Council - 02 Jul 2019 - Agenda — North Frontenac News Media

Published July 2, 2019

Word Count 65240 words

Reading Time 307 min read

Body: Council Type: Agenda Meeting: Regular Date: July 2, 2019 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Council/2019/Council - 02 Jul 2019 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

Page 1 of 297

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA

TIME: DATE: PLACE:

6:30 PM, Tuesday, July 2, 2019 Council Chambers.

Call to Order

Resolution

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

Approval of Agenda

Scheduled Closed Session

Section 239.2 (c) of the Municipal Act • a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board; • and to approve minutes of previous closed session meetings Potential Sale of unopened Road Allowance

Preliminary discussion on Land Acquisition

Closed Session Minutes - March 19, April 16, May 7 and June 18, 2019

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

Rise and Report from Closed Session

Vesting of Tax Sale Property - from June 18, 2019 Closed Session (resolution only)

Delegations - n/a

Public Meeting

2019 Development Charges Background Study and Proposed Bylaw

Approval of Minutes

Council Meeting of June 18, 2019

Business Arising from the Minutes - n/a

Reports Requiring Action

Community Well Being & Safety Plan

220 222

Road and Property Exchange - Normal Lane at Perth Road (Spicer/Postma) - See By-laws 2019-42 and 2019-43

223 227

4 - 210

211 219

Page 2 of 297

Site Plan Control Application - SP-03-19 - S. Clark Homes Ltd - See By-law 2019-44

228 248

Rezoning Z-19-08 - Concession 8, Part Lot 11, Loughborough - S. Clark Homes Ltd - See By-law 2019-45

249 250

Rezoning Z-19/06 - Concession 10, Lot 25, Storrington, Jeff Curtis & Marie Josee Landry - See By-law 2019-46

251 252

Committee Meeting Minutes

Police Services Board meeting held April 11, 2019

253 257

Bellrock Community Hall Committee meeting held May 16, 2019

258 259

Bedford District Recreation Committee meeting held June 13, 2019

260 261

By-laws

By-law 2019-42 - Purchase Property at Concession 14, Part Lot 25, Loughborough

262

By-law 2019-43 - Close and Sell a portion of Normal Rd, RP-1451 (Spicer)

263

By-law 2019-44 - Site Plan Agreement with S. Clark Homes Ltd

264

By-law 2019-45 - Rezone Concession 8, Part Lot 11, Loughborough (S. Clark Homes Ltd)

265 267

By-law 2019-46 - Rezone Concession 10, Part Lot 25, Storrington District

268 270

Reports for Information

Accounts Payable and Payroll Listing

271 282

2nd Quarter - 2019 Planning Activity Report

283 285

Information Items

Jon Pegg, Chief of Emergency Management, re: 2018 Compliance with the Emergency Management and Civic Protection Act.

286

Meela Melnik-Proud, Evonne Potts and Matt Rennie, re: Frontenac County Decision to extend the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

287 296

Notice of Motions

Announcements/Statements by Councillors

Page 3 of 297

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

Closed Session (if requested)

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2019-47

Adjournment

297

Township of South Frontenac 2019 D.C. Public Meeting

Page 4 of 297

July 2, 2019

Format for Public Meeting • D.C.A. Public Meeting • Opening remarks • Presentation of the proposed policies and charges • Presentations by the Public • Questions from Council • Conclude Public Meeting

Page 5 of 297

Study Process & Timelines June 19, 2019

May 14, 2019

Meetings with Staff, Growth Forecast Development & Policy Review

January to March 2019

Council Meeting

Release Background Study & Draft By-law

May 31, 2019

D.C. Open House

August 6, 2019

Public Meeting

July 2, 2019

Council Consideration of By-law

Existing By-law Expiry

September 3, 2019

Page 6 of 297

Public Meeting Purpose • The public meeting is to provide for a review of the D.C. proposal and to receive public input on the proposed policies and charges • The meeting is a mandatory requirement under the Development Charges Act (D.C.A.) • Prior to Council’s consideration of a by-law, a background study must be prepared and available to the public a minimum 60 days prior to the D.C. by-law passage

Page 7 of 297

Development Charges Purpose: •

To recover the capital costs associated with residential and non-residential growth within a municipality

•

The capital costs are in addition to what costs would normally be constructed as part of a subdivision (i.e. internal roads, roads, sidewalks, streetlights, etc.)

•

Municipalities are empowered to impose these charges via the Development Charges Act (D.C.A.)

Page 8 of 297

Update on Bill 73 (Smart Growth for our Communities Act, 2015 Effective January 1, 2016 •

New Definitions & Ineligible Services

•

Area-Specific DCs

•

Waste Diversion

•

Asset Management

•

Transit

•

No Additional Levies

•

Public Process Extended

•

Annual Report of the Treasurer

Page 9 of 297

Methodology 1.

Identify amount, type and location of growth

Identify servicing needs to accommodate growth

Identify capital costs to provide services to meet the needs

Deduct: i.

Grants, subsidies and other contributions

ii.

Benefit to existing development

iii.

Statutory 10% deduction (soft services)

iv.

Amounts in excess of 10 year historical service calculation

D.C. Reserve funds (where applicable)

Net costs then allocated between residential and non-residential benefit

Net costs divided by growth to calculate the D.C. 7

Page 10 of 297

Relationship Between Needs to Service Growth vs. Funding Service New Growth/Users

Development Charges

Rates, Taxes, Reserves, etc.

Page 11 of 297

Growth Forecast Summary

Measure

10 Year 2019-2028

15 Year 2019-2033

(Net) Population Increase

1,926

2,767

Residential Unit Increase

928

1,311

169,800

222,200

Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Increase (ft²) Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Forecast 2019

Page 12 of 297

Annual Housing Forecast

120 110 97

100

101

Housing Units

88 80

110

101

95 83

Years Historical

Low Density

Medium Density

High Density

Seasonal

Historical Average

Source: Historical housing activity from Township of South Frontenac building permit data, 2009-2018, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

Growth forecast represents calendar year.

Page 13 of 297

Services Included in D.C. Calculation • Services Related to a Highway; • Fire Protection Services; • Police and Other Facilities; • Parks and Recreation; • Library Services; • Community Based Studies; and • Engineering Services – Studies.

Page 14 of 297

Proposed Rates

Service

Single and SemiDetached Dwelling

RESIDENTIAL Apartments Apartments - 2 Bachelor and 1 Bedrooms + Bedroom

NON-RESIDENTIAL Other Multiples

Special Care/Special Dwelling Units

(per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area)

Municipal Wide “Hard” Services: Services Related to a Highway

6,856

4,481

3,132

5,495

2,747

4.62

Fire Protection Services

1,022

668

467

819

410

0.69

Police and Other Facilities

140

112

0.09

Engineering Services - Studies

0.05

Total Municipal Wide “Hard” Services

8,102

5,295

3,701

6,493

3,247

5.45

Parks and Recreation

991

648

453

794

397

0.33

Library Services

0.02

Community Based Studies

219

143

100

176

0.14

Municipal Wide “Soft” Services:

Total Municipal Wide “Soft” Services

1,281

837

585

1,027

513

0.50

Total Municipal Wide Services

9,383

6,132

4,286

7,520

3,760

5.94

Page 15 of 297

Rate Comparison – Residential (Single Detached Dwelling)

Residential (Single Detached) Comparison

Service

Current

Current (indexed)

Calculated

Municipal Wide “Hard” Services: Services Related to a Highway Fire Protection Services Police and Other Facilities Engineering Services - Studies*

5,543 548 374

6,356 628 429

6,856 1,022 140 84

Total Municipal Wide “Hard” Services

6,465

7,413

8,102

94 53 146

108 61 167

293 6,758

336 7,749

991 71 219 1,281 9,383

Municipal Wide “Soft” Services: Parks and Recreation Library Services Community Based Studies* Total Municipal Wide “Soft” Services Total Municipal Wide Services

*Studies were previously combined into one category. Percentage change in “current vs. calculated” column for “soft” services accounts for both categories.

Page 16 of 297

Rate Comparison – Non-Residential (per sq.ft.) Non-Residential (per sq.ft.) Comparison

Service Municipal Wide “Hard” Services: Services Related to a Highway Fire Protection Services Police and Other Facilities Engineering Services - Studies* Total Municipal Wide “Hard” Services Municipal Wide “Soft” Services: Parks and Recreation Library Services Community Based Studies* Total Municipal Wide “Soft” Services Total Municipal Wide Services

Current

Current (indexed)

4.36 0.46 0.28

5.00 0.53 0.32

5.10

5.85

0.12

0.14

0.12 5.22

0.14 5.99

Calculated 4.62 0.69 0.09 0.05 5.45 0.33 0.02 0.14 0.50 5.94

Page 17 of 297

*Studies were previously combined into one category. Percentage change in “current vs. calculated” column for “soft” services accounts for both categories.

D.C. Survey - Residential

Page 18 of 297

D.C. Survey – Non-Residential (Commercial)

Page 19 of 297

D.C. Survey – Non-Residential (Industrial)

Page 20 of 297

Proposed Exemptions and D.C. Policy

Non-Statutory Exemptions: • Place of Worship • Bonafide Agricultural Use/Farm Building (excludes growing/processing of cannabis); and • Secondary residential units within the primary dwelling as well as in separate detached accessory structures.

Policy: • 5-year sunset clause on redevelopment credits.

Page 21 of 297

Bill 108: “More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan” The following provides a brief overview of the proposed changes to the Development Charges Act (known as of June 6, 2019): Changes to eligible services

•

Soft Services will be removed from the DCA and will be considered as part of a new Community Benefits Charge imposed under the Planning Act (i.e. parking, outdoor recreation, indoor recreation, library services, etc.)

Payment in Installments:

•

Over six years for rental housing, as well as non-residential developments will pay their DC in six equal annual installments

•

Over 20 years for non-profit housing, will pay their DC in equal annual installments

When DC Amount is Determined

•

Currently DCs are calculated at the building permit stage. The proposed change would have DCs calculated on the date of the 19 application for Site Plan or zoning amendment

Page 22 of 297

•

Bill 108: “More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan” Community Benefit Charge (for soft services – outdoor recreation, indoor recreation, library and soft service admin studies )

•

Municipality may, by by-law, impose community benefits charges against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services and matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies

•

These services may not include services authorized by the DCA

•

The amount of a community benefits charge payable shall not exceed an amount equal to the prescribed percentage of the value of the land as of the valuation date

•

The valuation date is the day before building permit issuance

•

All money received by the municipality under a community benefits charge by-law shall be paid into a special account

•

Transitional provisions are set out regarding the DC reserve funds and DC credits 20

Page 23 of 297

•

Bill 108: “More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan” Transitional Policies 1)

Pass a new D.C. By-law; or

Pass a new D.C. By-law for hard services and amend the existing D.C. Bylaw to remove hard services (i.e. leave soft services charges in place)

May 2, 2019 Bill 108 First Reading

June 6, 2019 Bill 108 Royal Assent

Proclamation (Date unknown)

Prescribed Date for C.B.C. (January 1, 2021)

Pass a new hard services D.C. By-law and amend the existing D.C. By-law to retain charge for soft services (until a CBC by-law is passed).

Page 24 of 297

Pass a new D.C. By-law

Pass a new D.C. By-law for hard services and a new C.B.C. By-law for soft services

Next Steps

By-law Passage (August 6, 2019)

Page 25 of 297

Questions?

Page 26 of 297

Page 27 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA DATE: REPORT DATE:

July 2, 2019 June 25, 2019

SUBJECT:

Public Meeting for 2019 Development Charges Background Study and Proposed By-law

RECOMMENDATION That Council receive this report for information, and pending any recommended updates, consider the Development Charges (DC) By-law at its meeting of August 6, 2019. PURPOSE The purpose of this Public Meeting of Council is to provide a review of the Development Charges study and to receive public input in the proposed by-law and charges as per the Development Charges Act, 1997 as amended. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION At the April 16, 2019 Council meeting, Council set July 2, 2019 as the date to hold a statutory Public Meeting of Council under Section 12 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 as amended. Notice of the July 2, 2019 Public Meeting was advertised in the Frontenac News on Thursday, June 6, 2019. In order that sufficient information was made available to the public, the DC Background Study was made available online at the Township’s website on May 31, 2019 and copies were made available at the Clerk’s Office and the Development Services Department as of May 30, 2019. The release of the background study was promoted using the Township’s social media accounts. An Open House was held on June 19, 2019. Watson and Associate staff, the Director of Development Services, Director of Public Services and the Director of Corporate Services were available to answer questions from the public. The Open House was advertised for 2 weeks in the Frontenac News, advertised on the website, advertised on the Township electronic sign and promoted using the Township’s social media sites, including Twitter and Facebook. One member of the public attended the Open House. The individual attended to learn more about Development Charges and to understand more about how growth pays for growth related to infrastructure expenses. A copy of the 2019 Development Charges Background Study is attached for Council’s information (Attachment 1). The draft Development Charge By-law is also attached for ease of reference as Attachment 2. The purpose of the July 2nd meeting is to give the public an opportunity to ask questions, provide comments, and make representations on the 2019 Development Charges Background Study and the proposed By-law. The public was also invited to provide comments in writing. To date Township staff have not received any public comments on the Development Charges Background Study or By-law or the proposed charge itself. No written responses have been received to date. Prior to receiving the public comments, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. will provide a brief presentation (attached) of the findings of the study.

Page 28 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Council shall not take any action at this meeting. The Development Charge By-law will be brought back to Council for adoption at the August 6, Council Meeting, following a minimum of 60 days after the release of the DC Background Study. Impact of Bill 108 Bill 108 proposes several changes to how Development Charges are calculated and collected in Ontario. Bill 108 was given Royal Assent on June 6, 2019, however certain sections of this Bill related to the Development Charges Act and the Planning Act that will only take effect on Proclamation. As of the date of this report, proclamation has not yet occurred. Our Development Charge consultants, Watson and Associates are carefully monitoring the changes with Bill 108 and will advise us if any changes need to occur to the wording of the proposed Development Charges By-law as Council proceeds to adoption on August 6, 2019. FINANCIAL/STAFFING IMPLICATIONS: None ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: 2019 Development Charges Background Study, May 31, 2019 Attachment 2: Draft Development Charges By-law Attachment 3: Public Meeting Presentation, prepared by Watson & Associates Submitted/approved by: Wayne Orr, Chief Administrative Officer Prepared by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP Director of Development Services

Page 29 of 297

Development Charges Background Study Township of South Frontenac

May 31, 2019

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 905-272-3600 info@watsonecon.ca

Page 30 of 297

Table of Contents Page Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………. i 1.

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………… 1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Document…………………………………………………………….. 1-1 1.2 Summary of the Process………………………………………………………………. 1-2 1.3 Changes to the D.C.A.: Bill 73 – Smart Growth for our Communities Act, 2015 ………………………………………………………………… 1-3 1.3.1 Area Rating …………………………………………………………………….. 1-3 1.3.2 Asset Management Plan for New Infrastructure……………………. 1-3 1.3.3 60-Day Circulation of D.C. Background Study ……………………… 1-4 1.3.4 Timing of Collection of D.C.s……………………………………………… 1-4 1.3.5 Other Changes………………………………………………………………… 1-4 1.4 Proposed Changes to the D.C.A.: Bill 108 – An Act to Amend Various Statutes with Respect to Housing, Other Development and Various Other Matters ………………………………………………………………….. 1-5

Current Township of South Frontenac Policy……………………………………….. 2-1 2.1 Schedule of Charges …………………………………………………………………… 2-1 2.2 Services Covered ……………………………………………………………………….. 2-1 2.3 Timing of D.C. Calculation and Payment ………………………………………… 2-2 2.4 Indexing …………………………………………………………………………………….. 2-2 2.5 Redevelopment Allowance …………………………………………………………… 2-2 2.6 Exemptions ………………………………………………………………………………… 2-2

Anticipated Development in the Township of South Frontenac……………… 3-1 3.1 Requirement of the Act ………………………………………………………………… 3-1 3.2 Basis of Population, Household and Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Forecast …………………………………………………………………………….. 3-1 3.3 Summary of Growth Forecast ……………………………………………………….. 3-2

The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge ……………………………………. 4-1

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 31 of 297

Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8

4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12

Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 4-1 Increase in the Need for Service ……………………………………………………. 4-1 Services Potentially Involved ………………………………………………………… 4-3 Local Service Policy …………………………………………………………………….. 4-7 Capital Forecast ………………………………………………………………………….. 4-7 Treatment of Credits ……………………………………………………………………. 4-8 Existing Reserve Funds ……………………………………………………………….. 4-8 Deductions …………………………………………………………………………………. 4-9 4.8.1 Reduction Required by Level of Service Ceiling …………………… 4-9 4.8.2 Reduction for Uncommitted Excess Capacity …………………….. 4-10 4.8.3 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development …………………… 4-10 4.8.4 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions …………………………………………………………………. 4-12 4.8.5 The 10% Reduction ……………………………………………………….. 4-12 Municipal-wide vs. Area Rating……………………………………………………. 4-12 Allocation of Development ………………………………………………………….. 4-12 Asset Management ……………………………………………………………………. 4-13 Transit ……………………………………………………………………………………… 4-13

D.C.-Eligible Cost Analysis by Service …………………………………………………. 5-2 5.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 5-2 5.2 Service Levels and 10-Year Capital Costs for D.C. Calculation………….. 5-2 5.2.1 Parks and Recreation ………………………………………………………. 5-2 5.2.2 Police and Other Facilities ………………………………………………… 5-5 5.2.3 Library Services ………………………………………………………………. 5-7 5.2.4 Community Based Studies ………………………………………………… 5-9 5.2.5 Engineering Services – Studies ……………………………………….. 5-11 5.3 Service Levels and 15-Year Capital Costs for South Frontenac’s D.C. Calculation ………………………………………………………………………… 5-13 5.3.1 Services Related to a Highway – Roads, Bridges, Structures, Streetlighting and Traffic Signals ……………………… 5-13 5.3.2 Services Related to a Highway - Public Works Facilities, Fleet & Equipment …………………………………………………………. 5-15 5.3.3 Fire Protection Services ………………………………………………….. 5-18

D.C. Calculation ………………………………………………………………………………….. 6-1

D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. By-law Rules ………………………….. 7-1 7.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 7-1 7.2 D.C. By-law Structure ………………………………………………………………….. 7-2 7.3 D.C. By-law Rules ……………………………………………………………………….. 7-2 7.3.1 Payment in any Particular Case …………………………………………. 7-2

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 32 of 297

Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page 7.3.2 7.3.3

7.4

7.5 8.

Determination of the Amount of the Charge …………………………. 7-3 Application to Redevelopment of Land (Demolition and Conversion)…………………………………………………………………….. 7-3 7.3.4 Exemptions (full or partial) ………………………………………………… 7-4 7.3.5 Phasing in ………………………………………………………………………. 7-4 7.3.6 Timing of Collection …………………………………………………………. 7-4 7.3.7 Indexing …………………………………………………………………………. 7-5 7.3.8 The Applicable Areas ……………………………………………………….. 7-5 Other D.C. By-law Provisions ……………………………………………………….. 7-5 7.4.1 Categories of Services for Reserve Fund and Credit Purposes ………………………………………………………………………… 7-5 7.4.2 By-law In-force Date ………………………………………………………… 7-6 7.4.3 Minimum Interest Rate Paid on Refunds and Charged for Inter-Reserve Fund Borrowing …………………………………………… 7-6 7.4.4 Area Rating …………………………………………………………………….. 7-6 Other Recommendations ……………………………………………………………… 7-8

By-law Implementation ……………………………………………………………………….. 8-1 8.1 Public Consultation Process …………………………………………………………. 8-1 8.1.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………….. 8-1 8.1.2 Public Meeting of Council………………………………………………….. 8-1 8.1.3 Other Consultation Activity ………………………………………………… 8-1 8.2 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development …………………………… 8-2 8.3 Implementation Requirements ………………………………………………………. 8-3 8.3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………….. 8-3 8.3.2 Notice of Passage ……………………………………………………………. 8-3 8.3.3 By-law Pamphlet ……………………………………………………………… 8-3 8.3.4 Appeals ………………………………………………………………………….. 8-4 8.3.5 Complaints ……………………………………………………………………… 8-4 8.3.6 Credits …………………………………………………………………………… 8-5 8.3.7 Front-Ending Agreements …………………………………………………. 8-5 8.3.8 Severance and Subdivision Agreement Conditions ………………. 8-5

Appendix A Background Information on Residential and Non-Residential Growth Forecast ………………………………………………………………………………… A-1 Appendix B Level of Service ……………………………………………………………………….. B-1 Appendix C Long-Term Capital and Operating Cost Examination …………………. C-1 Appendix D D.C. Reserve Fund Policy …………………………………………………………. D-1 Appendix E Local Service Policy …………………………………………………………………..E-1

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 33 of 297

Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page Appendix F Asset Management Plan…………………………………………………………….. F-1 Appendix G Proposed D.C. By-law ………………………………………………………………. G-1

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 34 of 297

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym

Full Description of Acronym

A.M.P.

Asset management plan

CANSIM

Canadian Socio-Economic Information Management System (Statistics Canada)

D.C.

Development charge

D.C.A.

Development Charges Act, 1997, as amended

E.I.A.

Environmental Impact Assessment

E.I.S.

Environmental Impact Study

F.I.R.

Financial Information Return

G.F.A.

Gross floor area

L.P.A.T.

Local Planning Appeal Tribunal

N.F.P.O.W.

No Fixed Place of Work

N.H.S.

Natural Heritage System

O.M.B.

Ontario Municipal Board

O.P.A.

Official Plan Amendment

O.Reg.

Ontario Regulation

P.O.A.

Provincial Offences Act

P.P.U.

Persons per unit

R.O.W.

Right of way

S.D.E.

Single detached equivalent

S.D.U.

Single detached unit

sq.ft.

square foot

sq.m

square metre

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 35 of 297

Executive Summary

Page 36 of 297

Executive Summary

The report provided herein represents the Development Charges (D.C.) Background Study for the Township of South Frontenac required by the Development Charges Act, 1997 (D.C.A.). This report has been prepared in accordance with the methodology required under the D.C.A. The contents include the following: • •

Chapter 1 – Overview of the legislative requirements of the Act; Chapter 2 – Review of present D.C. policies of the Township;

•

Chapter 3 – Summary of the residential and non-residential growth forecasts for the Township;

• •

•

Chapter 4 – Approach to calculating the D.C.; Chapter 5 – Review of historical service standards and identification of future capital requirements to service growth and related deductions and allocations; Chapter 6 – Calculation of the D.C.s;

• •

Chapter 7 – D.C. policy recommendations and rules; and Chapter 8 – By-law implementation.

D.C.s provide for the recovery of growth-related capital expenditures from new development. The D.C.A. is the statutory basis to recover these charges. The methodology is detailed in Chapter 4; a simplified summary is provided below:

Identify amount, type and location of growth;
Identify servicing needs to accommodate growth;
Identify capital costs to provide services to meet the needs;
Deduct: • •

Grants, subsidies and other contributions; Benefit to existing development;

• •

Statutory 10% deduction (soft services); Amounts in excess of 10-year historical service calculation;

•

D.C. reserve funds (where applicable);

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE i

Page 37 of 297

Net costs are then allocated between residential and non-residential benefit; and
Net costs divided by growth to provide the D.C. charge.

