Sponsored by CriSys Limited. The OntarioAssociation of Fire Chiefs Municipal OfficialsSeminar, the Essentialsof Firefightingand

Firefighting 101 offersmunicipalofficialsandstaffthe opportunityto understandthe challengesofthe fire service and its importance in their communities.

This two-day session includes customized presentations that will provide you with essential information and knowledge about the fire service. The highlight of the program is our interactive, hands-on fire training experience.

On Saturday and Sunday morning, you will hear (rom informative speakers on topics specifically designed for municipal officials. This year’s agenda highlights include:

. .

How Legislation Impacts the Delivery of Fire and Emergency Services in Your Community, presented by Deputy Chief Jim Jessop, Toronto Fire Services and former Ontario Fire Marshal. Legal Responsibility and Liability of the Municipality and the Fire Service, presented by Julia Nanos, Hicks Morley.

Fire Service Governance- Policyvs. Operations, Presented by Rob Browning, Past President, OAFC (03-05), Consultant & Executive Director, EOETA.

Keynote Presentation: Defending our Delivery Model, ChiefThomas Jenkins, City of Rogers, Arkansas and 1st Vice President, International Association of Fire Chiefs

.

Keynote Presentation: The Pulse Nightclub Shooting, Chief Roderick Williams, City of Oriando Fire Department.

On Saturday afternoon, attendees put on bunkergear and experience the role of a firefighter by participating in a live fire training session, including a simulated search and rescue, vehicle extrication exercise and extinguishing a real fire! This program has been specifically designed for municipal officials by the Greater Toronto Airport Authority Fire Department. Previous attendees who have participated have repeatedly said that it was one of the best seminars and training sessions that they had ever attended! Past attendees included mayors, councillors, chief administrative officers, directors and government officials.

Thisyear, wewill also introducea disasterresponse exercise inwhicha 911 call escalates intoa lull disaster response requiring your participation in the emergency operations centre. Learn about how important decisions are made, tracked, and how necessary resources are found, and how the Incadent Management System is used.

On Sundayafternoon you havethe opportunitytovisitthe OAFC2017Trade Show- the largestfire and emergencyservice showin Canada. Youandyourfire chiefwill beableto seea widevarietyof

520WestneyRd. S., Umt22AjaxONLlS6W6 V 905^26-9865 S 1-800-774-6651 B 905-426-3032 B www. oafc. on.ca

Page 47 of 48

ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF FIRE CHIEFS Leading innovation andexcellence inpublic andlife safety

fire vehicles and equipment, talk directly to suppliers and manufacturers and gain valuable information that can assist in your purchasing decisions.

h the evenings, there are networkingfunctions included in your registration packageencouragingyou

to interact with your colleagues and special guests. The Ladders Up Reception in support of the” Canadian Fallen Firefighters Foundation is held on Saturdayand the OntarioAssociation of Fire Chiefs annual Memorial Service and Reception is held on Sunday.

The seminartakes place at the Toronto Congress Centre at 650 Dixon Road, Toronto, Ontario on Saturday, May 6th and Sunday, May 7th, 2017. The main seminar hotel is the Crowne Plaza Toronto

Airport Hotel located at 33 Carlson Blvd, which is only a few minutes away from the Toronto Congress

Centre. A shuttle will bedoing continuous loopsfrom the hotel to the congress centre all throughout

the seminar ensuring a convenient experience for all guests.

The early bird rate forthe OAFC 2017 Municipal Officials Seminar is $350. 00 plus HST. The seminar fee includes,

. . .

Customized educational sessions on Saturday, Keynote speakerson Sunday, Incident Management System in the Emergency Operations Centre - new for 2017, A once in a lifetime, live fire training exercise,

.

OAFC 2017 Trade Show,

. . .

Breakfast, lunch and coffee breaks on both days, Ladders Up Reception on Saturday evening, Memorial Service and Reception on Sunday.

The registration rate increases by $75 after April 14, 2017, so register early and save! Ifyou have any questions aboutthe program, I encourageyou to reviewthe enclosed brochure or contact the OAFC board office at 905-426-9865 and speak to our planning team. In addition, please visit our website at www.oafc.on.ca/evenVoafc-2017-attendeesffmuniciDal officials seminar tab to viewseminardetails, the agenda, speaker and presentation overviews, trade show information, location and to register.

The Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs looks forward to welcoming you to the 2017 Municipal Officials

Seminar. Wehopethatyou will considerattendingand participating inthiseducationaland unique event.

Yours truly,

Chief Stephen Hernen President

520We8tneyRd. S., Unit22AjaxONLlS6W6 S 905-426-9865 S 1-800-774-6651 fl 905^126-3032 B www.oafc.on.ca

Page 48 of 48

Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs

Ministere de I’Agriculture, de I Alimentation et des Affaires rurales

Office of the Minister

Bureau du ministre

77 Grenville Street, 11th Floor Toronto, Ontario M7A 1B3

77, rue Grenville, 11’etage Toronto (Ontario) M7A 1B3

Tel: 416-326-3074

Ontario

TCI. : 416 326-3074 Telec. .-416326-3083

Fax: 416-326-3083

February 27, 2017 Dear Mayor/Reeve/Warden:

S^o^lw t^201Lpremrer’SAWardfor Agr. Food Innovation Excellence program I accepted. I askthatyoupleasesharethis’information inyourmunicipal”

are now

fnlp^mLe.r.’s,.AWa.rdfoLA^foodln^ wascreatedtorecognizeand Sthe^p’^^novation. tha"hrivesinOntario’s$36^Hiionagr od’^ctor^Ea^y^,Z agri:foodsectorclemonstrates leadership in innovationby developing new7n"d"exc^a’Droc!d’u’c; “methods and ways of doing business thathelp d"vei g^h’an"d°c’re^te^‘b9s pn"ouurt;IS’ S£.

tKe^SZSS^^^^^^^^^^^

?1r5^. SiroS(Ipsri|p2°8’:e2soT7

s

innovations across the Province. inc^

and agri’food °rganizations are invited to submit

applications until

D.etals »on e"9JbJ’’ty:.i.n-n°.vat;oncategori. esLassessment criteria. the application and selection ^S.TJanb,efo^inth^. -Tlosed2017.. pro9.ramGuidebook^ ^^w!^caia ^wSrmmatlonl- .For additional informafion:please conttacTthe Ag’ric’u’it’u^J Information Contact Centre at 1-877-424-1300 oraa:info. omafrafiBn"nfari’n"rg°^

Ke SSff^; £SS£W

ss^ss^yi

the recipients ofthe 2016 p^ram for the

nnovations developed in your

municipalityto 3row our a9ri-

Sincerely,

JeffLeal

Minister ofAgriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Enclosure

Good ThingsGrow in Ontario

A bonne terre, bons produits

MinistryHeadquarters: 1 StoneRoadWest,Guelph,OntarioN1G4Y2

Bureauprincipalduministere:1 StoneRoadWest, G’uelph”(bniano)‘N1G4Y2

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.
Buy Me a Coffee