A number of changes to the D.C. process need to be addressed as a result of the Smart Growth for our Communities Act, 2015 (Bill 73). These changes have been incorporated throughout the report and in the updated draft by-law, as necessary. These items include: a. Area-rating: Council must consider the use of area-specific charges. b. Asset Management Plan for New Infrastructure: The D.C. background study must include an asset management plan that deals with all assets proposed to be funded, in whole or in part, by D.C.s. The asset management plan must show that the assets are financially sustainable over their full lifecycle. c. 60-day Circulation Period: The D.C. background study must be released to the public at least 60-days prior to passage of the D.C. by-law. d. Timing of Collection of Development Charges: The D.C.A. now requires D.C.s to be collected at the time of the first building permit.
The growth forecast (Chapter 3) on which the Township-wide D.C. is based, projects the following population, housing and non-residential floor area for the 10-year (2019 to 2028) and 15-year (2019 to 2033) periods. Measure

10 Year 2019-2028

15 Year 2019-2033

(Net) Population Increase

1,926

2,767

Residential Unit Increase

928

1,311

169,800

222,200

Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Increase (ft²) Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Forecast 2019

On September 2, 2014, the Township of South Frontenac passed By-law 201454 under the D.C.A. The by-law imposes D.C.s on residential and nonresidential uses. This by-law will expire on September 3, 2019. The Township is

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE ii

Page 38 of 297

undertaking a D.C. public process and anticipates passing a new by-law in advance of the expiry date. The mandatory public meeting has been set for July 2, 2019 with adoption of the by-law on August 6, 2019. 6. The Township’s D.C.s currently in effect are $6,758 for single detached dwelling units for full services. Non-residential charges are $5.22 per square foot for full services. This report has undertaken a recalculation of the charge based on future identified needs (presented in Schedule ES-1 for residential and nonresidential). Charges have been provided on a Township-wide basis for all services. The corresponding single detached unit charge is $9,383. The nonresidential charge is $5.94 per square foot of building area. These rates are submitted to Council for its consideration. 7. The D.C.A. requires a summary be provided of the gross capital costs and the net costs to be recovered over the life of the by-law. This calculation is provided by service and is presented in Table 6-4. A summary of these costs is provided below: Total gross expenditures planned over the next five years Less: Benefit to existing development Post planning period benefit Ineligible re: Level of Service Mandatory 10% deduction for certain services Grants, subsidies and other contributions Net Costs to be recovered from development charges

$ 7,418,333 $ 547,330 $ $ $ 122,375 $ $ 6,748,628

This suggests that for the non-D.C. cost over the five-year D.C. by-law (benefit to existing development, mandatory 10% deduction, and the grants, subsidies and other contributions), $669,705 (or an annual amount of $133,941) will need to be contributed from taxes and rates, or other sources. Based on the above table, the Township plans to spend $7.42 million over the next five years, of which $6.75 million (91%) is recoverable from D.C.s. Of this net amount, $6.17 million is recoverable from residential development and $0.58 million from non-residential development. It is noted also that any exemptions or reductions in the charges would reduce this recovery further.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE iii

Page 39 of 297

Considerations by Council – The background study represents the service needs arising from residential and non-residential growth over the forecast periods. The following services are calculated based on a 15-year forecast: • •

Services Related to a Highway; Public Works Facilities, Fleet & Equipment; and

•

Fire Protection Services.

All other services are calculated based on a 10-year forecast. These include: • •

Police and Other Facilities; Parkland Development;

• •

Recreation Facilities; Library Services; and

•

Administration.

Council will consider the findings and recommendations provided in the report and, in conjunction with public input, approve such policies and rates it deems appropriate. These directions will refine the draft D.C. by-law which is appended in Appendix G. These decisions may include: •

adopting the charges and policies recommended herein;

• •

considering additional exemptions to the by-law; and considering reductions in the charge by class of development (obtained by removing certain services on which the charge is based and/or by a general reduction in the charge).

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE iv

Table ES-1 Schedule of Development Charges Service

Single and SemiDetached Dwelling

RESIDENTIAL Apartments Apartments - 2 Bachelor and 1 Bedrooms + Bedroom

NON-RESIDENTIAL Other Multiples

Special Care/Special Dwelling Units

(per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area)

Municipal Wide “Hard” Services: Services Related to a Highway

6,856

4,481

3,132

5,495

2,747

4.62

Fire Protection Services

1,022

668

467

819

410

0.69

Police and Other Facilities

140

112

0.09

Engineering Services - Studies

0.05

Total Municipal Wide “Hard” Services

8,102

5,295

3,701

6,493

3,247

5.45

991

648

453

794

397

0.33

Municipal Wide “Soft” Services: Parks and Recreation Library Services

0.02

Community Based Studies

219

143

100

176

0.14

Total Municipal Wide “Soft” Services

1,281

837

585

1,027

513

0.50

Total Municipal Wide Services

9,383

6,132

4,286

7,520

3,760

5.94

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE v

Page 40 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Page 41 of 297

Report

Page 42 of 297

Chapter 1 Introduction

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 43 of 297

Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this Document This background study has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the D.C.A. (section 10) and, accordingly, recommends new D.C.s and policies for the Township of South Frontenac. The Township retained Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Watson), to undertake the D.C.s (D.C.) study process during 2019. Watson worked with Township staff preparing the D.C. analysis and policy recommendations. This D.C. background study, containing the proposed D.C. by-law, will be distributed to members of the public in order to provide interested parties with sufficient background information on the legislation, the study’s recommendations and an outline of the basis for these recommendations. This report has been prepared, in the first instance, to meet the statutory requirements applicable to the Township’s D.C. background study, as summarized in Chapter 4. It also addresses the requirement for “rules” (contained in Chapter 7) and the proposed by-law to be made available as part of the approval process (included as Appendix G). In addition, the report is designed to set out sufficient background on the legislation (Chapter 4), South Frontenac’s current D.C. policies (Chapter 2) and the policies underlying the proposed by-law, to make the exercise understandable to those who are involved. Finally, it addresses post-adoption implementation requirements (Chapter 8) which are critical to the successful application of the new policy. The Chapters in the report are supported by Appendices containing the data required to explain and substantiate the calculation of the charge. A full discussion of the statutory requirements for the preparation of a background study and calculation of a D.C. is provided herein.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 1-1

Page 44 of 297

1.2 Summary of the Process The public meeting required under section 12 of the D.C.A., has been scheduled for July 2, 2019. Its purpose is to present the study to the public and to solicit public input. The meeting is also being held to answer any questions regarding the study’s purpose, methodology and the proposed modifications to the Township’s D.C.s. In accordance with the legislation, the background study and proposed D.C. by-law will be available for public review on May 31, 2019. The process to be followed in finalizing the report and recommendations includes: •

consideration of responses received prior to, at, or immediately following the Public Meeting; and

•

finalization of the report and Council consideration of the by-law subsequent to the public meeting.

Figure 1-1 outlines the proposed schedule to be followed with respect to the D.C. by-law adoption process. Figure 1-1 Schedule of Key D.C. Process Dates for the Township of South Frontenac

Data collection, staff review, engineering work, D.C. calculations and policy work
Public meeting advertisement placed in newspaper(s)
Background study and proposed bylaw available to public
Public meeting of Council
Council considers adoption of background study and passage of bylaw
Newspaper notice given of by-law passage
Last day for by-law appeal
Township makes pamphlet available (where by-law not appealed)

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

February to April 2019 No later than June 11, 2019 May 31, 2019 July 2, 2019 August 6, 2019 By 20 days after passage 40 days after passage By 60 days after in force date

PAGE 1-2

Page 45 of 297

1.3 Changes to the D.C.A.: Bill 73 – Smart Growth for our Communities Act, 2015 With the amendment of the D.C.A. (as a result of Bill 73 and O.Reg. 428/15), there are a number of areas that must be addressed to ensure that the Township is in compliance with the D.C.A., as amended. The following provides an explanation of the changes to the Act that affect the Township’s background study and how they have been dealt with to ensure compliance with the amended legislation.

1.3.1 Area Rating Bill 73 has introduced two new sections where Council must consider the use of areaspecific charges:

Section 2 (9) of the Act now requires a municipality to implement area-specific D.C.s for either specific services which are prescribed and/or for specific municipalities which are to be regulated. (Note that at this time, no municipalities or services are prescribed by the Regulations.)
Section 10 (2) c. 1 of the D.C.A. requires that, “the development charges background study shall include consideration of the use of more than one development charge by-law to reflect different needs for services in different areas.” In regard to the first item, there are no services or specific municipalities identified in the regulations which must be area-rated. The second item requires Council to consider the use of area rating.

1.3.2 Asset Management Plan for New Infrastructure The new legislation now requires that a D.C. background study must include an Asset Management Plan (subsection 10 (2) (c.2)). The asset management plan must deal with all assets that are proposed to be funded, in whole or in part, by D.C.s. The current regulations provide very extensive and specific requirements for the asset management plan related to transit services; however, they are silent with respect to how the asset management plan is to be provided for all other services. As part of any asset management plan, the examination should be consistent with the municipality’s existing assumptions, approaches and policies on asset management planning. This

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 1-3

Page 46 of 297

examination may include both qualitative and quantitative measures such as examining the annual future lifecycle contributions needs (discussed further in Appendix F of this report).

1.3.3 60-Day Circulation of D.C. Background Study Previously the legislation required that a D.C. background study be made available to the public at least two weeks prior to the public meeting. The amended legislation now provides that the D.C. background study must be made available to the public (including posting on the municipal website) at least 60 days prior to passage of the D.C. by-law. No other changes were made to timing requirements for such things as notice of the public meeting and notice of by-law passage. This D.C. study is being provided to the public on May 31, 2019 to ensure the new requirements for release of the study is met.

1.3.4 Timing of Collection of D.C.s The D.C.A. has been refined by Bill 73 to require that D.C.s are collected at the time of the first building permit. For the majority of development, this will not impact the Township’s present process. There may be instances, however, where several building permits are to be issued and either the size of the development or the uses will not be definable at the time of the first building permit. In these instances, the Township may enter into a delayed payment agreement in order to capture the full development.

1.3.5 Other Changes It is also noted that a number of other changes were made through Bill 73 and O.Reg. 428/15 including changes to the way in which Transit D.C. service standards are calculated, the inclusion of Waste Diversion and the ability for collection of additional levies; however, these sections do not impact the Township’s D.C.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 1-4

Page 47 of 297

1.4 Proposed Changes to the D.C.A.: Bill 108 – An Act to Amend Various Statutes with Respect to Housing, Other Development and Various Other Matters On May 2, 2019, the Province introduced Bill 108 which proposes changes to the Development Charges Act. The Bill has been introduced as part of the Province’s “More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan”. The Bill was given first reading and is expected to be debated over the coming months. The Act proposes that any Development Charge (D.C.) by-laws passed after May 2, 2019 will be affected by these proposed changes. Any by-laws which were passed prior to this date will remain in effect until it is either repealed or expires. A summary of the proposed changes to the Development Charges Act (D.C.A.) is provided below: Changes to Eligible Services – the Bill will remove “Soft Services” from the D.C.A. These services will be considered as part of a new Community Benefit Charge (discussed below) imposed under the Planning Act. Eligible services which will remain under the D.C.A. are as follows: • •

Water supply services, including distribution and treatment services; Waste water services, including sewers and treatment services;

• • •

Storm water drainage and control services; Services related to a highway as defined in subsection 1 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001 or subsection 3 (1) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, as the case may be; Electrical power services;

• •

Policing services; Fire protection services;

• •

Toronto-York subway extension, as defined in subsection 5.1 (1); Transit services other than the Toronto-York subway extension;

• •

Waste diversion services; and Other services as prescribed.

Waste Diversion – the Bill will remove the mandatory 10% deduction for this service. Payment in Installments over Six Years – the Bill proposes that Rental Housing, NonProfit Housing and Commercial/Industrial/Institutional developments pay their

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 1-5

Page 48 of 297

development charges in six equal annual payments commencing the earlier of the date of issuance of a building permit or occupancy. If payments are not made, interest may be charged (at a presecribed rate) and may be added to the property and collected as taxes. When D.C. Amount is Determined – the Bill proposes that the D.C. amount for all developments proceeding by Site Plan or requiring a zoning amendment, shall be determined based on the D.C. charge in effect on the day of the application for Site Plan or zoning amendment. If the development is not proceeding via these planning approvals then the amount is determined the earlier of the date of issuance of a building permit or occupancy. Soft Services to be Included in a new Community Benefit Charge under the Planning Act – it is proposed that a municipality may by by-law impose community benefits charges against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services and matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the bylaw applies. These services may not include services authorized by the D.C.A. Various provisons are provided as follows: •

Before passing a community benefits charge by-law, the municipality shall prepare a community benefits charge strategy that, (a) identifies the facilities, services and matters that will be funded with community benefits charges and (b) complies with any prescribed requirements;

•

The amount of a community benefits charge payable shall not exceed an amount equal to the prescribed percentage of the value of the land as of the valuation date;

• •

The valuation date is the day before building permit issuance; Valuations will be based on appraised value of land. Various requirements are set out in this regard;

•

All money received by the municipality under a community benefits charge bylaw shall be paid into a special account;

•

In each calendar year, a municipality shall spend or allocate at least 60 percent of the monies that are in the special account at the beginning of the year;

• •

Requirements for annual reporting shall be prescribed; and Transitional provisions are set out regarding the D.C. reserve funds and D.C. credits.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 1-6

Page 49 of 297

Chapter 2 Current Township of South Frontenac Policy

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 50 of 297

Current Township of South Frontenac Policy 2.1 Schedule of Charges On September 2, 2014, the Township of South Frontenac passed By-law 2014-54 under the D.C.A. This by-law imposes D.C.s for residential and non-residential uses. The table below provides the rates currently in effect, as at January 1, 2019 Table 2-1 Township of South Frontenac Current D.C. Rates

Service Public Works (Roads, Bridges & Equipment) Fire Protection Services Police Recreation Library Services General Government Total

Non-Residential Residential Per Dwelling per sq.ft. Unit 5,543 4.36 0.46 548 0.28 374 94 53 0.12 146 6,758 5.22

2.2 Services Covered The following services are covered under By-law 2014-54: By-law 09-143, as amended: • •

Public Works (Roads, Bridges & Equipment) Fire Protection;

• •

Police; Recreation;

• •

Library; and General Government.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 2-1

Page 51 of 297

2.3 Timing of D.C. Calculation and Payment D.C.s are calculated and payable in full at the time the first building permit is issued in relation to a building or structure on land to which a D.C. applied.

2.4 Indexing Rates may be indexed on the anniversary date of the D.C. by-law (every September 3rd) in accordance with the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price Statistics 62007.

2.5 Redevelopment Allowance An owner who has secured the necessary approvals may demolish and replace existing dwelling units or non-residential floor area and not be subject to the D.C.s applicable with respect to the development being replaced. Any additional floor area or dwelling units created in excess of those demolished shall be subject to D.C.s.

2.6 Exemptions The following non-statutory exemption is provided under By-law 2014-54: •

A place of worship and land used in connection therewith, and a churchyard, cemetery and burial ground exempt from taxation.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 2-2

Page 52 of 297

Chapter 3 Anticipated Development in the Township of South Frontenac

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 53 of 297

Anticipated Development in the Township of South Frontenac 3.1 Requirement of the Act Chapter 4 provides the methodology for calculating a D.C. as per the D.C.A. Figure 4-1 presents this methodology graphically. It is noted in the first box of the schematic that in order to determine the D.C. that may be imposed, it is a requirement of Section 5 (1) of the D.C.A. that “the anticipated amount, type and location of development, for which development charges can be imposed, must be estimated.” The growth forecast contained in this chapter (with supplemental tables in Appendix A) provides for the anticipated development for which the Township of South Frontenac will be required to provide services, over a 10-year (mid-2019 to mid-2029) and 15-year term (mid-2019 to mid-2034) time horizon.

3.2 Basis of Population, Household and Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Forecast The D.C. growth forecast has been derived from the Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs Final Report, June 13, 2014, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. In compiling the growth forecast, the following additional information sources were consulted to further assess the residential and nonresidential development potential for the Township of South Frontenac over the forecast period, including: •

The Township of South Frontenac Development Charge Background Study, July 2014;

•

The Township of South Frontenac Official Plan, November 2014, Adopted by South Frontenac Township Council September 5th, 2000, Approved by Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing April 30, 2002, Approved by the Ontario Municipal Board, November 25, 2003. Update Adopted by South Frontenac Township Council, 2010; The Township of South Frontenac Growth Study, February 26, 2013, MHBC Planning Urban Design & Landscape Architecture;

•

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-1

Page 54 of 297

•

Historical residential and non-residential building permit data over the 2016 to 2018 and 2014 to 2018 periods, respectively;

• •

Population, housing and employment data from 2006, 2011 and 2016 Census; Residential supply data (in the development process) as provided by the Township of South Frontenac; Non-residential supply opportunities as provided by the Township of South Frontenac; and

• •

Discussions with Township of South Frontenac staff regarding historic and expected seasonal development activity.

3.3 Summary of Growth Forecast A detailed analysis of the residential and non-residential growth forecasts is provided in Appendix A and the methodology employed is illustrated in Figure 3-1. The discussion provided herein summarizes the anticipated growth for the Township and describes the basis for the forecast. The results of the residential growth forecast analysis are summarized in Table 3-1 below, and Schedule 1 in Appendix A. As identified in Table 3-1 and Appendix A, Schedule 1, the Township’s permanent population is anticipated to reach approximately 20,970 by mid-2029 and 21,760 by mid-2034, resulting in an increase of approximately 1,820 and 2,600 persons, respectively, over the 10-year and 15-year forecast periods. The Township’s seasonal population is forecast to increase to 11,090 persons in 2029, and approximately 11,150 persons in 2034. The Township’s total population (permanent and seasonal population) is forecast to reach approximately 32,060 by 2029, and 32,900 by 2034. 1

1 The population figures used in the calculation of the 2019 D.C. exclude the net

Census undercount, which is estimated at approximately 2.5%.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-2

Page 55 of 297

Figure 3-1 Household Formation-based Population and Household Projection Model

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-3

Table 3-1 Township of South Frontenac Residential Growth Forecast Summary

Forecast

Historical

Year

Housing Units Total Permanent and Seasonal Population

Permanent Permanent

Seasonal Total Total Equivalent Person Per Person Per Seasonal Households Unit Permanent Institutional Unit Households Including Households Households (P.P.U.) (P.P.U.) Seasonal

Singles & Semi- Conversions2 Multiples3 Apartments4 Other Detached

Mid 2006

18,690

18,227

18,175

11,960

30,187

6,420

170

120

6,780

3,268

10,048

2.688

3.004

Mid 2016

19,120

18,646

18,585

10,945

29,591

6,920

140

7,190

2,991

10,181

2.593

2.906

Mid 2019

19,640

19,155

19,092

10,980

30,135

7,175

140

7,469

3,000

10,469

2.565

2.878

Mid 2029

21,500

20,971

20,902

11,090

32,061

8,071

104

156

8,476

3,030

11,506

2.474

2.786

Mid 2034

22,305

21,757

21,357

11,145

32,902

8,428

144

169

8,900

3,045

11,945

2.445

2.754

430

419

410

-1,015

-596

500

-30

410

-277

133

Mid 2006 - Mid 2016

Incremental

Excluding Census Undercount Permanent Population Permanent (Including Permanent Institutional Population Seasonal Census Population Population Excluding Population Institutional Undercount)1

Mid 2016 - Mid 2019

520

509

507

544

255

279

288

Mid 2019 - Mid 2029

1,860

1,816

1,810

110

1,926

896

1,007

1,037

Mid 2019 - Mid 2034

2,665

2,602

2,265

165

2,767

1,253

120

1,431

1,476

Source: Derived from the Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs Final Report, June 2014, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. ¹ Census undercount estimated at approximately 2.5%. Note: Population including the undercount has been rounded. 2 Conversion of existing seasonal housing units to year-round permanent housing units. 3 Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. 4 Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom+ apartments.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-4

Page 56 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Figure 3-2 Township of South Frontenac Annual Housing Forecast FIGURE A-1 ANNUAL HOUSING110 FORECAST¹ 110 110

120

120 100

Housing Units

101

110

88 100 80

101

86 96

80 80

110

60 60 40 40

20 20

Years Historical

Low Density

Medium Density

High Density

Seasonal

Historical Average

Source: Historical housing activity from Township of South Frontenac building permit data, 2009-2018, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

Growth forecast represents calendar year.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-5

Page 57 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Page 58 of 297

Provided below is a summary of the key assumptions and findings regarding the Township of South Frontenac D.C. growth forecast.

Housing Unit Mix (Appendix A – Schedules 1 and 6) •

The unit mix for the Township was derived from a detailed review of historical development activity (as per Schedule 6), as well as active residential development applications, and discussions with Township staff regarding anticipated development trends for the Township. Map A-1 geographically illustrates the location of currently active subdivisions and condominiums in South Frontenac as of March, 2019.

•

Based on the above indicators, the 2019 to 2034 household growth forecast is comprised of a unit mix of 96% low density (single detached and semi-detached), 2% medium density (multiples) and 2% high density (apartments).

Planning Period •

Short and longer-term time horizons are required for the D.C. process. The D.C.A. limits the planning horizon for certain services, such as parks, recreation and libraries, to a 10-year planning horizon. Services related to a highway, public works, fire, police, stormwater, water and wastewater services can utilize a longer planning period.

Population in New Housing Units (Appendix A - Schedules 3, 4 and 5) •

•

The number of housing units to be constructed in the Township of South Frontenac during the short- and long-term periods is presented on Figure 3-2. Over the 2019 to 2034 forecast period, the Township is anticipated to average 104 new permanent and seasonal housing units per year. Institutional population 1 is anticipated to grow modestly by 8 persons between 2019 to 2034.

1 Institutional includes special care facilities such as nursing home or residences for

senior citizens. A P.P.U. of 1.100 depicts 1-bedroom and 2 or more bedroom units in these special care facilities.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-6

Page 59 of 297

•

Population in new units is derived from Schedules 3, 4, and 5, which incorporate historical development activity, anticipated units (see unit mix discussion) and average persons per unit (P.P.U.) by dwelling type for new units. Schedules 7a and 7b summarize the P.P.U. for the new housing units by age and type of dwelling based on a 2016 custom Census data. The total calculated P.P.U. for all density types has been downwardly adjusted to account for the P.P.U. trends which has been recently experienced in both new and older units. Forecasted 20-year average P.P.U.s by dwelling type are as follows: o Low density: 2.745 o Medium density: 2.200 1 o High density : 1.599

Existing Units and Population Change (Appendix A - Schedules 3, 4 and 5) •

Existing households for mid-2019 are based on the 2016 Census households, plus estimated residential units constructed between mid2016 and 2019 assuming a 6-month lag between construction and occupancy (see Schedule 3).

•

The decline in average occupancy levels for existing housing units is calculated in Schedules 3 through 5, by aging the existing population over the forecast period. The forecast population decline in existing households over the 2019 to 2034 forecast period is approximately 1,290.

Employment (Appendix A, Schedules 9a, 9b, 9c, 10 and 11) •

Employment projections are largely based on the activity rate method, which is defined as the number of jobs in a municipality divided by the number of residents. Key employment sectors include primary, industrial, commercial/ population-related, institutional, and work at home, which are considered individually below.

1 Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2 or more bedroom apartments

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-7

Page 60 of 297

•

2016 employment data 1 (place of work) for the Township of South Frontenac is outlined in Schedule 9a. The 2016 employment base is comprised of the following sectors: • •

40 primary (2%); 775 work at home employment (37%);

• •

218 industrial (11%); 523 commercial/population related (25%); and

•

520 institutional (25%).

The 2016 employment by usual place of work, including work at home, is estimated at 2,075. An additional 1,200 employees have been identified for the Township in 2016 that have no fixed place of work (N.F.P.O.W.). 2 The 2016 employment base, including N.F.P.O.W., totals approximately 3,275. Total employment, including work at home and N.F.P.O.W., for the Township of South Frontenac is anticipated to reach approximately 3,840 by mid-2029 and 4,040 by mid-2034. This represents an employment increase of 450 for the 10-year forecast period and 650 for the 15-year forecast period. Schedule 9b, Appendix A, summarizes the employment forecast, excluding work at home employment and N.F.P.O.W. employment, which is the basis for the D.C. employment forecast. The impact on municipal services from work at home employees has already been included in the population forecast. The need for municipal services related to N.F.P.O.W. employees has largely been included in the employment forecast by usual place of work (i.e. employment and gross floor area generated from N.F.P.O.W. construction employment). Furthermore,

1 2016 employment is based on Statistics Canada 2016 Place of Work Employment

dataset. 2 Statistics Canada defines “No Fixed Place of Work” (N.F.P.O.W.) employees as, “persons who do not go from home to the same work place location at the beginning of each shift. Such persons include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc.”

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-8

Page 61 of 297

since these employees have no fixed work address, they cannot be captured in the non-residential gross floor area (G.F.A.) calculation. •

Total employment for the Township of South Frontenac (excluding work at home and N.F.P.O.W. employment) is anticipated to reach approximately 1,560 by mid-2029 and 1,620 by mid-2034. This represents an employment increase of 200 and 260 over the 10-year and 15-year forecast periods, respectively.

Non-Residential Sq.ft. Estimates (Gross Floor Area (G.F.A.), Appendix A, Schedule 9b) •

Square footage estimates were calculated in Schedule 9b based on the following employee density assumptions: o 1,500 sq.ft. per employee for industrial; o 550 sq.ft. per employee for commercial/population-related; and o 659 sq.ft. per employee for institutional employment. • The Township-wide incremental Gross Floor Area (G.F.A.) increase is anticipated to be approximately 170,000 sq.ft. over the 10-year forecast period and 222,200 sq.ft. over the 2019 to 2034 forecast period, downwardly adjusted to account for institutional development associated with special care facilities.

•

In terms of percentage growth, the 2019 to 2034 incremental G.F.A. forecast by sector is broken down as follows:

industrial – 56%;
commercial/population-related – 29%; and
institutional – 15%.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-9

Page 62 of 297

Chapter 4 The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 3-10

Page 63 of 297

The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge 4.1 Introduction This chapter addresses the requirements of subsection 5 (1) of the D.C.A. with respect to the establishment of the need for service which underpins the D.C. calculation. These requirements are illustrated schematically in Figure 4-1.

4.2 Increase in the Need for Service The D.C. calculation commences with an estimate of “the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development,” for each service to be covered by the by-law. There must be some form of link or attribution between the anticipated development and the estimated increase in the need for service. While the need could conceivably be expressed generally in terms of units of capacity, subsection 5 (1) 3, which requires that Township Council indicate that it intends to ensure that such an increase in need will be met, suggests that a project-specific expression of need would be most appropriate.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-1

Page 64 of 297

Figure 4-1 The Process of Calculating a Development Charge under the Act that must be followed

Anticipated Development 1. Tax Base, User Rates, etc.

Ineligible Services

Estimated Increase in Need for Service Subdivision Agreements and Consent Provisions

Ceiling Re: Increased Need

Specified Local Services

D.C. Needs By Service

Needs That Will Be Met

Examination of the Long-term Capital and Operating Costs for Capital Infrastructure 6.

Asset Management Plan for All Capital Projects to be Funded by D.C.s 7. 1

Less: Uncommitted Excess Capacity 10.

Less: Benefit To Existing Development 11.

Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other 12. Contributions

Less: 10% Where Applicable

Non-Transit Services Historical Service Standard 4a. Transit Services Forward-looking Service 4b. Standard

Non-Transit Services “Financially Sustainable” 7a. Transit Services “Detailed Requirements” 7b.

D.C. Net Capital Costs Financing, Inflation and Investment Considerations 15.

Costs for new development vs. existing development for the term of the by-law and the balance of the period 14.

D.C. By-law(s) Spatial Applicability 16.

Amount of the Charge By Type of Development (including apportionment of costs - residential and 17. non-residential)

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Consideration of exemptions, phase-ins, etc.

PAGE 4-2

Page 65 of 297

4.3 Services Potentially Involved Table 4-1 lists the full range of municipal service categories which are provided within the Township. A number of these services are defined in subsection 2 (4) of the D.C.A. as being ineligible for inclusion in D.C.s. These are shown as “ineligible” on Table 4-1. Two ineligible costs defined in subsection 5 (3) of the D.C.A. are “computer equipment” and “rolling stock with an estimated useful life of (less than) seven years…” In addition, local roads are covered separately under subdivision agreements and related means (as are other local services). Services which are potentially eligible for inclusion in the Township’s D.C. are indicated with a “Yes.” Table 4-1 Categories of Municipal Services to be Addressed as Part of the Calculation Eligibility for Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation Yes No n/a Ineligible

Description Municipality provides the service – service has been included in the D.C. calculation. Municipality provides the service – service has not been included in the D.C. calculation. Municipality does not provide the service. Service is ineligible for inclusion in the D.C. calculation.

Eligibility Categories of for Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation 1.

Services Related to a Highway

Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes

Service Components

1.1 Arterial roads 1.2 Collector roads 1.3 Bridges, Culverts and Roundabouts 1.4 Local municipal roads 1.5 Traffic signals 1.6 Sidewalks and streetlights 1.7 Active Transportation

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Maximum Potential D.C. Recovery % 100 100 100 0 100 100 100

PAGE 4-3

Page 66 of 297

Eligibility Categories of for Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation 2.

Other Transportation Services

n/a n/a n/a n/a

Stormwater Drainage and Control Services

Fire Protection Services

Outdoor Recreation Services (i.e. Parks and Open Space)

Yes Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Yes Yes Yes Ineligible Yes Yes Yes Yes

Indoor Recreation Services

Yes Yes Yes

Service Components

2.1 Transit vehicles1 & facilities 2.2 Other transit infrastructure 2.3 Municipal parking spaces indoor 2.4 Municipal parking spaces outdoor 2.5 Works Yards 2.6 Rolling stock 1 2.7 Ferries 2.8 Airport 3.1 Main channels and drainage trunks 3.2 Channel connections 3.3 Retention/detention ponds 4.1 Fire stations 4.2 Fire pumpers, aerials and rescue vehicles1 4.3 Small equipment and gear 5.1 Acquisition of land for parks, woodlots and E.S.A.s 5.2 Development of area municipal parks 5.3 Development of district parks 5.4 Development of municipalwide parks 5.5 Development of special purpose parks 5.6 Parks rolling stock1 and yards 6.1 Arenas, indoor pools, fitness facilities, community centres, etc. (including land) 6.2 Recreation vehicles and equipment 2

Maximum Potential D.C. Recovery % 100 100 90 90 100 100 90 90 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

1with 7+ year life time

*same percentage as service component to which it pertains computer equipment excluded throughout 2with 7+ year life time

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-4

Page 67 of 297

Eligibility Categories of for Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation 7.

Library Services

Electrical Power Services

Provision of Cultural, Entertainment and Tourism Facilities and Convention Centres 10. Wastewater Services

Water Supply Services
Waste Management Services

Yes n/a n/a Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible

n/a n/a n/a n/a No No n/a No Ineligible Ineligible No No

Police Services
Homes for the Aged
Child Care

Yes n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Service Components

7.1 Public library space (incl. furniture and equipment) 7.2 Library vehicles¹ 7.3 Library materials 8.1 Electrical substations 8.2 Electrical distribution system 8.3 Electrical system rolling stock 9.1 Cultural space (e.g. art galleries, museums and theatres) 9.2 Tourism facilities and convention centres

10.1 Treatment plants 10.2 Sewage trunks 10.3 Local systems 10.4 Vehicles and equipment1 11.1 Treatment plants 11.2 Distribution systems 11.3 Local systems 11.4 Vehicles and equipment1 12.1 Landfill collection, transfer vehicles and equipment 12.2 Landfills and other disposal facilities 12.3 Waste diversion facilities 12.4 Waste diversion vehicles and equipment1 13.1 Police detachments 13.2 Police rolling stock1 13.3 Small equipment and gear 14.1 Homes for the aged space 14.2 Vehicles1 15.1 Child care space 15.2 Vehicles1

Maximum Potential D.C. Recovery % 90 90 90 0 0 0 0 0

100 100 0 100 100 100 0 100 0 0 90 90 100 100 100 90 90 90 90

1with 7+ year life time

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-5

Page 68 of 297

Service Components

Maximum Potential D.C. Recovery %

n/a n/a n/a n/a

16.1 Health department space 16.2 Health department vehicles¹ 17.1 Social Housing space 18.1 P.O.A. space

90 90 90 90

n/a n/a n/a Ineligible

19.1 Social service space 20.1 Ambulance station space 20.2 Vehicles1 21.1 Hospital capital contributions

90 90 90 0

Ineligible Ineligible Ineligible

22.1 Office space 22.2 Office furniture 22.3 Computer equipment

0 0 0

Eligibility Categories of for Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation 16. Health 17. Social Housing 18. Provincial Offences Act (P.O.A.) 19. Social Services 20. Ambulance 21. Hospital Provision 22. Provision of Headquarters for the General Administration of Municipalities and Area Municipal Boards 23. Other Services

Yes

23.1 Studies in connection with acquiring buildings, rolling stock, materials and equipment, and improving land2 and facilities, including the D.C. background study cost 23.2 Interest on money borrowed to pay for growth-related capital

0-100 0-100

1with a 7+ year life time 2same percentage as service component to which it pertains

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-6

Page 69 of 297

4.4 Local Service Policy Some of the need for services generated by additional development consists of local services related to a plan of subdivision. As such, they will be required as a condition of subdivision agreements or consent conditions.

4.5 Capital Forecast Paragraph 7 of subsection 5 (1) of the D.C.A. requires that “the capital costs necessary to provide the increased services must be estimated.” The Act goes on to require two potential cost reductions and the Regulation sets out the way in which such costs are to be presented. These requirements are outlined below. These estimates involve capital costing of the increased services discussed above. This entails costing actual projects or the provision of service units, depending on how each service has been addressed. The capital costs include: a) costs to acquire land or an interest therein (including a leasehold interest); b) costs to improve land; c) costs to acquire, lease, construct or improve buildings and structures; d) costs to acquire, lease or improve facilities, including rolling stock (with a useful life of 7 or more years), furniture and equipment (other than computer equipment), materials acquired for library circulation, reference or information purposes; e) interest on money borrowed to pay for the above-referenced costs; f) costs to undertake studies in connection with the above-referenced matters; and g) costs of the D.C. background study. In order for an increase in need for service to be included in the D.C. calculation, Township Council must indicate “…that it intends to ensure that such an increase in need will be met” (subsection 5 (1) 3). This can be done if the increase in service forms part of a Council-approved Official Plan, capital forecast or similar expression of the intention of Council (O.Reg. 82/98 section 3). The capital program contained herein reflects the Township’s approved and proposed capital budgets and master servicing/needs studies.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-7

Page 70 of 297

4.6 Treatment of Credits Section 8, paragraph 5, of O.Reg. 82/98 indicates that a D.C. background study must set out “the estimated value of credits that are being carried forward relating to the service.” Subsection 17, paragraph 4, of the same Regulation indicates that “…the value of the credit cannot be recovered from future D.C.s,” if the credit pertains to an ineligible service. This implies that a credit for eligible services can be recovered from future D.C.s. As a result, this provision should be made in the calculation, in order to avoid a funding shortfall with respect to future service needs. There are no outstanding credit obligations for inclusion in the D.C. calculations.

4.7 Existing Reserve Funds Section 35 of the D.C.A. states that: “The money in a reserve fund established for a service may be spent only for capital costs determined under paragraphs 2 to 8 of subsection 5 (1).” There is no explicit requirement under the D.C.A. calculation method set out in subsection 5 (1) to net the outstanding reserve fund balance as part of making the D.C. calculation; however, section 35 does restrict the way in which the funds are used in future. For services which are subject to a per capita based, service level “cap,” the reserve fund balance should be applied against the development-related costs for which the charge was imposed once the project is constructed (i.e. the needs of recent growth). This cost component is distinct from the development-related costs for the next 10-year period, which underlie the D.C. calculation herein. The alternative would involve the Township spending all reserve fund monies prior to renewing each by-law, which would not be a sound basis for capital budgeting. Thus, the Township will use these reserve funds for the Township’s cost share of applicable development-related projects, which are required but have not yet been undertaken, as a way of directing the funds to the benefit of the development which contributed them (rather than to future development, which will generate the need for additional facilities directly proportionate to future growth).

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-8

Page 71 of 297

The Township’s D.C. Reserve Fund Balance 1by service at December 31, 2018 is shown below:

Service Services Related to a Highway Fire Protection Services Police and Other Facilities Parks and Recreation Library Services Administration Total

Balance as at Dec 31/18 $1,934,664 $5,400 $146,067 $216,287 $64,332 $39,402 $2,406,152

4.8 Deductions The D.C.A. potentially requires that five deductions be made to the increase in the need for service. These relate to: • •

the level of service ceiling; uncommitted excess capacity;

• •

benefit to existing development; anticipated grants, subsidies and other contributions; and

•

10% reduction for certain services.

The requirements behind each of these reductions are addressed as follows:

4.8.1 Reduction Required by Level of Service Ceiling This is designed to ensure that the increase in need included in section 4.3 does “…not include an increase that would result in the level of service (for the additional development increment) exceeding the average level of the service provided in the Municipality over the 10-year period immediately preceding the preparation of the background study…” O.Reg. 82.98 (section 4) goes further to indicate that “…both the quantity and quality of a service shall be taken into account in determining the level of service and the average level of service.”

Reserve balance to be combined with Administration Studies.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-9

Page 72 of 297

In many cases, this can be done by establishing a quantity measure in terms of units as floor area, land area or road length per capita and a quality measure, in terms of the average cost of providing such units based on replacement costs, engineering standards or recognized performance measurement systems, depending on circumstances. When the quantity and quality factor are multiplied together, they produce a measure of the level of service, which meets the requirements of the Act, i.e. cost per unit. With respect to transit services, the changes to the Act as a result of Bill 73 have provided for an alternative method for calculating the services standard ceiling. Transit services must now utilize a forward-looking service standard analysis. The Township does not currently, and in the near future does not intend to, provide transit services. Therefore, this change to the Act is not applicable to the Township. The average service level calculation sheets for each service component in the D.C. calculation are set out in Appendix B.

4.8.2 Reduction for Uncommitted Excess Capacity Paragraph 5 of subsection 5 (1) requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the Township’s “excess capacity,” other than excess capacity which is “committed.” “Excess capacity” is undefined, but in this case must be able to meet some or all of the increase in need for service, in order to potentially represent a deduction. The deduction of uncommitted excess capacity from the future increase in the need for service would normally occur as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with justifying and sizing new facilities, e.g. if a road widening to accommodate increased traffic is not required because sufficient excess capacity is already available, then widening would not be included as an increase in need, in the first instance.

4.8.3 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development Section 5 (1) 6 of the D.C.A. provides that, “The increase in the need for service must be reduced by the extent to which an increase in service to meet the increased need would benefit existing development.” The general guidelines used to consider benefit to existing development included:

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-10

Page 73 of 297

•

the repair or unexpanded replacement of existing assets that are in need of repair;

•

an increase in average service level of quantity or quality (compare water as an example);

• •

the elimination of a chronic servicing problem not created by growth; and providing services where none previously existed (generally considered for water or wastewater services).

This step involves a further reduction in the need, by the extent to which such an increase in service would benefit existing development. The level of services cap in section 4.4 is related but is not the identical requirement. Sanitary, storm and water trunks are highly localized to growth areas and can be more readily allocated in this regard than other services such as services related to a highway, which do not have a fixed service area. Where existing development has an adequate service level which will not be tangibly increased by an increase in service, no benefit would appear to be involved. For example, where expanding existing library facilities simply replicates what existing residents are receiving, they receive very limited (or no) benefit as a result. On the other hand, where a clear existing service problem is to be remedied, a deduction should be made accordingly. In the case of services such as recreation facilities, community parks, libraries, etc., the service is typically provided on a Township-wide system basis. For example, facilities of the same type may provide different services (i.e. leisure pool vs. competitive pool), different programs (i.e. hockey vs. figure skating) and different time availability for the same service (i.e. leisure skating available on Wednesday in one arena and Thursday in another). As a result, residents will travel to different facilities to access the services they want at the times they wish to use them, and facility location generally does not correlate directly with residence location. Even where it does, displacing users from an existing facility to a new facility frees up capacity for use by others and generally results in only a very limited benefit to existing development. Further, where an increase in demand is not met for a number of years, a negative service impact to existing development is involved for a portion of the planning period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-11

Page 74 of 297

4.8.4 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions This step involves reducing the capital costs necessary to provide the increased services by capital grants, subsidies and other contributions (including direct developer contributions required due to the local service policy) made or anticipated by Council and in accordance with various rules such as the attribution between the share related to new vs. existing development. That is, some grants and contributions may not specifically be applicable to growth or where Council targets fundraising as a measure to offset impacts on taxes (O.Reg. 82/98 section 6).

4.8.5 The 10% Reduction Paragraph 8 of subsection 5 (1) of the D.C.A. requires that, “the capital costs must be reduced by 10 per cent.” This paragraph does not apply to water supply services, waste water services, storm water drainage and control services, services related to a highway, police and fire protection services. The primary services to which the 10% reduction does apply include services such as parks, recreation, libraries, childcare/ social services, the Provincial Offences Act, ambulance, homes for the aged, and health. The 10% is to be netted from the capital costs necessary to provide the increased services, once the other deductions have been made, as per the infrastructure costs sheets in Chapter 5.

4.9 Municipal-wide vs. Area Rating This step involves determining whether all of the subject costs are to be recovered on a uniform municipal-wide basis or whether some or all are to be recovered on an areaspecific basis. Under the amended D.C.A., it is now mandatory to “consider” area-rating of services (providing charges for specific areas and services), however, it is not mandatory to implement area-rating. Further discussion is provided in section 7.4.4.

4.10 Allocation of Development This step involves relating the costs involved to anticipated development for each period under consideration and using allocations between residential and non-residential

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-12

Page 75 of 297

development and between one type of development and another, to arrive at a schedule of charges.

4.11 Asset Management The new legislation now requires that a D.C. background study must include an asset management plan (subsection 10 (2) c. 2). The asset management plan (A.M.P.) must deal with all assets that are proposed to be funded, in whole or in part, by D.C.s. The current regulations provide very extensive and specific requirements for the A.M.P. related to transit services (as noted in the subsequent subsection); however, they are silent with respect to how the A.M.P. is to be provided for all other services. As part of any A.M.P., the examination should be consistent with the municipality’s existing assumptions, approaches and policies on the asset management planning. This examination has been included in Appendix F.

4.12 Transit The most significant changes to the Act relate to the transit service. The Township does not currently, and in the near future does not intend to, provide transit services. Therefore, calculations and reporting requirements relating to transit are not required.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 4-13

Page 76 of 297

Chapter 5 D.C.-Eligible Cost Analysis by Service

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 77 of 297

D.C.-Eligible Cost Analysis by Service 5.1 Introduction This chapter outlines the basis for calculating eligible costs for the D.C.s to be applied on a uniform basis. In each case, the required calculation process set out in subsection 5 (1) paragraphs 2 to 8 in the D.C.A. and described in Chapter 4, was followed in determining D.C.-eligible costs. The nature of the capital projects and timing identified in the Chapter reflects Council’s current intention. Over time, however, Township projects and Council priorities change and accordingly, Council’s intentions may alter and different capital projects (and timing) may be required to meet the need for services required by new growth.

5.2 Service Levels and 10-Year Capital Costs for D.C. Calculation This section evaluates the development-related capital requirements for all of the “softer” services over a 10-year planning period. Each service component is evaluated on two format sheets: the average historical 10-year level of service calculation (see Appendix B), which “caps” the D.C. amounts; and, the infrastructure cost calculation, which determines the potential D.C. recoverable cost.

5.2.1 Parks and Recreation The Township currently has 122.86 acres of parkland within its jurisdiction consisting of various sized parks. The Township has sustained the current level of service over the historical 10-year period (2009 to 2018), with an average of 4.2 acres of parkland and 2 parkland amenities items per 1,000 population. Including parkland and parkland amenities (e.g. ball diamonds, playground equipment, soccer fields, etc.), the level of service provided is approximately $417 per capita. When applied over the forecast period, this average level of service translates into a D.C.-eligible amount of $803,585. With respect to recreation facilities, there are currently five facilities provided by the Township, in addition to the Frontenac Community Arena which is shared with Central

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-2

Page 78 of 297

Frontenac. These six facilities provide a total of 26,685 sq.ft. of space. The average historical level of service for the previous ten years has been approximately 0.91 sq.ft. of space per capita or an investment of $233 per capita. The Township also provides for a Zamboni at the Frontenac Community Arena (of which South Frontenac is responsible for 59% of the cost). This provides a service standard of $4/per capita. Based on these service standards, the Township would be eligible to collect $456,000 from D.C.s. The total D.C. eligible amount for parks and recreation over the forecast period is $1,259,585. The Township has provided for the need for additional parkland development and recreation facility space. The needs include items such as a new splash pad, skateboard park, as well as additional indoor recreation space. The growth-related cost of these projects is $1,475,000. A deduction has been made in the amount of $216,287 to account for the reserve fund balance, resulting in a net D.C. amount of $1,111,213, after the mandatory 10% deduction. As the predominant users of parks and recreation tend to be residents of the Township, the forecast growth-related costs have been allocated 95% to residential and 5% to non-residential.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-3

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Parks and Recreation Less:

Less: Prj.No

1 2

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2019-2028 Provision for Additional Parkland Development & Recreation Facility Space Reserve Fund Adjustment

Timing (year)

Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2019$)

2019-2028

Total

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Other Deductions

Net Capital Cost

1,475,000

Subtotal

1,475,000

216,287

(216,287)

216,287

1,258,713

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost

Other (e.g. 10% Statutory Deduction)

Total

147,500

1,327,500

1,261,125

66,375

(216,287)

(205,472)

(10,814)

1,111,213

1,055,653

55,561

147,500

Residential Share

NonResidential Share

95%

PAGE 5-4

Page 79 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

1,475,000

Post Period Benefit

Grants, Benefit to Subsidies and Other Existing Development Contribution s Attributable

Page 80 of 297

5.2.2 Police and Other Facilities The Township of South Frontenac has one O.P.P. Station at 9,396 sq.ft. within its jurisdiction. Other facilities include the Town Hall, Princess Anne Sharing Centre and the Verona Medical Centre. These facilities provide for an average historical level of service of 0.62 sq.ft. per capita or an investment of $166 per capita. Based on this service standard, the Township would be eligible to collect $319,485 from D.C.s for facility space. The Township has provided for the need for upgrades/enhancements to police facility space as well as a Town Hall expansion. The growth-related cost of these projects is $325,000 which has been included in the D.C. calculation. A deduction of $146,067 has been made to account for the existing reserve fund balance. The Police facility represents approximately 50% of the service standard and as this is a service that does not require the 10% mandatory deduction, a 5% deduction has been taken to account for the facility space that is not attributable to police. Therefore, the net growth capital cost after the 5% deduction is $162,683 and has been included in the D.C. These costs have been allocated 91% residential and 9% non-residential based on the incremental growth in population to employment for the 10-year forecast period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-5

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Police and Other Facilities

Prj .No

1 2

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2019-2028 Provision for Additional Facility Space Reserve Fund Adjustment

Timing (year) 2019-2028

Gross Capital Post Period Other Net Capital Benefit to Cost Benefit Deductions Cost Existing Estimate Development (2019$) 325,000 325,000 146,067

Total 325,000 *Statutory deduction is allocated towards facility space other than police

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

325,000

146,067

Less: Subtotal

Other (e.g. 5% Statutory Deduction)*

325,000 (146,067)

16,250

178,933

16,250

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost NonResidential Residential Total Share Share 91% 9% 308,750 280,963 27,788 (13,146) (146,067) (132,921)

162,683

148,042

14,641

PAGE 5-6

Page 81 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New

Page 82 of 297

5.2.3 Library Services The Township provides three library facilities which total 5,950 sq.ft. in library space. Over the past ten years, the average level of service was 0.18 sq.ft. of space per capita or an investment of $51 per capita. Based on the service standard over the past ten years, the Township would be eligible to collect a total of $97,879 from D.C.s for library services. Based on the projected growth over the 10-year forecast period, the Township has identified the need for additional library space to service growth. As the exact locations and nature of this facility space has not yet been identified a provision of $160,000 has been included in the D.C. A deduction of $64,332 has been made to account for the existing reserve fund balance leading to an amount of $79,668, after the 10% mandatory deduction, which has been included in the D.C. calculation. While library usage is predominately residential based, there is some use of the facilities by non-residential users, for the purpose of research. To acknowledge this use, the growth-related capital costs have been allocated 95% residential and 5% nonresidential.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-7

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service Library Facilities Less:

Prj.No

1 2

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development

2019-2028 Provision for additional library space Reserve Fund Adjustment

Timing (year)

2019-2028

Total

Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2019$)

160,000

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Other Deductions

Net Capital Cost

160,000

Grants, Subsidies Benefit to and Other Existing Contribution Development s Attributable to New Development

Subtotal

160,000

64,332

(64,332)

64,332

95,668

Other (e.g. 10% Statutory Deduction)

16,000

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost

Total

Residential Share

NonResidential Share

95%

144,000

136,800

7,200

(64,332)

(61,116)

(3,217)

79,668

75,684

3,983

PAGE 5-8

Page 83 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Post Period Benefit

Less:

Page 84 of 297

5.2.4 Community Based Studies The D.C.A. permits the inclusion of studies undertaken to facilitate the completion of the Township’s capital works program. The Township has made provision for the inclusion of new studies undertaken to facilitate this D.C. process, as well as other studies which benefit growth (in whole or in part). The list of studies related to recreation, culture and planning includes such studies as the following: •

Growth Management Study;

• •

Official Plan; and Recreation Master Plan.

The cost of these studies is $330,000, of which $45,000 is attributable to existing benefit. The net growth-related capital cost, after the mandatory 10% deduction, is $256,500 and has been included in the D.C. These costs have been allocated 91% residential and 9% non-residential based on the incremental growth in population to employment for the 10-year forecast period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-9

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Community Based Studies Less:

Prj.No

1 2 3

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development

2019-2028 Growth Management Study Official Plan Recreation Master Plan

Timing (year)

Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2019$)

Post Period Benefit

150,000 150,000 30,000

330,000

2019 2019-2021 2020

Total

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Net Capital Cost

Benefit to Existing Development

150,000 150,000 30,000

37,500 7,500

330,000

45,000

Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development

Subtotal

Other (e.g. 10% Statutory Deduction)

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost

Total

Residential Share

NonResidential Share

150,000 112,500 22,500

15,000 11,250 2,250

135,000 101,250 20,250

91% 122,850 92,138 18,428

9% 12,150 9,113 1,823

285,000

28,500

256,500

233,415

23,085

PAGE 5-10

Page 85 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Other Deductions

Less:

Page 86 of 297

5.2.5 Engineering Services – Studies In addition to the studies identified in Section 5.2.4, studies related to “hard” services as well as the D.C. study have been included in the calculation. The list of studies related to these items includes the following: • •

Transportation Master Plan; Firehall Study; and

•

Development Charges Studies.

The cost of these studies is $160,000, of which $12,500 is attributable to existing benefit. A further deduction of $39,402 has been made to account for the existing reserve fund balance. The net growth-related capital cost, after the mandatory 10% deduction, is $98,598 and has been included in the D.C. These costs have been allocated 91% residential and 9% non-residential based on the incremental growth in population to employment for the 10-year forecast period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-11

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Engineering Services - Studies Less:

Less:

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Prj.No

1 2 3 4 5

2019-2028 Transportation Master Plan Firehall Study Development Charges Study Development Charges Study Reserve Fund Adjustment

Timing (year)

Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2019$)

Post Period Benefit

2020 2019 2019 2024

50,000 15,000 40,000 55,000

160,000

Total

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Net Capital Cost

50,000 15,000 40,000 55,000

12,500 39,402

160,000

51,902

Subtotal

37,500 15,000 40,000 55,000 (39,402)

108,098

Other (e.g. 10% Statutory Deduction)

4,000 5,500

9,500

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost

Residential Share

NonResidential Share

37,500 15,000 36,000 49,500 (39,402)

91% 34,125 13,650 32,760 45,045 (35,856)

9% 3,375 1,350 3,240 4,455 (3,546)

98,598

89,724

8,874

Total

PAGE 5-12

Page 87 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Other Deductions

Grants, Subsidies Benefit to and Other Existing Contribution Development s Attributable to New Development

Page 88 of 297

5.3 Service Levels and 15-Year Capital Costs for South Frontenac’s D.C. Calculation This section evaluates the development-related capital requirements for those services with 15-year capital costs.

5.3.1 Services Related to a Highway – Roads, Bridges, Structures, Streetlighting and Traffic Signals South Frontenac owns and maintains 787 km of local and arterial roads. This provides an average level of investment of $12,179 per capita, resulting in a D.C.-eligible recovery amount of approximately $33.7 million over the 15-year forecast period. The Township also has 61 culverts, arches, beams and related infrastructure to support roads throughout the Township which equates to $1,003 per capita and a D.C.recoverable amount of approximately $2.78 million over the 15-year forecast period. Further, the Township provides 494 streetlights and traffic signals, which equate to an average level of investment of $82 per capita, and a D.C.-recoverable amount of $227,171 over the 15-year forecast period. In total the D.C.-recoverable amount for Services Related to a Highway – Roads, equal $36,700,382. The Township has identified $12,000,000 of future growth-related capital related to roads, bridges and structures. The capital projects forecasted include various works related to enhancing capacity, buildings sidewalks, improving shoulders and adding cycling facilities. A deduction for the existing reserve fund balance of $1,934,664 has been made resulting in a D.C.-eligible amount of $10,065,336 to be recovered over the current forecast period (2019 to 2033). The capital costs are shared 91%/9% between residential and non-residential based on the population to employment ratio over the 15-year forecast period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-13

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Services Related to a Highway - Roads, Bridges, Structures, Streetlights and Traffic Signals

Prj .No

1 2

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2019-2033 Provision for Additional Roads, Bridges & Structures Reserve Fund Adjustment

Timing (year)

2019-2033

Total

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

12,000,000

Benefit to Existing Development 1,934,664

1,934,664

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost

Total

Residential Share

NonResidential Share

91%

12,000,000

10,920,000

1,080,000

(1,934,664)

(1,760,545)

(174,120)

10,065,336

9,159,455

905,880

PAGE 5-14

Page 89 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Gross Capital Net Capital Post Period Other Cost Estimate Cost Benefit Deductions (2019$)

Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development

Page 90 of 297

5.3.2 Services Related to a Highway - Public Works Facilities, Fleet & Equipment The Township operates their Public Works service out of a number of facilities. The facilities provide 111,899 sq.ft. of building area, providing for an average level of service of 3.22 sq.ft. per capita or $423 per capita. This level of service provides the Township with a maximum D.C.-eligible amount for recovery over the 15-year forecast period of $1,169,279. A renovation and expansion to the Keely Road Administrative Building has been identified at a gross cost of $925,000. A deduction of $489,830 has been made to account for the benefit to existing development resulting in a net amount of $435,170 included in the D.C. The Public Works Department has a variety of vehicles and major equipment totalling approximately $9.67 million. The inventory provides for a per capita standard of $338. Over the forecast period, the D.C.-eligible amount for vehicles and equipment is $935,882. Additional vehicle and equipment items have been identified for the forecast period, amounting to $900,000 of growth-related capital which has been included in the D.C. calculation. The residential/non-residential capital cost allocation for facilities and fleet is based on a 91%/9% split which is based on the incremental growth in population to employment for the 15-year forecast period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-15

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Public Works Facilities

Prj .No

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2019-2033 Keely Road Administrative Building Renovation and Expansion

Timing (year)

2019-2020

Total

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Post Period Other Benefit Deductions

925,000

Net Capital Cost

Benefit to Existing Development

925,000

489,830

925,000

489,830

Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost

Total

Residential Share

NonResidential Share

91%

435,170

396,005

39,165

435,170

396,005

39,165

PAGE 5-16

Page 91 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2019$)

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Public Works Fleet & Equipment

Prj .No

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2019-2033 New Vehicles/Equipment

Timing (year)

Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2019$)

2019-2028

900,000

Total

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Benefit to Existing Development

900,000

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost NonResidential Share

Total

Residential Share

900,000

91% 819,000

9% 81,000

900,000

819,000

81,000

PAGE 5-17

Page 92 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Post Period Other Net Capital Cost Benefit Deductions

Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development

Page 93 of 297

5.3.3 Fire Protection Services South Frontenac currently operates its fire services from 28,786 sq.ft. of facility space, providing for a per capita average level of service of 0.91 sq.ft. per capita or $208 per capita. This level of service provides the Township with a maximum D.C.-eligible amount for recovery over the forecast period of $576,587. The fire department has a current inventory of 32 vehicles. The total D.C.-eligible amount calculated for fire vehicles over the forecast period is $993,962, based on a standard of $359 per capita. The fire department provides 282 items of equipment and gear for the use in fire services. This results in a calculated average level of service for the historical 10-year period of $47 per capita, providing for a D.C.-eligible amount over the forecast period of $130,519 for small equipment and gear. The total maximum D.C.-eligible amount over the forecast period for fire services is $1,701,068. The Township has identified the need for additional facility space. This includes renovating and expanding existing stations as well as the development of a fire headquarters. This facility has been identified to include a large training room, office space and a boardroom. A provision for the cost of these facilities has been included in the D.C. at an amount of $1,615,000. The need for two additional SUV’s has also been identified at a gross cost of $90,000. A deduction of $5,400 has been made to account for the existing reserve fund balance resulting in an amount of $1,699,600 to be included in the D.C. calculations. These costs are shared between residential and non-residential based on the population to employment ratio over the forecast period, resulting in 91% being allocated to residential development and 9% being allocated to non-residential development.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 5-18

Infrastructure Costs Included in the Development Charges Calculation Township of South Frontenac Service: Fire Services

Prj .No

1 2 3

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2019-2033 Provision for Additional Space SUV (2) Reserve Fund Adjustment

Timing (year)

2019-2033 2020-2022

Total

Gross Capital Cost Post Period Other Net Capital Benefit to Cost Estimate Benefit Deductions Existing (2019$) Development 1,615,000 90,000

1,705,000

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

1,615,000 90,000

5,400

1,705,000

5,400

Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost NonResidential Share

Total

Residential Share

1,615,000 90,000 (5,400)

91% 1,469,650 81,900 (4,914)

9% 145,350 8,100 (486)

1,699,600

1,546,636

152,964

Page 94 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development

Page 95 of 297

Chapter 6 D.C. Calculation

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 96 of 297

D.C. Calculation Table 6-1 calculates the proposed uniform D.C. to be imposed on anticipated development in the Township for Township-wide services over a 15-year planning horizon. Table 6-2 calculates the proposed uniform D.C. to be imposed on anticipated development in the Township for Township-wide services over a 10-year planning horizon The calculation for residential development is generated on a per capita basis and is based upon five forms of housing types (singles and semi-detached, apartments 2+ bedrooms, apartments bachelor and 1 bedroom, all other multiples and special care/special dwelling units). The non-residential D.C. has been calculated on a per sq.ft. of gross floor area basis for all types of non-residential development (industrial, commercial and institutional). The D.C.-eligible costs for each service component were developed in Chapter 5 for all Township services, based on their proposed capital programs. For the residential calculations, the total cost is divided by the “gross” (new resident) population to determine the per capita amount. The eligible D.C. cost calculations set out in Chapter 5 are based on the net anticipated population increase (the forecast new unit population less the anticipated decline in existing units). The cost per capita is then multiplied by the average occupancy of the new units (Appendix A, Schedule 5) to calculate the charge in Tables 6-1 and 6-2. With respect to non-residential development, the total costs in the uniform charge allocated to non-residential development (based on need for service) have been divided by the anticipated development over the planning period to calculate a cost per sq.ft. of gross floor area. Table 6-3 summarizes the total D.C. that is applicable for municipal-wide services and Table 6-4 summarizes the gross capital expenditures and sources of revenue for works to be undertaken during the 5-year life of the by-law.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 6-1

Page 97 of 297

Table 6-1 Township of South Frontenac Development Charge Calculation Municipal-wide Services 2019-2033 2019$ D.C.-Eligible Cost Residential Non-Residential

SERVICE

Services Related to a Highway 1.1 Roads, bridges, culverts, structures, streetlights & traffic signals 1.2 Public Works facilities 1.3 Public Works fleet & equipment

2019$ D.C.-Eligible Cost S.D.U. per sq.ft. $

9,159,455 396,005 819,000 10,374,460

905,880 39,165 81,000 1,026,045

6,053 262 541 6,856

4.08 0.18 0.36 4.62

Fire Protection Services 2.1 Fire facilities, vehicles & equipment

1,546,636

152,964

1,022

0.69

TOTAL

11,921,096

1,179,010

7,878

5.31

D.C.-Eligible Capital Cost 15-Year Gross Population/GFA Growth (sq,ft,) Cost Per Capita/Non-Residential GFA (sq.ft.) By Residential Unit Type Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Other Multiples Special Care/Special Dwelling Units

11,921,096 4,154 $2,869.79

1,179,010 222,200 $5.31

P.P.U. 2.745 1.794 1.254 2.200 1.100

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

$7,878 $5,148 $3,599 $6,314 $3,157

PAGE 6-2

Page 98 of 297

Table 6-2 Township of South Frontenac Development Charge Calculation Municipal-wide Services 2019-2028 2019$ D.C.-Eligible Cost Residential Non-Residential

SERVICE

$ 3. Police and Other Facilities 3.1 Police and other facilities

2019$ D.C.-Eligible Cost S.D.U. per sq.ft. $

148,042

14,641

140

0.09

1,055,653

55,561

991

0.33

Library Services 5.1 Library facilities

75,684

3,983

0.02

Engineering Services - Studies 6.1 Studies

89,724

8,874

0.05

Community Based Studies 7.1 Studies

233,415

23,085

219

0.14

TOTAL

1,602,517

106,144

1,505

0.63

D.C.-Eligible Capital Cost 10-Year Gross Population/GFA Growth (sq,ft,) Cost Per Capita/Non-Residential GFA (sq.ft.) By Residential Unit Type Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Other Multiples Special Care/Special Dwelling Units

$1,602,517 2,922 $548.43

$106,144 169,800 $0.63

Parks and Recreation 4.1 Parkland development, amenities, recreation facilities and vehicles

P.P.U. 2.745 1.794 1.254 2.200 1.100

$1,505 $984 $688 $1,207 $603

Table 6-3 Township of South Frontenac Development Charge Calculation Total All Services 2019$ D.C.-Eligible Cost Residential Non-Residential $ $

2019$ D.C.-Eligible Cost S.D.U. per sq.ft. $ $

Municipal-wide Services 15 Year

11,921,096

1,179,010

7,878

5.31

Municipal-wide Services 10 Year

1,602,517

106,144

1,505

0.63

TOTAL

13,523,614

1,285,154

9,383

5.94

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 6-3

Table 6-4 Township of South Frontenac Gross Expenditure and Sources of Revenue Summary for Costs to be Incurred over the Life of the By-law Service

Services Related to a Highway 1.1 Roads, bridges, culverts, structures, streetlights & traffic signals 1.2 Public Works facilities 1.3 Public Works fleet & equipment

Total Gross Cost

Sources of Financing Tax Base or Other Non-D.C. Source Post D.C. Period Benefit to Legislated Benefit Other Funding Existing Reduction

Other Deductions

D.C. Reserve Fund Residential

Non-Residential

4,000,000 925,000 450,000

0 0 0

0 489,830 0

0 0 0

3,640,000 396,005 409,500

360,000 39,165 40,500

Fire Protection Services 2.1 Fire facilities, vehicles & equipment

628,333

571,783

56,550

Police and Other Facilities 3.1 Police and other facilities

162,500

8,125

140,481

13,894

Parks and Recreation 4.1 Parkland development, amenities, recreation facilities and vehicles

737,500

73,750

630,563

33,188

Library Services 5.1 Library facilities

80,000

8,000

68,400

3,600

Engineering Services - Studies 6.1 Studies

105,000

12,500

4,000

80,535

7,965

Community Based Studies 7.1 Studies

330,000

45,000

28,500

233,415

23,085

$7,418,333

$547,330

$122,375

$6,170,682

$577,947

Total Expenditures & Revenues

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 6-1

Page 99 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Page 100 of 297

Chapter 7 D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. By-law Rules

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 101 of 297

D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. By-law Rules 7.1 Introduction Subsection 5 (1) 9 states that rules must be developed: “…to determine if a development charge is payable in any particular case and to determine the amount of the charge, subject to the limitations set out in subsection 6.” Paragraph 10 of the section goes on to state that the rules may provide for exemptions, phasing in and/or indexing of D.C.s. Subsection 5 (6) establishes the following restrictions on the rules: •

the total of all D.C.s that would be imposed on anticipated development must not exceed the capital costs determined under 5(1) 2-8 for all services involved;

•

if the rules expressly identify a type of development, they must not provide for it to pay D.C.s that exceed the capital costs that arise from the increase in the need for service for that type of development; however, this requirement does not relate to any particular development; and if the rules provide for a type of development to have a lower D.C. than is allowed, the rules for determining D.C.s may not provide for any resulting shortfall to be made up via other development.

•

With respect to “the rules,” section 6 states that a D.C. by-law must expressly address the matters referred to above re subsection 5 (1) paragraphs 9 and 10, as well as how the rules apply to the redevelopment of land. The rules provided are based on the Township’s existing policies; however, there are items under consideration at this time and these may be refined prior to adoption of the by-law.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-1

Page 102 of 297

7.2 D.C. By-law Structure It is recommended that: •

the Township uses a uniform Township-wide D.C. calculation for all municipal services; and

•

one municipal D.C. by-law be used for all services.

7.3 D.C. By-law Rules The following subsections set out the recommended rules governing the calculation, payment and collection of D.C.s in accordance with section 6 of the D.C.A. It is recommended that the following sections provide the basis for the D.C.s.:

7.3.1 Payment in any Particular Case In accordance with the D.C.A., subsection 2 (2), a D.C. be calculated, payable and collected where the development requires one or more of the following: “(a) the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment to a zoning bylaw under section 34 of the Planning Act; (b)

the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act;

(c)

a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50 (7) of the Planning Act applies;

(d)

the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act;

(e)

a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act;

(f)

the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998; or

(g)

the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure.”

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-2

Page 103 of 297

7.3.2 Determination of the Amount of the Charge The following conventions be adopted:

Costs allocated to residential uses will be assigned to different types of residential units based on the average occupancy for each housing type constructed during the previous decade. Costs allocated to non-residential uses will be assigned based on the amount of square feet of gross floor area constructed for eligible uses (i.e. industrial, commercial and institutional).
Costs allocated to residential and non-residential uses are based upon a number of conventions, as may be suited to each municipal circumstance, e.g. •

for engineering services – studies, community based studies, and police and other facilities the costs have been based on a population vs. employment growth ratio (91%/9%) for residential and non-residential, respectively) over the 10-year forecast period;

•

for parks and recreation and library services, a 5% non-residential attribution has been made to recognize use by the non-residential sector; and

•

for services related to a highway, public works facilities, fleet and equipment, and fire protection services, a 91% residential/9% nonresidential attribution has been made based on a population vs. employment growth ratio over the 15-year forecast period.

7.3.3 Application to Redevelopment of Land (Demolition and Conversion) If a development involves the demolition of and replacement of a building or structure on the same site, or the conversion from one principal use to another, the developer shall be allowed a credit equivalent to:

the number of dwelling units demolished/converted multiplied by the applicable residential D.C. in place at the time the D.C. is payable; and/or
the gross floor area of the building demolished/converted multiplied by the current non-residential D.C. in place at the time the D.C. is payable.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-3

Page 104 of 297

The demolition credit is allowed only if the land was improved by occupied structures and if the demolition permit related to the site was issued less than 5 years prior to the issuance of a building permit. The credit can, in no case, exceed the amount of D.C.s that would otherwise be payable.

7.3.4 Exemptions (full or partial) a) Statutory exemptions: •

industrial building additions of up to and including 50% of the existing gross floor area (defined in O.Reg. 82/98, section 1) of the building; for industrial building additions which exceed 50% of the existing gross floor area, only the portion of the addition in excess of 50% is subject to D.C.s (subsection 4 (3) of the D.C.A.);

•

buildings or structures owned by and used for the purposes of any municipality, local board or Board of Education (section 3);

•

residential development that results only in the enlargement of an existing dwelling unit, or that results only in the creation of up to two additional dwelling units (based on prescribed limits set out in section 2 of O.Reg. 82/98).

b) Non-statutory exemptions: •

• •

Land that is owned by and used for the purposes of a place of worship, a churchyard, cemetery, or burial ground exempt from taxation under section 3 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O., 1990; Bona fide agricultural use/farm building; and Second residential units located in separate detached accessory structures.

7.3.5 Phasing in No provisions for phasing in the D.C. are provided in the D.C. by-law.

7.3.6 Timing of Collection A D.C. that is applicable under section 5 of the D.C.A. shall be calculated and payable:

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-4

Page 105 of 297

•

where a permit is required under the Building Code Act in relation to a building or structure, the owner shall pay the D.C. prior to the issuance of a permit of prior to the commencement of development or redevelopment as the case may be; and despite the above, Council, from time to time and at any time, may enter into agreements providing for all or any part of a D.C. to be paid before or after it would otherwise be payable.

7.3.7 Indexing Indexing of the D.C.s shall be implemented on a mandatory basis annually commencing on the first anniversary date of this by-law and each anniversary date thereafter, in accordance with the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Non-Residential Building Construction Price Index (Table 18-10-0135-01)1 for the most recent year-over-year period.

7.3.8 The Applicable Areas The charges developed herein provide for uniform charges within the Township as follows: •

all municipal-wide services – the full residential and non-residential charge will be imposed on all lands within the Township.

7.4 Other D.C. By-law Provisions It is recommended that:

7.4.1 Categories of Services for Reserve Fund and Credit Purposes The Township’s D.C. collections are currently reserved in six separate reserve funds: services related to a highway, fire protection services, police and other facilities, parks and recreation, library services and administration. It is recommended that the administration reserve fund be renamed Engineering Services – Studies and that a new

1 O.Reg. 82/98 referenced “The Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price

Statistics, catalogue number 62-007” as the index source. Since implementation, Statistics Canada has modified this index twice and the above-noted index is the most current. The draft by-law provided herein refers to O.Reg. 82/98 to ensure traceability should this index continue to be modified over time.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-5

Page 106 of 297

reserve fund be established for the Community Based Studies. Appendix D outlines the reserve fund policies that the Township is required to follow as per the D.C.A.

7.4.2 By-law In-force Date A by-law under the D.C.A. comes into force on the day after which the by-law is passed by Council.

7.4.3 Minimum Interest Rate Paid on Refunds and Charged for InterReserve Fund Borrowing The minimum interest rate is the Bank of Canada rate on the day on which the by-law comes into force (as per section 11 of O.Reg. 82/98).

7.4.4 Area Rating As noted earlier, Bill 73 has introduced two new sections where Council must consider the use of area specific charges:

Section 2 (9) of the Act now requires a municipality to implement area-specific D.C.s for either specific services which are prescribed and/or for specific municipalities which are to be regulated (note that at this time, no municipalities or services are prescribed by the Regulations).
Section 10 (2) c.1 of the D.C.A. requires that “the development charges background study shall include consideration of the use of more than one development charge by-law to reflect different needs for services in different areas.” In regard to the first item, there are no services or specific municipalities identified in the regulations which must be area-rated. The second item requires Council to consider the use of area-rating. At present, the Township’s by-law does not provide for area-rating. All Township services are recovered based on a uniform, Township-wide basis. There have been several reasons why they have not been imposed including:
All Township services, with the exception of water, wastewater and stormwater, require that the average 10-year service standard be calculated. This average

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-6

Page 107 of 297

service standard multiplied by growth in the Township, establishes an upper ceiling on the amount of funds which can be collected from all developing landowners. Section 4 (4) of O.Reg. 82/98 provides that “…if a development charge by-law applies to a part of the municipality, the level of service and average level of service cannot exceed that which would be determined if the bylaw applied to the whole municipality.” Put in layman terms, the average service standard multiplied by the growth within the specific area, would establish an area specific ceiling which would significantly reduce the total revenue recoverable for the Township hence potentially resulting in D.C. revenue shortfalls and impacts on property taxes. 2. Extending on item 1, attempting to impose an area charge potentially causes equity issues in transitioning from a Township-wide approach to an area specific approach. For example, if all services were now built (and funded) within Area A (which is 75% built out) and this was funded with some revenues from Areas B and C, moving to an area rating approach would see Area A contribute no funds to the costs of services in Areas B and C. The development charges would be lower in Area A (as all services are now funded) and higher in Areas B and C. As well, funding shortfalls may then potentially encourage the municipality to provide less services to Areas B and C due to reduced revenue. 3. Many services which are provided (roads, parks, recreation facilities, library) are not restricted to one specific area and are often used by all residents. For example, arenas located in different parts of the Township will be used by residents from all areas depending on the programing of the facility (i.e. a public skate is available each night, but at a different arena; hence usage of any one facility at any given time is based on programing availability). For the reasons noted above, it is recommended that Council continue the D.C. approach to calculate the charges on a uniform Township-wide basis.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-7

Page 108 of 297

7.5 Other Recommendations It is recommended that Council: “Whenever appropriate, request that grants, subsidies and other contributions be clearly designated by the donor as being to the benefit of existing development or new development, as applicable;” “Adopt the assumptions contained herein as an ‘anticipation’ with respect to capital grants, subsidies and other contributions;” “Continue the D.C. approach to calculate the charges on a uniform Municipalwide basis for all services;” “Approve the capital project listing set out in Chapter 5 of the D.C.s Background Study dated May 31, 2019, subject to further annual review during the capital budget process;” “Approve the D.C.s Background Study dated May 31, 2019, as amended (if applicable);” “Determine that no further public meeting is required;” and “Approve the D.C. By-law as set out in Appendix G.”

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 7-8

Page 109 of 297

Chapter 8 By-law Implementation

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

Page 110 of 297

By-law Implementation 8.1

Public Consultation Process

8.1.1 Introduction This chapter addresses the mandatory, formal public consultation process (section 8.1.2), as well as the optional, informal consultation process (section 8.1.3). The latter is designed to seek the co-operation and participation of those involved, in order to produce the most suitable policy. Section 8.1.4 addresses the anticipated impact of the D.C. on development from a generic viewpoint.

8.1.2 Public Meeting of Council Section 12 of the D.C.A. indicates that before passing a D.C. by-law, Council must hold at least one public meeting, giving at least 20 clear days’ notice thereof, in accordance with the Regulation. Council must also ensure that the proposed by-law and background report are made available to the public at least two weeks prior to the (first) meeting. Any person who attends such a meeting may make representations related to the proposed by-law. If a proposed by-law is changed following such a meeting, Council must determine whether a further meeting (under this section) is necessary (i.e. if the proposed by-law which is proposed for adoption has been changed in any respect, Council should formally consider whether an additional public meeting is required, incorporating this determination as part of the final by-law or associated resolution. It is noted that Council’s decision, once made, is final and not subject to review by a Court or the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (L.P.A.T.) (formerly the Ontario Municipal Board (O.M.B.)).

8.1.3 Other Consultation Activity There are three broad groupings of the public who are generally the most concerned with Township D.C. policy:

The first grouping is the residential development community, consisting of land developers and builders, who are typically responsible for generating the majority

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 8-1

Page 111 of 297

of the D.C. revenues. Others, such as realtors, are directly impacted by D.C. policy. They are, therefore, potentially interested in all aspects of the charge, particularly the quantum by unit type, projects to be funded by the D.C. and the timing thereof, and Township policy with respect to development agreements, D.C. credits and front-ending requirements. 2. The second public grouping embraces the public at large and includes taxpayer coalition groups and others interested in public policy. 3. The third grouping is the industrial/commercial/institutional development sector, consisting of land developers and major owners or organizations with significant construction plans, such as hotels, entertainment complexes, shopping centres, offices, industrial buildings and institutions. Also involved are organizations such as Industry Associations, the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Trade and the Economic Development Agencies, who are all potentially interested in Township D.C. policy. Their primary concern is frequently with the quantum of the charge, gross floor area exclusions such as basements, mechanical or indoor parking areas, or exemptions and phase-in or capping provisions in order to moderate the impact.

8.2 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development The establishment of sound D.C. policy often requires the achievement of an acceptable balance between two competing realities. The first is that high nonresidential D.C.s can, to some degree, represent a barrier to increased economic activity and sustained industrial/commercial growth, particularly for capital intensive uses. Also, in many cases, increased residential D.C.s can ultimately be expected to be recovered via higher housing prices and can impact project feasibility in some cases (e.g. rental apartments). On the other hand, D.C.s or other Township capital funding sources need to be obtained in order to help ensure that the necessary infrastructure and amenities are installed. The timely installation of such works is a key initiative in providing adequate service levels and in facilitating strong economic growth, investment and wealth generation.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 8-2

Page 112 of 297

8.3 Implementation Requirements 8.3.1 Introduction Once the Township has calculated the charge, prepared the complete background study, carried out the public process and passed a new by-law, the emphasis shifts to implementation matters. These include notices, potential appeals and complaints, credits, front-ending agreements, subdivision agreement conditions and finally the collection of revenues and funding of projects. The sections which follow overview the requirements in each case.

8.3.2 Notice of Passage In accordance with section 13 of the D.C.A., when a D.C. by-law is passed, the Township clerk shall give written notice of the passing and of the last day for appealing the by-law (the day that is 40 days after the day it was passed). Such notice must be given no later than 20 days after the day the by-law is passed (i.e. as of the day of newspaper publication or the mailing of the notice). Section 10 of O.Reg. 82/98 further defines the notice requirements which are summarized as follows: •

notice may be given by publication in a newspaper which is (in the Clerk’s opinion) of sufficient circulation to give the public reasonable notice, or by personal service, fax or mail to every owner of land in the area to which the bylaw relates;

• •

subsection 10 (4) lists the persons/organizations who must be given notice; and subsection 10 (5) lists the eight items which the notice must cover.

8.3.3 By-law Pamphlet In addition to the “notice” information, the Township must prepare a “pamphlet” explaining each D.C. by-law in force, setting out: •

a description of the general purpose of the D.C.s;

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 8-3

Page 113 of 297

•

the “rules” for determining if a charge is payable in a particular case and for determining the amount of the charge;

• •

the services to which the D.C.s relate; and a description of the general purpose of the Treasurer’s statement and where it may be received by the public.

Where a by-law is not appealed to the L.P.A.T., the pamphlet must be readied within 60 days after the by-law comes into force. Later dates apply to appealed by-laws. The Township must give one copy of the most recent pamphlet without charge, to any person who requests one.

8.3.4 Appeals Sections 13 to 19 of the D.C.A. set out the requirements relative to making and processing a D.C. by-law appeal and L.P.A.T. Hearing in response to an appeal. Any person or organization may appeal a D.C. by-law to the L.P.A.T. by filing a notice of appeal with the Township clerk, setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons supporting the objection. This must be done by the last day for appealing the by-law, which is 40 days after the by-law is passed. The Township is carrying out a public consultation process, in order to address the issues that come forward as part of that process, thereby avoiding or reducing the need for an appeal to be made.

8.3.5 Complaints A person required to pay a D.C., or his agent, may complain to the Township Council imposing the charge that: • •

the amount of the charge was incorrectly determined; the reduction to be used against the D.C. was incorrectly determined; or

•

there was an error in the application of the D.C.

Sections 20 to 25 of the D.C.A. set out the requirements that exist, including the fact that a complaint may not be made later than 90 days after a D.C. (or any part of it) is payable. A complainant may appeal the decision of Township Council to the L.P.A.T.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 8-4

Page 114 of 297

8.3.6 Credits Sections 38 to 41 of the D.C.A. set out a number of credit requirements, which apply where a Township agrees to allow a person to perform work in the future that relates to a service in the D.C. by-law. These credits would be used to reduce the amount of D.C.s to be paid. The value of the credit is limited to the reasonable cost of the work which does not exceed the average level of service. The credit applies only to the service to which the work relates, unless the Township agrees to expand the credit to other services for which a D.C. is payable.

8.3.7 Front-Ending Agreements The Township and one or more landowners may enter into a front-ending agreement which provides for the costs of a project which will benefit an area in the Township to which the D.C. by-law applies. Such an agreement can provide for the costs to be borne by one or more parties to the agreement who are, in turn, reimbursed in future by persons who develop land defined in the agreement. Part III of the D.C.A. (sections 44 to 58) addresses front-ending agreements and removes some of the obstacles to their use which were contained in the D.C.A., 1989. Accordingly, the Township assesses whether this mechanism is appropriate for its use, as part of funding projects prior to Township funds being available.

8.3.8 Severance and Subdivision Agreement Conditions Section 59 of the D.C.A. prevents a municipality from imposing directly or indirectly, a charge related to development or a requirement to construct a service related to development, by way of a condition or agreement under section 51 or section 53 of the Planning Act, except for: •

•

“local services, related to a plan of subdivision or within the area to which the plan relates, to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under section 51 of the Planning Act;” and “local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under section 53 of the Planning Act.”

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 8-5

Page 115 of 297

It is also noted that subsection 59 (4) of the D.C.A. requires that the municipal approval authority for a draft plan of subdivision under subsection 51 (31) of the Planning Act, use its power to impose conditions to ensure that the first purchaser of newly subdivided land is informed of all the D.C.s related to the development, at the time the land is transferred. In this regard, if the Township in question is a commenting agency, in order to comply with subsection 59 (4) of the D.C.A. it would need to provide to the approval authority, information regarding the applicable Township D.C.s related to the site. If the Township is an approval authority for the purposes of section 51 of the Planning Act, it would be responsible to ensure that it collects information from all entities which can impose a D.C. The most effective way to ensure that purchasers are aware of this condition would be to require it as a provision in a registered subdivision agreement, so that any purchaser of the property would be aware of the charges at the time the title was searched prior to closing a transaction conveying the lands.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE 8-6

Page 116 of 297

Appendices

Page 117 of 297

Appendix A Background Information on Residential and NonResidential Growth Forecast

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-1

Schedule 1 Township of South Frontenac Residential Growth Forecast Summary

Forecast

Historical

Year

Housing Units Total Permanent and Seasonal Population

Permanent Permanent

Seasonal Total Total Equivalent Person Per Person Per Seasonal Households Unit Permanent Institutional Unit Households Including Households Households (P.P.U.) (P.P.U.) Seasonal

Singles & Semi- Conversions2 Multiples3 Apartments4 Other Detached

Mid 2006

18,690

18,227

18,175

11,960

30,187

6,420

170

120

6,780

3,268

10,048

2.688

3.004

Mid 2016

19,120

18,646

18,585

10,945

29,591

6,920

140

7,190

2,991

10,181

2.593

2.906

Mid 2019

19,640

19,155

19,092

10,980

30,135

7,175

140

7,469

3,000

10,469

2.565

2.878

Mid 2029

21,500

20,971

20,902

11,090

32,061

8,071

104

156

8,476

3,030

11,506

2.474

2.786

Mid 2034

22,305

21,757

21,357

11,145

32,902

8,428

144

169

8,900

3,045

11,945

2.445

2.754

430

419

410

-1,015

-596

500

-30

410

-277

133

Mid 2006 - Mid 2016

Incremental

Excluding Census Undercount Permanent Population Permanent (Including Permanent Institutional Population Seasonal Census Population Population Excluding Population Institutional Undercount)1

Mid 2016 - Mid 2019

520

509

507

544

255

279

288

Mid 2019 - Mid 2029

1,860

1,816

1,810

110

1,926

896

1,007

1,037

Mid 2019 - Mid 2034

2,665

2,602

2,265

165

2,767

1,253

120

1,431

1,476

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-2

Page 118 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

FIGURE A-1 ANNUAL HOUSING FORECAST¹ 120 110 97

100

101

110

110 95

Housing Units

110

101

96 83

95 83

Years Historical

Low Density

Medium Density

High Density

Seasonal

Historical Average

Source: Historical housing activity from Township of South Frontenac building permit data, 2009-2018, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

Growth forecast represents calendar year.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-3

Page 119 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Schedule 2 Township of South Frontenac Estimate of the Anticipated Amount, Type and Location of Development for which Development Charges can be Imposed

Development Location

Township of South Frontenac

Development Location

Township of South Frontenac

Development Location

Township of South Frontenac

Timing

Singles & SemiDetached

Multiples1

Apartments2

Total Residential Units Unadjusted for Conversions

Gross Sesasonal Units Unadjusted for Conversions

Sesasonal Units Adjusted for Conversion

Total Units Including Gross Seasonal

Conversions3

2019 - 2029

896

927

110

1,037

2019 - 2034

1,253

1,311

165

1,476

120

Existing Unit Population Change

Permanent Net Population Increase Excluding Conversions

Timing

Gross Permanent Population in New Units

Net Population Net Population Increase (including Population Change Increase (including Institutional and Seasonal Population Institutional and From Conversion of 100% Seasonal Equivalent Excluding Seasonal Population Seasonal to Population Conversions Equivalent) Including Permanent Units Equivalent) Excluding Conversions Conversions

Institutional Population

2019 - 2029

2,519

(930)

1,589

403

1,998

(73)

1,926

2019 - 2034

3,550

(1,286)

2,264

604

2,876

(110)

2,767

Gross Permanent Population in New Units

Seasonal Population Equivalent Excluding Conversions

Total Gross Population in New Permanent and Seasonal Units

2019 - 2029

2,519

403

2,922

2019 - 2034

3,550

604

4,154

Timing

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. 1

Includes townhomes and apartments in duplexes.

Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom+ apartments.

Conversion of existing seasonal housing units to year-round permanent housing units.

Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-4

Page 120 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Page 121 of 297

Schedule 3 Township of South Frontenac Current Year Growth Forecast Mid 2016 to Mid 2019 Population

Mid 2016 Population (Permanent and Seasonal)

29,591

Occupants of Permanent New Housing Units, Mid 2016 to Mid 2019

Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

255 2.919 744

744

Occupants of Converted Units Mid 2016 to Mid 2019

Conversion Units (4) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

24 2.919 70

Occupants of New Seasonal Units Mid 2016 to Mid 2019

Net Seasonal Units(2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

9 3.660 33

Occupants of New Units Equivalent Institutional Units multiplied by P.P.U. (3) Mid 2016 to Mid 2019 gross population increase

2 1.100 2

Total Units (Permanent and Seasonal)

Decline in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2016 to Mid 2019

Total Units

288

Total gross population increase

849

Units (5) multiplied by P.P.U. decline rate (6) total decline in population

7,190 -0.0424 -305

-305

Population Estimate to Mid 2019 (Permanent and Seasonal)

30,135

Net Population Increase, Mid 2016 to Mid 2019 (Permanent and Seasonal)

544

(1)

2016 population based on Statistics Canada Census unadjusted for Census undercount.

(2)

Estimated residential units constructed, - to the beginning of the growth period assuming a six-month lag between construction and occupancy.

(3)

Average number of persons per unit (P.P.U.) is assumed to be: Structural Type

Persons Per Unit¹ (P.P.U.)

% Distribution of Estimated Units²

Weighted Persons Per Unit Average

Singles & Semi Detached

2.919

100%

2.919

Multiples (7)

2.357

0.000

Apartments (8)

1.652

Permanent Total Seasonal Total

3.660

0.000

100%

2.919

100%

3.660

Permanent persons per unit based on 2016 Census custom database. Seasonal persons per unit based on Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs Final Report, June 13, 2014, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. ² Based on Building permit/completion acitivty.

(4)

Conversion of units from seasonal to permanent occupancy.

(5)

2011 households taken from StatsCan Census.

(6)

Decline occurs due to aging of the population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions.

(7)

Includes townhomes and apartments in duplexes.

(8)

Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-5

Page 122 of 297

Schedule 4 Township of South Frontenac Ten Year Growth Forecast Mid 2019 to Mid 2029 Population

Mid 2019 Population (Permanent and Seasonal)

Occupants of Permanent New Housing Units, Mid 2019 to Mid 2029

Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

927 2.716 2,519

2,519

Occupants of Converted Units Mid 2019 to Mid 2029

Conversion Units (4) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

80 2.745 220

220

Occupants of New Seasonal Units Mid 2019 to Mid 2029

Net Seasonal Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

30 3.660 110

110

Units Occupants of New Equivalent Institutional Units multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase Mid 2019 to Mid 2029

6 1.100 7

Total Units (Permanent and Seasonal)

Decline in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2019 to Mid 2029

(1)

30,135

1,037

Total Units

2,856

Total gross population increase

7,445 -0.1250 -930

Units (5) multiplied by P.P.U. decline rate (6) total decline in population

-930

Population Estimate to Mid 2029 (Permanent and Seasonal)

32,061

Net Population Increase, Mid 2019 to Mid 2029 (Permanent and Seasonal)

1,926

Mid 2019 Population (Permanent and Seasonal) based on: 2016 Population (29,591) + Mid 2016 to Mid 2019 estimated housing units to beginning of forecast period (255 x 2.919 = 744) + (7,190 x 0.0424 = -305) + Converted Units (24 x 2.919 = 70) + Seasonal population (9 x 3.666 = 33) + Institutional (2 x 1.100 = 2) = 30,135

(2) (3)

Based upon forecast building permits/completions assuming a lag between construction and occupancy. Average number of persons per unit (ppu) is assumed to be: Persons Per Unit¹ (P.P.U.)

% Distribution of Estimated Units²

Singles & Semi Detached

2.745

97%

2.652

Multiples (7)

2.200

0.037

1.599

0.027

100%

2.716

100%

3.660

Structural Type

Apartments (8)

Weighted Persons Per Unit Average

one bedroom or less 1.254 two bedrooms or more 1.794 Permanent Total Seasonal Total

3.660

Permanent persons per unit based on adjusted Statistics Canada Custom 2016 Census database. Seasonal persons per unit based on Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs Final Report, June 13, 2014, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. ² Forecast unit mix based upon historical trends and housing units in the development process.

(4)

Conversion of units from seasonal to permanent occupancy.

(5)

Mid 2019 households based upon 7,190 (2016 Census) + 255 (Mid 2016 to Mid 2019 unit estimate) = 7,445

(6)

Decline occurs due to aging of the population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions.

(7)

Includes townhomes and apartments in duplexes.

(8)

Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-6

Page 123 of 297

Schedule 5 Township of South Frontenac Fifteen Year Growth Forecast Mid 2019 to Mid 2034 Population

Mid 2019 Population (Permanent and Seasonal)

Occupants of Permanent New Housing Units, Mid 2019 to Mid 2034

Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

1,311 2.708 3,550

3,550

Occupants of Converted Units Mid 2019 to Mid 2034

Conversion Units (4) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

120 2.745 329

329

Occupants of New Seasonal Units Mid 2019 to Mid 2034

Net Seasonal Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) gross population increase

45 3.660 165

165

Occupants of New Units Equivalent Institutional Units multiplied by P.P.U. (3) Mid 2019 to Mid 2034 gross population increase

8 1.100 9

Total Units (Permanent and Seasonal)

Decline in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2019 to Mid 2034

(1)

30,135

Total Units

1,476

Total gross population increase

4,053

Units (5) multiplied by P.P.U. decline rate (6) total decline in population

7,445 -0.1727 -1,286

-1,286

Population Estimate to Mid 2034 (Permanent and Seasonal)

32,902

Net Population Increase, Mid 2019 to Mid 2034 (Permanent and Seasonal)

2,767

(2) (3)

Based upon forecast building permits/completions assuming a lag between construction and occupancy. Average number of persons per unit (ppu) is assumed to be: Persons Per Unit¹ (P.P.U.)

% Distribution of Estimated Units²

Weighted Persons Per Unit Average

Singles & Semi Detached

2.745

96%

2.623

Multiples (7)

2.200

0.049

Apartments (8)

1.599

0.035

100%

2.708

100%

3.660

Structural Type

one bedroom or less 1.254 two bedrooms or more 1.794 Permanent Total Seasonal Total

3.660

¹ Permanent persons per unit based on adjusted Statistics Canada Custom 2016 Census database. Seasonal persons per unit based on Population, Housing and Employment Projections for the Frontenacs Final Report, June 13, 2014, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. ² Forecast unit mix based upon historical trends and housing units in the development process.

(4)

Conversion of units from seasonal to permanent occupancy.

(5)

Mid 2019 households based upon 7,190 (2016 Census) + 255 (Mid 2016 to Mid 2019 unit estimate) = 7,445

(6)

Decline occurs due to aging of the population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions.

(7)

Includes townhomes and apartments in duplexes.

(8)

Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-7

Page 124 of 297

Schedule 6 Township of South Frontenac Historical Residential Building Permits Years 2009 to 2018

Residential Building Permits Year

Singles & Semi Detached

Multiples1

Apartments2

Total

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Sub-total

443

Average (2009 - 2013)

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

% Breakdown

Sub-total

414

Average (2014 - 2018)

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%

Total

857

Average

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%

% Breakdown 2009 - 2018

% Breakdown

Source: Historical housing activity from Township of South Frontenac building permit data, 2009-2018, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. 1 Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. 2 Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-8

Page 125 of 297

Schedule 7a Township of South Frontenac Persons Per Unit By Age and Type of Dwelling (2016 Census) Age of Dwelling

Singles and Semi-Detached < 1 BR

1 BR

2 BR

3/4 BR

5+ BR

Total

20 Year Average

20 Year Forecast1

1-5

2.935

2.919

6-10

1.733

2.776

2.663

2.791

11-15

2.053

3.167

3.009

2.864

2.745

16-20

2.644

2.553

2.786

2.745

2.783

2.745

2.718

2.745

20-25

2.250

2.717

2.772

25-35

1.905

2.472

4.250

2.585

35+

1.778

1.976

2.583

3.837

2.527

Total

0.455

1.731

1.962

2.657

4.009

2.626

Age of Dwelling

(0.043)

All Density Types < 1 BR

1 BR

2 BR

3/4 BR

5+ BR

Total

1-5

2.837

2.921

6-10

1.857

2.776

2.652

11-15

2.167

3.141

3.018

16-20

2.613

2.579

20-25

2.545

2.701

2.705

25-35

1.182

1.833

2.466

4.250

2.509

35+

1.419

1.945

2.583

3.800

2.488

Total

1.382

1.948

2.647

3.972

2.588

PPU has been forecasted based on 2001-2016 historical trends. Note: Does not include Statistics Canada data classified as ‘Other’ P.P.U. Not calculated for samples less than or equal to 50 dwelling units, and does not include institutional population.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-9

Page 126 of 297

Schedule 7b Frontenac County Persons Per Unit By Age and Type of Dwelling (2016 Census) Age of Dwelling

< 1 BR

1 BR

Multiples1 2 BR 3/4 BR

5+ BR

Total

20 Year Average

20 Year Forecast3

1-5

2.433

2.357

6-10

2.639

2.302

11-15

2.400

2.128

2.262

2.200

16-20

1.941

2.135

2.017

2.201

2.200

2.209

2.200

20-25

1.611

2.585

2.241

25-35

1.182

2.086

2.683

2.492

35+

1.329

1.730

2.608

3.385

2.236

Total

1.300

1.790

2.576

3.000

2.274

Age of Dwelling

< 1 BR

1 BR

Apartments2 2 BR 3/4 BR

5+ BR

Total

1-5

1.282

1.805

2.571

1.652

20 Year Average

20 Year Forecast3

6-10

1.295

1.677

1.525

11-15

1.364

1.718

1.667

1.615

1.599

16-20

1.275

1.728

2.545

1.610

1.613

1.599

20-25

1.175

1.651

2.750

1.542

1.599

25-35

1.210

1.682

2.510

1.591

35+

1.184

1.188

1.764

2.395

2.182

1.601

Total

1.060

1.212

1.734

2.469

1.800

1.598

Age of Dwelling

All Density Types < 1 BR

1 BR

2 BR

3/4 BR

5+ BR

Total

1-5

1.321

1.810

2.866

4.364

2.448

6-10

1.316

1.761

2.925

4.167

2.570

11-15

1.344

1.706

2.938

3.643

2.585

16-20

1.302

1.662

2.586

3.674

2.330

20-25

1.206

1.735

2.649

3.556

2.301

25-35

1.247

1.737

2.637

3.664

2.332

35+

0.978

1.227

1.782

2.486

3.395

2.177

Total

1.016

1.246

1.763

2.607

3.569

2.282

Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes.

Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-10

Schedule 8 Township of South Frontenac Persons Per Unit By Structural Type and Age of Dwelling (2016 Census) 3.50

Persons Per Dwelling

3.00 2.50

3.01

2.92

2.77

2.66 2.36

2.00

2.59 2.49

2.55 2.30

1.65

2.13 1.52

2.53

2.24

2.02 1.67

1.61

1.60

1.59

1.54

1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 1-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

20-25

25-35

35+

Age of Dwelling Singles and Semi-Detached

Multiples

Apartments

Multiple and Apartment P.P.U.s are based on Frontenac County.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-11

Page 127 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Schedule 9a Township of South Frontenac Employment Forecast, 2019 to 2034 Activity Rate Period

Population

Mid 2006 Mid 2016

Institutional

Total

N.F.P.O.W.

0.017

0.032

0.025

0.125

0.059

0.184

0.012

0.028

0.111

0.064

0.176

0.042

0.011

0.030

0.027

0.113

0.064

0.002

0.043

0.013

0.032

0.027

0.118

0.002

0.044

0.014

0.032

0.027

0.119

Work at Industrial Home

18,227

0.003

0.048

18,646

0.002

0.042

Mid 2019

19,155

0.002

Mid 2029

20,971

Mid 2034

21,757

Employment

Commercial/ Population Related

Primary

Total Including Primary NFPOW

N.F.P.O.W.

Total Employment (Including N.F.P.O.W.)

Total (Excluding Work at Home)

2,275

1,080

3,355

1,405

2,075

1,200

3,275

1,300

525

2,158

1,233

3,391

1,362

667

570

2,466

1,374

3,840

1,563

301

697

578

2,583

1,455

4,038

1,624

-105

Work at Home

Industrial

Commercial/ Population Related

Institutional

Total

870

310

575

460

775

218

523

520

0.177

796

218

580

0.066

0.183

903

280

0.067

0.186

959

Incremental Change

Mid 2006 - Mid 2016

419

-0.001

-0.006

-0.005

-0.004

0.003

-0.014

0.005

-0.008

-20

-95

-93

-53

-200

120

-80

Mid 2016 - Mid 2019

509

0.0000

-0.0003

0.0022

-0.0005

0.0014

0.0000

0.0014

116

Mid 2019 - Mid 2029

1,816

0.0000

0.0015

0.0020

0.0016

-0.0002

0.0049

0.0012

0.0061

107

308

141

449

201

Mid 2019 - Mid 2034

2,602

0.0001

0.0025

0.0018

-0.0008

0.0060

0.0025

0.0085

163

118

425

222

647

262

Annual Average

Mid 2006 - Mid 2016

-0.00011 -0.00062 -0.00053

-0.00035

0.00027

-0.00135

0.00051

-0.00084

-2

-10

-9

-5

-20

-8

-11

Mid 2016 - Mid 2019

170

0.0000

-0.0001

0.0007

-0.0002

0.0005

0.0000

0.0005

Mid 2019 - Mid 2029

182

0.00000

0.00015

0.00020

0.00016

-0.00002

0.00049

0.00012

0.00061

Mid 2019 - Mid 2034

173

0.0000

0.0002

0.0001

-0.0001

0.0004

0.0002

0.0006

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. ¹ Statistics Canada defines no fixed place of work (N.F.P.O.W.) employees as “persons who do not go from home to the same work place location at the beginning of each shift”. Such persons include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-12

Page 128 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Schedule 9b Township of South Frontenac Employment & Gross Floor Area (G.F.A) Forecast, 2019 to 2034

Period

Population

Mid 2006 Mid 2016

Employment Commercial/ Population Related

Gross Floor Area in Square Feet (Estimated)¹ Commercial/ 2 Population Total Industrial Institutional Related

Primary

Industrial

18,227

310

575

460

1,405

465,000

316,300

322,000

1,103,300

18,646

218

523

520

1,300

326,300

287,400

364,000

977,700

Mid 2019

19,155

218

580

524

1,361

326,300

318,700

366,300

1,011,300

Mid 2029

20,971

280

667

566

1,559

420,000

366,900

394,200

1,181,100

Mid 2034

21,757

301

697

573

1,619

451,500

383,400

398,600

1,233,500

Institutional

Total

Incremental Change Mid 2006 - Mid 2016

419

-20

-93

-53

-105

Mid 2016 - Mid 2019

509

31,300

2,300

33,600

Mid 2019 - Mid 2029

1,816

198

93,700

48,200

27,900

169,800

Mid 2019 - Mid 2034

2,602

118

258

125,200

64,700

32,300

222,200

Annual Average Mid 2006 - Mid 2016

-2

-9

-5

-11

Mid 2016 - Mid 2019

170

10,433

767

11,200

Mid 2019 - Mid 2029

182

9,370

4,820

2,790

16,980

Mid 2019 - Mid 2034

173

8,347

4,313

2,153

14,813

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. 1

Square Foot Per Employee Assumptions Industrial 1,500 Commercial/ Population Related 550 Institutional 659 2

Forecast institutional employment and gross floor area has been adjusted downward to account for employment associated with special care units.

Reflects Mid 2019 to Mid 2034 forecast period Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-13

Page 129 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Schedule 10 Township of South Frontenac Non-Residential Construction Value Years 2007 to 2016 (000’s 2018 $) YEAR 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Subtotal Percent of Total Average

Industrial New Improve Additions 340 251 0 636 359 0 270 0 0 299 0 892 256 62 0 191 265 0 1,303 139 0 720 35 0 395 106 0 5,387 1,233 1,436 67% 15% 18% 539 154 718

Total 591 995 270 1,191 318 457 1,443 755 502 8,056 100% 806

New 605 18 825 143 482 0 374 337 887 3,672 52% 459

Commercial Improve Additions 832 0 198 0 46 0 22 0 309 0 218 0 196 0 98 506 265 0 2,830 506 40% 7% 283 506

Total 1,438 217 871 165 791 218 570 941 1,152 7,007 100% 701

New 0 80 0 2,760 0 84 79 0 448 3,473 31% 579

Institutional Improve Additions 5 0 195 0 153 1,130 65 0 138 4,511 95 0 237 0 98 0 262 0 1,464 6,324 13% 56% 146 2,108

Total 5 275 1,283 2,824 4,649 179 317 98 710 11,261 100% 1,126

Total New Improve Additions 945 1,088 0 734 752 0 1,095 199 1,130 3,201 87 892 739 509 4,511 276 578 0 1,756 573 0 1,057 231 506 1,730 633 0 12,532 5,527 8,266 48% 21% 31% 1,253 553 1,653

Total 2,034 1,487 2,424 4,180 5,759 853 2,329 1,794 2,363 26,324 100% 2,632

2007 - 2011 Period Total 2007 - 2011 Average % Breakdown

4,582 916 34.6%

3,336 667 25.2%

5,309 1,062 40.1%

13,226 2,645 100.0%

2012 - 2016 Period Total 2012 - 2016 Average % Breakdown

3,474 695 26.5%

3,672 734 28.0%

5,952 1,190 45.4%

13,098 2,620 100.0%

2007 - 2016 Period Total 2007 - 2016 Average % Breakdown

8,056 806 30.6%

7,007 701 26.6%

11,261 1,126 42.8%

26,324 2,632 100.0%

Source: Statistics Canada Publication, 64-001-XIB Note: Inflated to year-end 2017 (January, 2018) dollars using Reed Construction Cost Index

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-14

Page 130 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Page 131 of 297

Schedule 11 Township of South Frontenac Employment to Population Ratio by Major Employment Sector, 2006 to 2016 Year

Change

NAICS

Comments 2006

2016

06-16

Employment by industry Primary Industry Employment 11 21

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting

205

150

-55

Mining and oil and gas extraction

Sub-total

215

160

-55

Categories which relate to local land-based resources

Industrial and Other Employment 22

Utilities

Construction

200

180

-20

31-33

Manufacturing

-35

Wholesale trade

-40

Transportation and warehousing

105

-30

Administrative and support

Sub-total

520

408

-113

Retail trade

340

315

-25

Information and cultural industries

-15

Finance and insurance

Real estate and rental and leasing

-30

Professional, scientific and technical services

150

200

Management of companies and enterprises

48-49 56

Categories which relate primarily to industrial land supply and demand

Population Related Employment 44-45

Administrative and support

Arts, entertainment and recreation

-10

Accommodation and food services

100

-60

Other services (except public administration)

125

Sub-total

980

898

-83

Categories which relate primarily to population growth within the municipality

Institutional 61

Educational services

355

325

-30

Health care and social assistance

135

165

Public administration

120

Sub-total

560

610

Total Employment

2,275

2,075

-200

Population

18,227

18,646

-18,646

Industrial and Other Employment

0.03

0.02

-0.01

Population Related Employment

0.05

-0.01

Institutional Employment

0.03

0.00

Primary Industry Employment

0.01

0.00

Total

0.12

0.11

-0.01

Employment to Population Ratio

Source: Statistics Canada Employment by Place of Work Note: 2006-2016 employment figures are classified by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-15

Map A-1

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE A-16

Page 132 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Page 133 of 297

Appendix B Level of Service

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-1

Appendix B: Level of Service SUMMARY OF SERVICE STANDARDS AS PER DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ACT, 1997, AS AMENDED Service Category

Services Related to a Highway

Sub-Component

10 Year Average Service Standard Cost (per capita)

Roads

$12,178.50

Quantity (per capita)

Quality (per capita)

Maximum Ceiling LOS

0.0267 km of roadways

456,124 per lane km

33,697,910

0.0021 Number of Bridges, Culverts & Structures

477,619 per item

2,775,301

4,976 per signal

227,171

Bridges, Culverts & Structures

$1,003.00

Traffic Signals & Streetlights

$82.10

0.0165 No. of Traffic Signals

Public Works Facilities

$422.58

3.2229 sq.ft. of building area

Public Works Fleet & Equipment

$338.23

0.0023 No. of vehicles and equipment

Fire Facilities

$208.38

0.9108 sq.ft. of building area

Fire

Fire Vehicles

$359.22

0.0011 No. of vehicles

Fire Small Equipment and Gear

$47.17

0.0096 No. of equipment and gear

Police and Other Facilities

$165.88

0.6166 sq.ft. of building area

Parks and Recreation

$208.48

Parkland Amenities

$208.75

Indoor Recreation Facilities

$232.75

0.9056 sq.ft. of building area

131 per sq.ft.

1,169,279

147,057 per vehicle

935,882

229 per sq.ft.

576,587

326,564 per vehicle

993,962

4,914 per Firefighter

130,519

269 per sq.ft.

319,485

0.0042 Acres of Parkland

49,638 per acre

401,532

0.0020 No. of parkland amenities

104,375 per amenity

402,053

Parks & Recreation

Library

Recreation Vehicles and Equipment

$4.01

0.0000 No. of vehicles and equipment

Library Facilities

$50.82

0.1809 sq.ft. of building area

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

448,277 7,723

281 per sq.ft.

97,879

PAGE B-2

Page 134 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

257 per sq.ft. 200,271 per vehicle

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure:

Services Related to a Highway km of roadways 2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019 Value ($/km)

Local- Rural Hot-Mix Surface Treated Gravel

18.58 323.27 242.00

18.58 331.52 233.75

18.58 338.77 226.50

18.58 342.27 223.00

18.58 345.62 219.65

19.14 349.42 215.85

19.89 352.17 211.65

19.89 356.27 207.55

17.74 358.42 207.55

$500,000 $300,000 $200,000

Local- Urban Hot-Mix

8.15

8.85

$2,400,000

Arterial-Rural Hot-Mix Surface Treated

116.80 64.70

$1,000,000 $400,000

Arterial-Urban Hot-Mix Total

13.00 786.50

13.00 787.06

$3,000,000

Population Per Capita Standard

29,559 0.0266

29,311 0.0268

29,088 0.0270

29,225 0.0269

29,316 0.0268

29,413 0.0268

29,521 0.0267

29,592 0.0266

29,757 0.0264

29,899 0.0263

Description

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.0267 $456,124 $12,179

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

15 Year 2,767 $12,179 $33,697,910

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-3

Page 135 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure: Description

Services Related to a Highway - Bridges, Culverts & Structures Number of Bridges, Culverts & Structures 2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

I Beam or Girders Rigid Frame, Vertical Legs T Beam Frame, Incline Legs Hybrid Round Culvert Rectangular Culvert Arch Culvert Through truss Earth Filled Arch

6 21 2 1 2 9 11 7 1 1

Total

29,559 0.0021

29,311 0.0021

29,088 0.0021

29,225 0.0021

29,316 0.0021

29,413 0.0021

29,521 0.0021

29,592 0.0021

29,757 0.0020

29,899 0.0020

Population Per Capita Standard 10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.0021 $477,619 $1,003

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

15 Year 2,767 $1,003 $2,775,301

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-4

Page 136 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2019 Value ($/item) $1,892,000 $263,700 $642,100 $97,500 $78,800 $355,500 $401,300 $361,200 $561,900 $424,300

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure: Description

Services Related to a Highway - Traffic Signals & Streetlights No. of Traffic Signals 2009

Traffic Signals

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019 Value ($/item) 2 $172,000

Streetlights

484

485

487

492

Total

485

486

488

494

29,559 0.0164

29,311 0.0165

29,088 0.0167

29,225 0.0166

29,316 0.0165

29,413 0.0165

29,521 0.0164

29,592 0.0164

29,757 0.0164

29,899 0.0165

Population Per Capita Standard 10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.0165 $4,976 $82

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

15 Year 2,767 $82 $227,171

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-5

Page 137 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

$4,600

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Public Works Facilities sq.ft. of building area

Service: Unit Measure: Description

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Storrington Yard Sand/Salt Storage Keeley Yard Sand/Salt Storage Portland Yard Sand/Salt Storage Bedford Yard Sand/Salt Storage Keeley Garage Bedford Garage Portland Garage Storrington Garage Keely Road Administrative Building

7,500 7,574 6,400 6,370 22,359 2,800 6,920 1,736 2,088

7,500 20,974 6,400 6,370 22,359 2,800 6,920 1,736 2,088

7,500 20,974 17,706 6,370 22,359 2,800 9,812 1,736 2,088

7,500 20,974 17,706 15,960 22,359 5,694 9,812 1,736 2,088

15,570 20,974 17,706 15,960 22,359 5,694 9,812 1,736 2,088

Total

63,747

77,147

91,345

103,829

111,899

Population Per Capita Standard

29,559 2.16

29,311 2.63

29,088 3.14

29,225 3.13

29,316 3.12

29,413 3.53

29,521 3.52

29,592 3.51

29,757 3.76

29,899 3.74

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 3.22 $131 $423

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

15 Year 2,767 $423 $1,169,279

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-6

Page 138 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2019 Value/sq.ft. Bld’g with land, Value site works, ($/sq.ft.) etc. $52 $66 $52 $66 $52 $66 $52 $66 $191 $220 $191 $220 $191 $220 $191 $220 $225 $257

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure: Description Building Dept Truck Half Ton Truck Three Quarter Ton Truck Diesel Work Truck (19,500 GVW) Mechanic Truck Tandem Dump Truck Triaxle Dump Truck Water Tank (For Tandems) Backhoe Loader Trackless Sidewalk Machine Dozer Excavator Motor Grader Vibratory Roller Air Compressor Utility & Culvert Trailer Equipment Float Trailer Belly Dump Trailer Hot Box Wood Chipper Steamer Diesel Plate Tamper Garbage Truck Garbage Truck with Compacting Total Population Per Capita Standard

Public Works Fleet & Equipment No. of vehicles and equipment 2009

2010 3 9 6 2 1 17

2011

3 9 6 2 1 17

3 2 4

1 3 2 1 1 1 4

2 1 4

1 3 2 1 1 1 4

1

3 2 4

2 1 4

1 67

29,559 0.0023

29,311 0.0023

29,088 0.0023

29,225 0.0023

29,316 0.0024

29,413 0.0023

29,521 0.0023

29,592 0.0023

29,757 0.0023

29,899 0.0022

2019 Value ($/Vehicle) $40,100 $34,400 $58,500 $91,700 $91,700 $280,900 $303,900 $34,400 $160,500 $220,200 $189,200 $137,600 $326,800 $401,300 $149,100 $28,700 $11,500 $68,800 $91,700 $34,400 $91,700 $22,900 $17,200 $172,000 $255,000

PAGE B-7

Page 139 of 297

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

3 9 7 1 1 16 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 3 1

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

3 9 6 2 1 16 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 4 1 1

15 Year 2,767 $338 $935,882

3 9 6 2 1 16 1 3 2 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 4 1 1

2018

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

2017

2009-2018 0.0023 $147,057 $338

3 9 6 2 1 16 1 3 2 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 4 1 1

2016

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

1 3 2 1 1 1 4

2015

3 9 6 2 1 16 1 3 2 4 1 2 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 4

1 3 2 1 1 1 4

2014

3 9 6 2 1 17 1 3 2 4 1 2 1 3

2013

3 9 6 2 1 17

3 2 4

2 1 4

1 3 2 1 1 1 4

3 9 6 2 1 17

3 2 4

2 1 5

2012

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure:

Fire Facilities sq.ft. of building area Description

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2,002 3,423 3,595 5,268 3,412 2,497 1,615 3,842 969

2,002 3,423 3,595 5,268 3,412 4,660 1,615 3,842 969

Station #1 - 7 & 11 Steele Road Station #2 - 237 Burridge Road Station #3 - 6930 Road #38 (Verona) Station #4 - 4808 Holleford Road (Hartington) Station #5 - 4233 Stagecoach Road (Sydenham) Station #6 (old) - 5855 Perth Road Station #6 (new) - 5582 Perth Road Station #7 - 3516 Latimer Road (Inverary) Station #8 - 3910 Battersea Road (Sunbury) Station #9 - 5038 Carrying Place Road

2,002 3,423 3,595 5,268 3,412 2,497 1,615 3,842 969

Total

26,623

28,786

Population Per Capita Standard

29,559 0.9007

29,311 0.9083

29,088 0.9153

29,225 0.9110

29,316 0.9081

29,413 0.9051

29,521 0.9018

29,592 0.8997

29,757 0.8947

29,899 0.9628

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.9108 $229 $208

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

15 Year 2,767 $208 $576,587

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-8

Page 140 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2019 Value/sq.ft. Bld’g with land, Value site works, ($/sq.ft.) etc. $190 $228 $190 $228 $190 $228 $190 $228 $190 $228 $190 $228 $230 $275 $190 $228 $190 $228 $190 $228

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure: Description

Fire Vehicles No. of vehicles 2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

3/4 ton truck Boat Pumper Mini-pumper Squad SUV Tanker Trailer

5 1 8 1 7 1 8 2

5 1 7 1 7 1 8 2

Total

29,559 0.0011

29,311 0.0011

29,088 0.0011

29,225 0.0011

29,316 0.0011

29,413 0.0011

29,521 0.0011

29,592 0.0011

29,757 0.0011

29,899 0.0011

Population Per Capita Standard 10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.0011 $326,564 $359

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

15 Year 2,767 $359 $993,962

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-9

Page 141 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2019 Value ($/Vehicle) $45,000 $60,000 $560,000 $350,000 $350,000 $45,000 $375,000 $15,000

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure:

Fire Small Equipment and Gear No. of equipment and gear

Bunker Gear Hoses Lighting Unit Mobile pump Breathing Apparatus (S.C.B.A.) - Masks and Packs Breathing Apparatus (S.C.B.A.) Bottles Ice Water Rescue Suits Vehicle Extrication Equipment (in Pumpers) Pumper Appliances Tanker Appliances

85 1 1 1

2019 Value ($/item) $2,200 $20,100 $17,200 $57,300

$7,700

$1,200

$2,000

$35,000

8 8

$20,000 $15,000

Total

282

29,559 0.0095

29,311 0.0096

29,088 0.0097

29,225 0.0096

29,316 0.0096

29,413 0.0096

29,521 0.0096

29,592 0.0095

29,757 0.0095

29,899 0.0094

Description

2009

Population Per Capita Standard

2010

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.0096 $4,914 $47

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

15 Year 2,767 $47 $130,519

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

PAGE B-10

Page 142 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2011

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure: Description

Police and Other Facilities sq.ft. of building area 2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

O.P.P. Station Township Hall Princess Anne sharing Centre Verona Medical Centre

9,396 3,375 1,740 3,660

Total

18,171

Population Per Capita Standard

29,559 0.6147

29,311 0.6199

29,088 0.6247

29,225 0.6217

29,316 0.6198

29,413 0.6178

29,521 0.6155

29,592 0.6140

29,757 0.6106

29,899 0.6077

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.6166 269 $166

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

10 Year 1,926 $166 $319,485

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-11

Page 143 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2019 Value/sq.ft. Bld’g with land, Value site works, ($/sq.ft.) etc. $225 $269 $225 $269 $225 $269 $225 $269

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure: Description

Parkland Development Acres of Parkland 2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Centennial Park Gerald Ball Park Battersea Park Inverary Ball Park Tett Park Gilmour Park Wilmer Park Bowes Park The Point Park Latimer Park McMullen Park Glendower Park Harris Park Davidson Beach

37.00 3.20 3.55 2.08 3.01 3.45 6.00 18.59 13.45 2.20 10.04 3.55 6.09 10.65

Total

122.86

Population Per Capita Standard

29,559 0.0042

29,311 0.0042

29,088 0.0042

29,225 0.0042

29,316 0.0042

29,413 0.0042

29,521 0.0042

29,592 0.0042

29,757 0.0041

29,899 0.0041

2009-2018 0.0042 $49,638 $208

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

10 Year 1,926 $208 $401,532

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-12

Page 144 of 297

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2019 Value ($/Acre) $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure: Description

Parkland Amenities No. of parkland amenities 2009

Play Equipment (Accessible) Tennis Courts (Lighting) Tennis Courts (No lighting) Baseball Fields (Lighting) Baseball Fields (No lighting) Soccer Fields Horeshoe Pits Football Field Lighting) Washrooms Washrooms (Accessible) Gazebos Benches Basketball Courts Dog Park Canteens Total Population Per Capita Standard

2010 11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 3 4 6

2011

11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 3 4 6

2012

5 58

5 59

5 60

29,559 0.0020

29,311 0.0020

29,088 0.0020

29,225 0.0020

29,316 0.0020

29,413 0.0020

29,521 0.0020

29,592 0.0020

29,757 0.0020

29,899 0.0020

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.0020 $104,375 $209

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

10 Year 1,926 $209 $402,053

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

12 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 4 4 6

2019 Value ($/item) $40,000 $175,000 $75,000 $387,600 $197,000 $214,000 $7,900 $444,000 $50,000 $50,000 $12,700 $750 $37,800 $15,000 $50,000

PAGE B-13

Page 145 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 4 4 6

2018

5 58

11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 4 4 6

2017

5 58

11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 4 4 6

2016

5 58

11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 3 4 6

2015

5 58

11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 3 4 6

2014

12 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 4 4 6 1 5 61

11 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 7 2 3 4 6

2013

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure:

Indoor Recreation Facilities sq.ft. of building area 2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fermoy Community Centre Harris Park Glendower Hall Storrington Centre Bradshaw School House Frontenac Community Arena*

937 900 4,600 2,300 810 17,138

Total

26,685

Population Per Capita Standard

29,559 0.9028

29,311 0.9104

29,088 0.9174

29,225 0.9131

29,316 0.9103

29,413 0.9073

29,521 0.9039

29,592 0.9018

29,757 0.8968

29,899 0.8925

Description

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.9056 $257 $233

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

10 Year 1,926 $233 $448,277

2019 Value/sq.ft. Bld’g with land, Value site works, ($/sq.ft.) etc. $225 $257 $225 $257 $225 $257 $225 $257 $225 $257 $225 $257

*Represents Township of South Frontenac’s share of the facility (59%). Shared with Central Frontenac.

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-14

Page 146 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Unit Measure:

Recreation Vehicles and Equipment No. of vehicles and equipment

Elite Zamboni

0.59

2019 Value ($/Vehicle) 0.59 $200,000

Total

0.59

29,559 0.00002

29,311 0.00002

29,088 0.00002

29,225 0.00002

29,316 0.00002

29,413 0.00002

29,521 0.00002

29,592 0.00002

29,757 0.00002

29,899 0.00002

Description

Population Per Capita Standard

2009

2009-2018 0.00002 $200,271 $4

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

10 Year 1,926 $4 $7,723

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

*Represents Township of South Frontenac’s share of the zamboni (59%). Shared with Central Frontenac.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-15

Page 147 of 297

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2010

Township of South Frontenac Service Standard Calculation Sheet Library Facilities sq.ft. of building area

Service: Unit Measure: Description

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Sydenham Library Storrington Library Hartington Library

1,000 350 1,500

4,100 350 1,500

Total

2,850

5,950

Population Per Capita Standard

29,559 0.0964

29,311 0.0972

29,088 0.2046

29,225 0.2036

29,316 0.2030

29,413 0.2023

29,521 0.2016

29,592 0.2011

29,757 0.2000

29,899 0.1990

10 Year Average Quantity Standard Quality Standard Service Standard

2009-2018 0.1809 $281 $51

D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population $ per Capita Eligible Amount

10 Year 1,926 $51 $97,879

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE B-16

Page 148 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2019 Value/sq.ft. Bld’g with land, Value site works, ($/sq.ft.) etc. $225 $281 $225 $281 $225 $281

Page 149 of 297

Appendix C Long-Term Capital and Operating Cost Examination

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE C-1

Page 150 of 297

Appendix C: Long-Term Capital and Operating Cost Examination Township of South Frontenac Annual Capital and Operating Cost Impact As a requirement of the D.C.A. under subsection 10 (2) (c), an analysis must be undertaken to assess the long-term capital and operating cost impacts for the capital infrastructure projects identified within the D.C. As part of this analysis, it was deemed necessary to isolate the incremental operating expenditures directly associated with these capital projects, factor in cost saving attributable to economies of scale or cost sharing where applicable and prorate the cost on a per unit basis (i.e. sq.ft. of building space, per vehicle, etc.). This was undertaken through a review of the Township’s approved 2017 Financial Information Return (F.I.R.). In addition to the operational impacts, over time the initial capital projects will require replacement. This replacement of capital is often referred to as life cycle cost. By definition, life cycle costs are all the costs which are incurred during the life of a physical asset, from the time its acquisition is first considered, to the time it is taken out of service for disposal or redeployment. The method selected for life cycle costing is the sinking fund method which provides that money will be contributed annually and invested, so that those funds will grow over time to equal the amount required for future replacement. The following factors were utilized to calculate the annual replacement cost of the capital projects (annual contribution = factor X capital asset cost) and are based on an annual growth rate of 2% (net of inflation) over the average useful life of the asset:

Asset Services Related to a Highway Vehicles Fire Equipment Parkland Facilities

Lifecycle Cost Factors Average Useful Life Factor 50 0.01182 10 0.09133 10 0.09133 30 0.02465 50 0.01182

Table C-1 depicts the annual operating impact resulting from the proposed gross capital projects at the time they are all in place. It is important to note that, while Township

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE C-2

Page 151 of 297

program expenditures will increase with growth in population, the costs associated with the new infrastructure (i.e. facilities) would be delayed until the time these works are in place.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE C-3

Page 152 of 297

Table C-1 Operating and Capital Expenditure Impacts for Future Capital Expenditures SERVICE

GROSS COST LESS ANNUAL LIFECYCLE BENEFIT TO EXPENDITURES EXISTING

ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES

TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES

Services Related to a Highway 1.1 Roads, bridges, culverts, structures, streetlights & traffic signals 1.2 Public Works facilities 1.3 Public Works fleet & equipment

10,065,336 435,170 900,000

784,425 22,556 132,830

770,950 33,332 68,935

1,555,375 55,888 201,765

Fire Protection Services 2.1 Fire facilities, vehicles & equipment

1,699,600

94,761

126,837

221,598

178,933

16,850

280,835

297,685

1,258,713

96,420

50,090

146,510

Library Services 5.1 Library facilities

95,668

8,290

289

8,579

Engineering Services - Studies 6.1 Studies

108,098

Community Based Studies 7.1 Studies

285,000

Police and Other Facilities 3.1 Police and other facilities Parks and Recreation 4.1 Parkland development, amenities, recreation facilities and vehicles

Total

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

15,026,518

1,156,132

1,331,268

2,487,400

PAGE C-4

Page 153 of 297

Appendix D D.C. Reserve Fund Policy

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE D-1

Page 154 of 297

Appendix D: D.C. Reserve Fund Policy D.1

Legislative Requirements

The Development Charges Act, 1997 (D.C.A.) requires development charge collections (and associated interest) to be placed in separate reserve funds. Sections 33 through 36 of the Act provide the following regarding reserve fund establishment and use: •

A municipality shall establish a reserve fund for each service to which the D.C. by-law relates; subsection 7 (1), however, allows services to be grouped into categories of services for reserve fund (and credit) purposes, although only 100% eligible and 90% eligible services may be combined (minimum of two reserve funds).

•

The municipality shall pay each development charge it collects into a reserve fund or funds to which the charge relates.

•

The money in a reserve fund shall be spent only for the “capital costs” determined through the legislated calculation process (as per subsection 5 (1) 28).

•

Money may be borrowed from the fund but must be paid back with interest (O.Reg. 82/98, subsection 11 (1) defines this as Bank of Canada rate either on the day the by-law comes into force or, if specified in the by-law, the first business day of each quarter). D.C. reserve funds may not be consolidated with other municipal reserve funds for investment purposes and may only be as an interim financing source for capital undertakings for which development charges may be spent (section 37).

•

Annually, the Treasurer of the municipality is required to provide Council with a financial statement related to the D.C. by-law(s) and reserve funds. This statement must be made available to the public and may be requested to be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The D.C.A. does not prescribe how the statement is to be made available to the public. We would recommend that a resolution of Council make the statement available on the municipality’s website or upon request. Subsection 43 (2) and O.Reg. 82/98 prescribes the information that must be included in the Treasurer’s statement, as follows: •

opening balance;

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE D-2

Page 155 of 297

•

closing balance;

•

description of each service and/or service category for which the reserve fund was established (including a list of services within a service category);

•

transactions for the year (e.g. collections, draws) including each assets capital costs to be funded from the D.C. reserve fund and the manner for funding the capital costs not funded under the D.C. by-law (i.e. non-D.C. recoverable cost share and post-period D.C. recoverable cost share);

•

for projects financed by development charges, the amount spent on the project from the D.C. reserve fund and the amount and source of any other monies spent on the project.

•

amounts borrowed, purpose of the borrowing and interest accrued during previous year;

•

amount and source of money used by the municipality to repay municipal obligations to the D.C. reserve fund;

•

list of credits by service or service category (outstanding at beginning of the year, given in the year and outstanding at the end of the year by holder); for credits granted under section 14 of the previous D.C.A., a schedule identifying the value of credits recognized by the municipality, the service to which it applies and the source of funding used to finance the credit; and a statement as to compliance with subsection 59 (1) of the D.C.A., whereby the municipality shall not impose, directly or indirectly, a charge related to a development or a requirement to construct a service related to development, except as permitted by the D.C.A. or another Act.

•

Based upon the above, Figure 1, and Attachments 1 and 2, set out the format for which annual reporting to Council should be provided. D.2

D.C. Reserve Fund Application

Section 35 of the D.C.A. states that: “The money in a reserve fund established for a service may be spent only for capital costs determined under paragraphs 2 to 8 of subsection 5(1).” This provision clearly establishes that reserve funds collected for a specific service are only to be used for that service, or to be used as a source of interim financing of capital undertakings for which a development charge may be spent.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE D-3

Page 156 of 297

Figure D-1 Township of South Frontenac Annual Treasurer’s Statement of Development Charge Reserve Funds

Description Opening Balance, January 1, ________

Services to which the Development Charge Relates Non-Discounted Services Discounted Services Police and Engineering Services Fire Other Services Related to a Protection Parks and Library Facilities Studies Highway Services Recreation Services

Community Based Studies

Total 0

Plus: Development Charge Collections Accrued Interest Repayment of Monies Borrowed from Fund and Associated Interest1 Sub-Total

0 0 0

Less: 2 Amount Transferred to Capital (or Other) Funds Amounts Refunded Amounts Loaned to Other D.C. Service Category for Interim Financing

0 0

0 0 0

Credits Sub-Total

0 0

Closing Balance, December 31, ________

1 2 3

Source of funds used to repay the D.C. reserve fund See Attachment 1 for details See Attachment 2 for details

The Municipality is compliant with s.s. 59.1 (1) of the Development Charges Act , whereby charges are not directly or indirectly imposed on development nor has a requirement to construct a service related to development been imposed, except as permitted by the Development Charges Act or another Act.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE D-4

Attachment 1 Township of South Frontenac Amount Transferred to Capital (or Other) Funds – Capital Fund Transactions D.C. Recoverable Cost Share D.C. Forecast Period

Capital Fund Transactions Services Related to a Highway Capital Cost A Capital Cost B Capital Cost C Sub-Total - Services Related to Highways

Gross Capital Cost

D.C. Reserve Fund Draw

Non-D.C. Recoverable Cost Share

Post D.C. Forecast Period

Post-Period Grants, Grants, Other Tax Supported Rate Supported Grants, Subsidies Other Benefit/ Capacity Subsidies Other Reserve/Reserv Operating Fund Operating Fund Subsidies Other Contributions Interim Financing Contributions e Fund Draws Contributions Contributions Debt Financing Contributions

D.C. Debt Financing

Fire Protection Services Capital Cost D Capita Cost E Capital Cost F Sub-Total - Fire Protection Services

Parks and Recreation Capital Cost G Capita Cost H Capital Cost I Sub-Total - Parks and Recreation

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE D-5

Page 157 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Attachment 2 Township of South Frontenac Statement of Credit Holder Transactions

Credit Holder Credit Holder A Credit Holder B Credit Holder C Credit Holder D Credit Holder E Credit Holder F

Applicable D.C. Reserve Fund

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE D-6

Page 158 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Credit Balance Credit Balance Outstanding Additional Credits Used by Outstanding Beginning of Credits Granted Holder During End of Year Year ________

Year During Year

Page 159 of 297

Appendix E Local Service Policy

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-1

Page 160 of 297

Appendix E: Local Service Policy This Appendix sets out the Township’s General Policy Guidelines on Development Charges (D.C.) and local service funding for Services Related to a Highway, Stormwater Management, Parkland Development, and Underground Linear Services. The guidelines outlines, in general terms, the nature of engineered infrastructure that is included in the study as a development charge project, versus infrastructure that is considered as a local service, to be completed separately by landowners, pursuant to a development agreement. The following policy guidelines are general principles by which staff will be guided in considering development applications. However, each application will be considered, in the context of these policy guidelines as subsection 59(2) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, on its own merits having regard to, among other factors, the nature, type and location of the development and any existing and proposed development in the surrounding area, as well as the location and type of services required and their relationship to the proposed development and to existing and proposed development in the area.

E-1 Services Related to a Highway A highway and services related to a highway are intended for the transportation of people and goods via many different modes including, but not limited to passenger automobiles, commercial vehicles, transit vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. The highway shall consist of all land and associated infrastructure built to support (or service) this movement of people and goods regardless of the mode of transportation employed. A complete street is the concept whereby a highway is planned, designed, operated and maintained to enable pedestrians, cyclists, public transit users and motorists to safely and comfortably be moved, thereby allowing for the efficient movement of persons and goods. The associated infrastructure to achieve this concept shall include, but is not limited to: road pavement structure and curbs; grade separation/bridge structures (for any vehicles, railways and/or pedestrians); grading, drainage and retaining wall features; culvert structures; storm water drainage systems; utilities; traffic control systems; signage; gateway features; street furniture; active transportation facilities (e.g. sidewalks, bike lanes, multi-use trails which interconnect the transportation network,

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-2

Page 161 of 297

etc.); roadway lighting systems; boulevard and median surfaces (e.g. sod & topsoil, paving, etc.); street trees and landscaping; parking lanes & lay-bys; (excluding on-street parking in the downtown) and driveway entrances; noise attenuation systems; railings and safety barriers. E.1.1 Local and Collector Roads a.

Collector Roads Internal to Development, inclusive of all land and associated infrastructure – direct developer responsibility under s.59 of the D.C.A. as a local service.

Collector Roads External to Development, inclusive of all land and associated infrastructure – if needed to support a specific development or required to link with the area to which the plan relates, direct developer responsibility under s.59 of the D.C.A.; otherwise, included in D.C. calculation to the extent permitted under s.5(1) of the D.C.A. (dependent on local circumstances).

All local roads, including private roads, are considered to be the developer’s responsibility.

E.1.2 Arterial Roads a. New, widened, extended or upgraded arterial roads, inclusive of all associated infrastructure: Included as part of road costing funded through D.C.A., s.5(1). b. Land acquisition for arterial roads on existing rights-of-way to achieve a complete street: dedication under the Planning Act provisions (s. 41, 51 and s. 53) through development lands; in area with limited development: included in D.C.’s. c. Land acquisition for arterial roads on new rights-of-way to achieve a complete street: dedication, where possible, under the Planning Act provisions (s. 51 and s. 53) through development lands up to the R.O.W. specified in the Official Plan. d. Land acquisition beyond normal dedication requirements to achieve transportation corridors as services related to highways, including intersection widening and redesign on collector and arterial roads: included in D.C.’s.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-3

Page 162 of 297

E.1.3 Traffic Control Systems, Signals and Intersection Improvements a. On new arterial roads and arterial road improvements unrelated to a specific development: included as part of road costing funded through D.C.’s. b. On non-arterial roads, or for any private site entrances or entrances to specific development: direct developer responsibility under s.59 of D.C.A. (as a local service). c. On arterial or collector road intersections with regional roads: include in D.C.’s or in certain circumstances, may be a direct developer responsibility d. Intersection improvements, new or modified signalization, signal timing & optimization plans, area traffic studies for highways attributed to growth and unrelated to a specific development: included in D.C. calculation as permitted under s.5(1) of the D.C.A. E.1.4 Streetlights a. Streetlights on new arterial roads and arterial road improvements: considered part of the complete street and included as part of the road costing funded through D.C.’s or in exceptional circumstances, may be direct developer responsibility through local service provisions (s.59 of D.C.A.). b. Streetlights on non-arterial roads internal to development: considered part of the complete street and included as a direct developer responsibility under s. 59 of the D.C.A. (as a local service). c. Streetlights on non-arterial roads external to development, needed to support a specific development or required to link with the area to which the plan relates: considered part of the complete street and are included as a direct developer responsibility under s. 59 of the D.C.A. (as a local service). E.1.5 Transportation Related Pedestrian and Cycling Facilities a. Sidewalks, multi-use trails, and bike lanes (paved shoulders), inclusive of all required infrastructure, located within arterial roads, regional roads: considered part of the complete street and included in D.C.’s, or, in exceptional

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-4

Page 163 of 297

circumstances, may be direct developer responsibility through local service provisions (s.59 of D.C.A.). b. Sidewalks, multi-use trails, and bike lanes (paved shoulders), inclusive of all required infrastructure, located within or linking to non-arterial road corridors internal to development: direct developer responsibility under s.59 of D.C.A. (as a local service). c. Other sidewalks, multi-use trails, and bike lanes (paved shoulders), inclusive of all required infrastructure, located within non-arterial road corridors external to development and needed to support a specific development or required to link with the area to which the plan relates: direct developer responsibility under s.59 of D.C.A. (as a local service). E.1.6 Noise Abatement Measures a. Noise abatement measures external and internal to development where it is related to, or a requirement of a specific development: direct developer responsibility under s.59 of D.C.A. (as a local service). b. Noise abatement measures on new arterial roads and arterial road improvements abutting an existing community and unrelated to a specific development: included as part of road costing funded through D.C.’s .

E.2 Stormwater Management a. Stormwater facilities for quality and/or quantity management, including downstream erosion works, inclusive of land and all associated infrastructure, such as landscaping and perimeter fencing: direct developer responsibility under s.59 of D.C.A. (as a local service). b. Over-sizing cost of stormwater facilities capacity, excluding land, to accommodate runoff from new, widened, extended or upgraded municipal arterial roads that are funded as a development charges project: included as part of road costing funded through D.C.’s.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-5

Page 164 of 297

c. Erosion works, inclusive of all restoration requirements, related to a development application: direct developer responsibility under s. 59 of the D.C.A. (as a local service). d. Storm sewer systems and drainage works that are required for a specific development, either internal or external to the area to which the plan relates: direct developer responsibility under s. 59 of the D.C.A. (as a local service).

E.3 Parkland Development E.3.1 Parkland a. Parkland Development for Neighbourhood Parks: direct developer responsibility to provide at base condition, as follows: •

Clearing and grubbing. Tree removals as per the subdivision’s tree preservation and removals plan.

• •

Topsoil Stripping, screening, and stockpiling. Rough grading (pre-grading) to allow for positive drainage of the Park, with minimum slopes of 2%. If necessary, this may include some minor drainage tile work and grading as per the overall subdivision grading design complete with any required swales or catch basins. Runoff from the development property shall not drain into the park unless approved by the Township.

•

Spreading of topsoil to 150mm depth (import topsoil if existing on-site is insufficient to reach required depth).

• •

Seeding of site with Township-approved seed mix. Maintenance of seed until acceptance by Township. Parks shall be free of any contaminated soil or subsoil.

• •

Parks shall not be mined for fill. Parks shall be conveyed free and clear of all encumbrances.

•

When Park parcels cannot be developed in a timely manner, they shall be graded to ensure positive drainage and seeded to minimize erosion and dust. These shall be maintained by the developer until construction commences thereon. The Park block shall not be used for topsoil or other construction material, equipment storage, or sales pavilions.

•

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-6

Page 165 of 297

b. Program facilities, amenities, and furniture, within parkland: are included in D.C.’s.

E.4 Landscape Buffer Blocks, Features, Cul-de-sac Islands, Berms, Grade Transition Areas, Walkway Connections to Adjacent Arterial Roads, Open Space, etc. The cost of developing all landscape buffer blocks, landscape features, cul-de- sac islands, berms, grade transition areas, walkway connections to adjacent arterial roads, open space and other remnant pieces of land conveyed to the municipality shall be a direct developer responsibility as a local service. Such costs include but are not limited to: a. pre-grading, sodding or seeding, supply and installation of topsoil, (to the Municipality’s required depth), landscape features, perimeter fencing and amenities and all planting.

E.5 Infrastructure Assets Constructed by Developers a. All infrastructure assets constructed by Developers must be designed in accordance with the Township’s Design Criteria and Standards, as revised. b. All infrastructure assets shall be conveyed in accordance with the Township’s Design Criteria and Standards, as revised c. Any Parks and Open Space infrastructure assets approved to be built by the developer on behalf of the Municipality shall be in accordance with the Township’s Standards.

E.6 Underground Services (Stormwater, Water and Sanitary Services) Underground services, where available, may include infrastructure for stormwater, water, and sanitary services within the road allowance. These services are not included in the cost of road infrastructure and are treated separately. The responsibility for such services as well as stormwater management ponds and water pumping stations, which are undertaken as part of new developments or redevelopments will generally be direct

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-7

Page 166 of 297

developer responsibility as a local service. It is recognized that much of the development within the Township occurs on private services. Private water and septic services are a direct developer responsibility. The costs of the following items shall be direct developer responsibilities as a local service: a. providing all underground services internal to the development, including storm, water and sanitary services; b. providing service connections from existing underground services to the development; c. providing new underground services or upgrading existing underground services external to the development if the services are required to service the development. If external services are required by two or more developments, the developer for the first development will be responsible for the cost of the external services and may enter into front-ending/cost-sharing agreements with other developers independent of the Municipality; d. providing stormwater management ponds and other facilities required by the development including all associated features such as landscaping and fencing; e. water booster pumping stations, and reservoir pumping stations serving individual developments, as may be required;

E.7 Natural Heritage System (N.H.S.) The Natural Heritage System includes natural heritage features including woodlands, wetlands, and environmental features, and their adjacent lands within the Township. It also includes areas surrounding waterbodies that are environmentally sensitive and have a direct impact on water quality (e.g. 30 metre buffer surrounding lakes and wetlands). Where a plan of subdivision or condominium has been approved that may include or are adjacent to natural heritage features/waterbodies, the Township through conditions of approval or by way of an agreement will require recommendations of Environmental Impact Studies/Assessments or other associated studies to be implemented. Works required to implement the recommendations of an Environmental

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-8

Page 167 of 297

Impact Study (E.I.S). or Environmental Impact Assessment (E.I.A.), or any similar study, shall be considered a local service paid for directly by the developer. Direct developer responsibility as a local service provision includes but is not limited to the following: a. Riparian planting and landscaping requirements (as required by the Township, Conservation Authority or other authorities having jurisdiction) to protect and enhance the natural heritage system and water quality. b. Implementation of recommendations included in an Environmental Impact Study/Assessment, or similar study, through conditions of development approvals by the Township, County or Conservation Authority.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE E-9

Page 168 of 297

Appendix F Asset Management Plan

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE F-1

Page 169 of 297

Appendix F: Asset Management Plan The recent changes to the D.C.A. (new subsection 10 (2) (c.2)) require that the background study must include an asset management plan (A.M.P.) related to new infrastructure. Section 10 (3) of the D.C.A. provides: “The asset management plan shall, (a)

deal with all assets whose capital costs are proposed to be funded under the development charge by-law;

(b)

demonstrate that all the assets mentioned in clause (a) are financially sustainable over their full life cycle;

(c)

contain any other information that is prescribed; and

(d)

be prepared in the prescribed manner.”

In regard to the above, section 8 of the Regulations was amended to include subsections (2), (3) and (4) which set out for specific detailed requirements for transit (only). For all services except transit, there are no prescribed requirements at this time thus requiring the municipality to define the approach to include within the background study. At a broad level, the A.M.P. provides for the long-term investment in an asset over its entire useful life along with the funding. The schematic below identifies the costs for an asset through its entire lifecycle. For growth-related works, the majority of capital costs will be funded by the D.C. Non-growth-related expenditures will then be funded from non-D.C. revenues as noted below. During the useful life of the asset, there will be minor maintenance costs to extend the life of the asset along with additional program related expenditures to provide the full services to the residents. At the end of the life of the asset, it will be replaced by non-D.C. financing sources. It should be noted that with the recent passing of the Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act (I.J.P.A.) municipalities are now required to complete A.M.P.s, based on certain criteria, which are to be completed by 2021 for core municipal services and 2023 for all other services. The amendments to the D.C.A. do not require municipalities to complete these A.M.P.s (required under I.J.P.A.) for the D.C. background study, rather the D.C.A. requires that the D.C. background study include information to show the assets to be funded by the D.C. are sustainable over their full lifecycle.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE F-2

Page 170 of 297

New Assets

Financing Methods

Replacement Assets

Purchase

Reserves/Reserve Funds Debentures User Fees Grants Other

Purchase

Install Commission

Operate

Maintain

Monitor (Throughout Life of Assets)

Operating Budget

(To End of Useful Life)

Removal/Decommission

Monitor (Throughout Life of Assets)

Proceeds on Disposal Funding of Disposal / Decommissioning Costs

Disposal

Removal/Decommission

Disposal

In 2012, the Province developed Building Together: Guide for municipal asset management plans which outlines the key elements for an A.M.P., as follows: State of local infrastructure: asset types, quantities, age, condition, financial accounting valuation and replacement cost valuation. Desired levels of service: defines levels of service through performance measures and discusses any external trends or issues that may affect expected levels of service or the municipality’s ability to meet them (for example, new accessibility standards, climate change impacts). Asset management strategy: the asset management strategy is the set of planned actions that will seek to generate the desired levels of service in a sustainable way, while managing risk, at the lowest lifecycle cost. Financing strategy: having a financial plan is critical for putting an A.M.P. into action. By having a strong financial plan, municipalities can also demonstrate that they have

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE F-3

Page 171 of 297

made a concerted effort to integrate the A.M.P. with financial planning and municipal budgeting and are making full use of all available infrastructure financing tools. Commensurate with the above, the Township prepared an A.M.P. in 2016 for its existing assets however, did not take into account future growth-related assets. As a result, the asset management requirement for the D.C. must be undertaken in the absence of this information. In recognition to the schematic above, the following table (presented in 2019 $) has been developed to provide the annualized expenditures and revenues associated with new growth. Note that the D.C.A. does not require an analysis of the non-D.C. capital needs or their associated operating costs so these are omitted from the table below. As well, as all capital costs included in the D.C.-eligible capital costs are not included in the Township’s A.M.P., the present infrastructure gap and associated funding plan have not been considered at this time. Hence the following does not represent a fiscal impact assessment (including future tax/rate increases) but provides insight into the potential affordability of the new assets:

The non-D.C. recoverable portion of the projects which will require financing from municipal financial resources (i.e. taxation, rates, fees, etc.). This amount has been presented on an annual debt charge amount based on 20-year financing.
Lifecycle costs for the 2019 D.C. capital works have been presented based on a sinking fund basis. The assets have been considered over their estimated useful lives.
Incremental operating costs for the D.C. services (only) have been included.
The resultant total annualized expenditures are $2.82 million.
Consideration was given to the potential new taxation and user fee revenues which will be generated as a result of new growth. These revenues will be available to finance the expenditures above. The new operating revenues are $1.87million. This amount, totalled with the existing operating revenues of $25.30 million, provide annual revenues of $27.16 million by the end of the period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE F-4

Page 172 of 297

In consideration of the above, the capital plan is deemed to be financially sustainable. Township of South Frontenac Asset Management – Future Expenditures and Associated Revenues 2019$ Sub-Total

2033 (Total)

Expenditures (Annualized) Annual Debt Payment on Non-Growth Related Capital1 Annual Debt Payment on Post Period Capital2 Lifecycle: Annual Lifecycle - Town Wide Services Sub-Total - Annual Lifecycle

48,073 $1,444,757 $1,444,757

$1,444,757

Incremental Operating Costs (for D.C. Services)

$1,331,268

Total Expenditures

$2,824,099

Revenue (Annualized) Total Existing Revenue3 Incremental Tax and Non-Tax Revenue (User Fees, Fines, Licences, etc.) Total Revenues

$25,295,963 $1,866,022 $27,161,985

Non-Growth Related component of Projects including 10% mandatory deduction on soft services 2 Interim Debt Financing for Post Period Benefit 3 As per Sch. 10 of FIR

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE F-5

Page 173 of 297

Appendix G Proposed D.C. By-law

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-1

Page 174 of 297

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW NO. 2019-xx BEING A BY-LAW OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOPMENT CHARGES WHEREAS Section 2(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 27 (hereinafter called the Act) enables the Council of a municipality to pass by-laws for the imposition of development charges against land located in the municipality where the development of the land would increase the need for municipal services as designated in the by-law and the development requires one or more of the actions set out in Subsection 2(2) of the Act; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac has given Notice in accordance with Section 12 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 of its development charges proposal and held a public meeting on July 2, 2019; AND WHEREAS the Council, at its meeting of July 2, 2019, approved a report dated May 31,2019 entitled Township of South Frontenac Development Charges Background Study; AND WHEREAS the Council has heard all persons who applied to be heard in objection to, or in support of, the development charges proposal at such public meeting and provided a subsequent period for written communications to be made; AND WHEREAS the Council, in adopting the Township of South Frontenac Development Charges Background Study on May 31, 2019, directed that development charges be imposed on land under development or redevelopment within the geographical limits of the municipality as hereinafter provided.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-2

Page 175 of 297

NOW THEREFORE the Council enacts as follows: DEFINITIONS 1.

In this By-law: (1) “Act” means the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 27; (2) “accessory use” means where used to describe a use, building or structure, that the use, building or structure is naturally and normally incidental, subordinate in purpose of floor area or both, and exclusively devoted to a principal use, building or structure; (3) “agricultural use” means a bona fide farming operation, including barns, silos and other ancillary buildings to such agricultural development for the purposes of the growing of field crops, flower gardening, truck gardening, berry crops, tree crops, nurseries, aviaries, apiaries, maple syrup production, mushroom cultivation or farms for the grazing, breeding, raising, boarding of livestock or any other similar uses carried on in the field of general agriculture and aquaculture. Agricultural use does not include the development of a single detached dwelling on agricultural land, nor does it include a building for the growing or processing of cannabis. (4) “apartment unit” means any residential dwelling unit within a building containing more than two dwelling units where the residential units are connected by an interior corridor; (5) “bedroom” means a habitable room larger than seven square metres, including a den, study or other similar area, but does not include a living room, dining room or kitchen; (6) “benefiting area” means an area defined by a map, plan or legal description in a front-ending agreement as an area that will receive a benefit from the construction of a service; (7) “capital costs” means costs incurred or proposed to be incurred by the municipality or a local board thereof directly or under an agreement, (a) to acquire land or an interest in land,

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-3

Page 176 of 297

(b) to improve land, (c) to acquire, construct or improve buildings and structures, (d) to acquire, construct or improve facilities including: (i) rolling stock, furniture and equipment with an estimated useful life

of seven years or more, (ii) materials acquired for circulation, reference or information purposes

by a library board as defined in the Public Libraries Act, 1984, S.O. 1984, c. 57, (iii) furniture and equipment, other than computer equipment,

(e) to undertake studies in connection with any matter under the Act and any of the matters in clauses (a) to (d), required for the provision of services designated in this by-law within or outside the municipality, including interest on borrowing for those expenditures under clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) that are growth-related; (8) “commercial use” means the use of land, structure or building for the purpose of buying and selling of commodities and supplying of services as distinguished from manufacturing or assembling of goods, also as distinguished from other purposes such as warehousing and/or an open storage yard; (9) “council” means the Council of the municipality; (10) “development” means the construction, erection or placing of one or more buildings or structures on land or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of increasing the size or usability thereof, and includes redevelopment; (11) “development charge” means a charge imposed with respect to growthrelated net capital costs against land in the municipality under this by-law; (12) “dwelling unit” means any part of a building or structure used, designed or intended to be used as a domestic establishment in which one or more persons

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-4

Page 177 of 297

may sleep and are provided with culinary and sanitary facilities for their exclusive use; (13) “existing industrial building” means a building used for or in connection with: (a)

manufacturing, producing, processing, storing or distributing something;

(b)

research or development in connection with manufacturing, producing or processing something;

(c)

retail sales by a manufacturer, producer or processor of something they manufactured, produced or processed, if the retail sales are at the site where the manufacturing, production or processing takes place;

(d)

office or administrative purposes, if they are: (i) carried out with respect to manufacturing, producing,

processing, storage or distributing of something, and (ii) in or attached to the building or structure used for that

manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distribution; (14) “farm building” means that part of a bona fide farm operation encompassing barns, silos and other ancillary development to an agricultural use, but excluding a residential use; (15) “front-end payment” means a payment made by an owner pursuant to a front-ending agreement, which may be in addition to a development charge that the owner is required to pay under this by-law, to cover the net capital costs of the services designated in the agreement that are required to enable the land to be developed; (16) “front-ending agreement” means an agreement made under Section 44 of the Act between the municipality and any or all owners within a benefitting area providing for front-end payments by an owner or owners or for the installation of

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-5

Page 178 of 297

services by an owner or owners or for the installation of services by an owner or owners or any combination thereof; (17) “grade” means the average level of finished ground adjoining a building or structure at all exterior walls; (18) “gross floor area” means the total area of all floors above grade of a dwelling unit measured between the outside surfaces of exterior walls or between the outside surfaces of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing the dwelling unit from another dwelling unit or other portion of a building; i) In the case of a commercial, industrial and/or institutional building or structure, or in the case of a mixed-use building or structure in respect of the commercial, industrial and/or institutional portion thereof, the total area of all building floors above or below grade measured between the outside surfaces of the exterior walls, or between the outside surfaces of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing a commercial, industrial and/or institutional use and a residential use. (19) “owner” means the owner of land or a person who has made application for an approval for the development of land upon which a development charge is imposed; (20) “place of worship” means land that is owned by and used for the purposes of a place of worship, a churchyard, cemetery, or burial ground exempt from taxation under section 3 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O., 1990, c. A.31, as amended. (21)

“Planning Act” means the Planning Act, 1990, as amended;

(22) “rate” means the interest rate established weekly by the Bank of Canada for treasury bills having a term of 30 days; (23)

“regulation” means any regulation made pursuant to the Act;

(24) “residential use” means land or buildings or structure of any kind whatsoever used, designed or intended to be used as living accommodations for one or more individuals;

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-6

Page 179 of 297

(25) “semi-detached dwelling”, “duplex” or “row housing” means a dwelling unit in a residential building consisting of two (or more in the case of row housing) dwelling units having one vertical wall or one horizontal wall, but no other parts, attached to another dwelling unit where the residential units are not connected by an interior corridor; (26) “services” (or “service”) means those services designated in Schedule “A” to this by-law or specified in an agreement made under Section 44 of the Act; (27) “services in lieu” means those services specified in an agreement made under Section 8 of this by-law; (28) “service standards” means the prescribed level of services on which the schedule of charges in Schedules “B-1” and “B-2” are based; (29) “servicing agreement” means an agreement between a landowner and the municipality relative to the provision of municipal services to specified lands within the municipality; (30) “single detached dwelling unit” means a residential building consisting of one dwelling unit and not attached to another structure. (31) “Special Care/Special Dwelling” means a Residential Use Building containing two or more rooms or suites of rooms designed or intended to be used for sleeping and living accommodation that have a common entrance from street level: (1)

Where the occupants have the right to use in common halls, stairs, yards, common rooms and accessory buildings;

(2)

Which may or may not have exclusive sanitary and/or culinary facilities;

(3)

That is designated to accommodate persons with specific needs, including, but not limited to, independent permanent living arrangements;

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-7

Page 180 of 297

(4)

Where support services such as meal preparation, grocery shopping, laundry, housekeeping, nursing, respite care, and attendant services may be provided at various levels;

(5)

And includes, but is not limited to, retirement houses, nursing homes, group homes (including correctional group homes) and hospices;

For the purposes of this by-law each of the following permanent and seasonal units shall be deemed to be a separate dwelling unit: (i)

Each single detached dwelling;

(ii)

Each dwelling unit within a duplex or semi-detached dwelling; and

(iii)

Each suite, apartment or unit within a triplex, quadraplex, high density multiple unit residential development or similar development;

SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 2.

(1)

Subject to the provisions of this by-law, development charges against land shall be calculated and collected in accordance with the base rates set out in Schedules “B-1” and “B-2”, which relate to the services set out in Schedule “A”.

(2)

The development charge with respect to the use of any land, buildings or structures shall be calculated as follows: (a)

in the case of residential development, or the residential portion of a mixed-use development, based upon the number and type of dwelling units;

(b)

in the case of commercial and/or industrial, or the commercial and/or industrial portion of a mixed-use development, based upon the gross floor area of such development.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-8

Page 181 of 297

(3)

Council hereby determine that the development of land, buildings or structures for residential and commercial and/or industrial uses will require the provision, enlargement, expansion or improvement of the services referenced in Schedule “B”.

APPLICABLE LANDS 3.

(1)

Subject to Subsections (2), (3), (4) and (5), this by-law applies to all lands in the Township of South Frontenac whether or not the land or use is exempt from taxation under Section 3 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1980, c.31.

(2)

This by-law shall not apply to land that is owned by and use for the purposes of:

(3)

(a)

a board of education;

(b)

any municipality or local board thereof;

(c)

bona fide agricultural use or farm building;

(d)

a place of worship and land used in connection therewith, and a churchyard, cemetery and burial ground exempt from taxation under Section 3 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1980, c.31.

(e)

secondary residential units located both within the primary dwelling and in separate detached accessory structures.

This by-law shall not apply to that category of exempt development described in Subsection 2(3)(b) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, c.27 and Section 2 of O.Reg. 82/98, namely:

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-9

Page 182 of 297

NAME OF CLASS OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

DESCRIPTION OF CLASS OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS

MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS

RESTRICTIONS

Residential buildings, each of which contains a single dwelling unit, that are not attached to other buildings.

Two

The total gross floor area of the additional dwelling unit or units must be less than or equal to the gross floor area of the dwelling unit already in the building.

Semi-detached dwellings or row Residential buildings, each of dwellings which contains a single dwelling unit, that have one or two vertical walls, but no other parts, attached to other buildings. Other residential buildings A residential building not in another class of residential building described in this table.

One

The gross floor area of the additional dwelling unit must be less than or equal to the gross floor area of the dwelling unit already in the building.

One

the gross floor area of the additional dwelling unit must be less than or equal to the gross floor area of the smallest dwelling unit already in the building.

Single detached dwellings

(4)

(a)

If a development includes the enlargement of the gross floor area of an existing industrial building, the amount of the development charge that is payable in respect of the enlargement is determined in accordance with this section.

(b)

If the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 percent or less, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is zero.

(c)

If the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 percent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is the amount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows:

(d)

(i)

Determine the amount by which the enlargement exceeds 50 percent of the gross floor area before the enlargement.

(ii)

Divide the amount determined under paragraph 1 by the amount of the enlargement.

The exemption to Development charges in (a) through (c) above shall only apply to the first instance of an industrial expansion.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-10

Page 183 of 297

(5)

That where a conflict exists between the provisions of the new by-law and any other agreement between the Township and the owner, with respect to land to be charged under this policy, the provisions of such agreement prevail to the extent of the conflict.

(6)

This by-law is not applicable to development for which a complete application for building permit has been submitted prior to the in-force date of this by-law.

(1)

Subject to Subsection (2), development charges shall apply to, and shall be calculated and collected in accordance with, the provisions of this bylaw on land to be developed for residential and commercial, industrial and/or institutional use, where:

(2)

(a)

the development of that land will increase the need for services, and

(b)

the development requires: (i)

the passing of a zoning by-law or an amendment thereto under Section 34 of the Planning Act, 1990;

(ii)

the approval of a minor variance under Section 45 of the Planning Act, 1990;

(iii)

a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under Subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act, 1990;

(iv)

the approval of a plan of subdivision under Section 51 of the Planning Act, 1990;

(v)

a consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act, 1990;

(vi)

the approval of a description under Section 51 of the Condominium Act, R.S.O. 1980, c.84; or

(vii)

the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, R.S.O. 1992 in relation to a building or structure.

Subsection (1) shall not apply in respect of:

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-11

Page 184 of 297

(a)

local services installed at the expense of the owner within a plan of subdivision as a condition of approval under Section 52 of the Planning Act, 1990;

(b)

local services installed at the expense of the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act, 1990.

EXISTING AGREEMENTS 5.

An agreement with respect to charges related to development registered prior to passage of the by-law remains in effect after enactment of this by-law.

MULTIPLE CHARGES 6.

(1)

Where two or more of the actions described in Section 4(1) are required before land to which a development charge applies can be developed, only one development charge shall be calculated and collected in accordance with the provisions of this by-law.

(2)

Notwithstanding Subsection (1), if two or more of the actions described in Section 4(1) occur at different times, and if the subsequent action has the effect of increasing the need for municipal services as designated in Schedule “A”, an additional development charge on the additional residential units and/or commercial and/or industrial floor area, shall be calculated and collected in accordance with the provisions of this by-law.

SERVICE STANDARDS 7.

For the purposes of Section 8, the approved service standards for the municipality are those contained in the Development Charges Background Study dated May 31, 2019.

SERVICES IN LIEU 8.

(1)

Council may authorize an owner to substitute the whole or such part of the development charge applicable to the owner’s development as may be specified in an agreement by the provision at the sole expense of the owner, of services in lieu. Such agreement shall further specify that where the owner provides services in lieu in accordance with the agreement,

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-12

Page 185 of 297

Council shall give to the owner a credit against the development charge otherwise applicable to the development, equal to the reasonable cost to the owner of providing the services in lieu provided such credit shall not exceed the total development charge payable by an owner to the municipality. (2)

In any agreement under Subsection (1), Council may also give a further credit to the owner equal to the reasonable cost of providing services in addition to, or of a greater size or capacity, than would be required under this by-law.

(3)

The credit provided for in Subsection (2) shall not exceed the service standards referenced in Section 7 and used in the calculation of the charges in Schedules “B-1” and “B-2” and no credit shall be charged to any development charges reserve fund prescribed in this by-law.

FRONT-ENDING AGREEMENTS 9.

(1)

Council may enter into a front-ending agreement with any or all owners within a benefitting area pursuant to Section 21 of the Development Charges Act, 1997, providing for the payment by the owner or owners of a front-end payment or for the installation of services by the owners or any combination of front-end payments and installation of services, which may be in addition to the required development charge.

(2)

Front-end payments made by benefitting owners under a front-ending agreement relating to the provision of services for which a development charge is payable shall be credited with an amount equal to the reasonable cost to the owner of providing the services, against the development charges otherwise payable under Schedule “B” of this bylaw.

(3)

No credit given pursuant to Subsection 9(1) shall exceed the total development charge payable by the owner for the applicable service component or the standard of service outlined in Schedule “B” and referenced in Section 7.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-13

Page 186 of 297

(4)

The front-end payment required to be made by the benefitting owner under a front-ending agreement may be adjusted annually.

DEVELOPMENT CHARGE REDEVELOPMENT CREDITS 10.

(1)

Where there is a redevelopment of land on which there is a conversion of space proposed, or on which there was formerly erected a building or structure that has been demolished, a credit shall be allowed against the development charge otherwise payable by the owner pursuant to this Bylaw for the portion of the previous building or structure still in existence that is being converted or for the portion of the building or structure that has been demolished, as the case may be, calculated by multiplying the number and type of dwelling units being converted or demolished or the non-residential total floor area being converted or demolished by the relevant development charge in effect on the date when the development charge is payable in accordance with this By-law. If the development includes the conversion from one use (the “first use”) to another use, the credit shall be based on the development charges calculated pursuant to this By-law at the current development charge rates, that would be payable as development charges in respect of the first use.

(2)

A credit in respect of any demolition under this section shall not be given unless a building permit has been issued or a subdivision agreement, site plan agreement or a consent application has been entered into with the Township for the development within 5 years from the date the demolition permit was issued.

(3)

The amount of any credit hereunder shall not exceed, in total, the amount of the development charges otherwise payable with respect to the development.

TIMING OF CALCULATION AND PAYMENT 11.

(1)

Development charges shall be calculated and payable in full in money or by provision of services as may be agreed upon, or by credit granted by the Act, on the date that the first building permit is issued in relation to a building or structure on land to which a development charge applies, or in a manner or at a time otherwise lawfully agreed upon.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-14

Page 187 of 297

(2)

Where development charges apply to land in relation to which a building permit is required, the building permit shall not be issued until the development charge has been paid in full.

(3)

Notwithstanding Subsections (1) and (2), an owner may enter into an agreement with the municipality to provide for the payment in full of a development charge before building permit issuance or later than the issuing of a building permit.

BY-LAW REGISTRATION 12.

A certified copy of this by-law may be registered on title to any land to which this by-law applies.

RESERVE FUND(S) 13.

(1)

Monies received from payment of development charges shall be maintained in a separate reserve fund or funds, and shall be used only to meet the growth-related net capital costs for which the development charge was levied under this by-law.

(2)

Council directs the Municipal Treasurer to divide the reserve fund(s) created hereunder into the separate sub-accounts in accordance with the service categories set out in Schedule “A” to which the development charge payments shall be credited in accordance with the amounts shown, plus interest earned thereon.

(3)

Where any development charge, or part thereof, remains unpaid after the due date, the amount unpaid shall be added to the tax roll and shall be collected as taxes.

(4)

Where any unpaid development charges are collected as taxes under Subsection (3), the monies so collected shall be credited to the development charge reserve fund or funds referred to in Subsection (1).

BY-LAW AMENDMENT OR REPEAL 14.

(1)

Where this by-law or any development charge prescribed thereunder is amended or repealed either by order of the Local Planning Appeal

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-15

Page 188 of 297

Tribunal or by the Municipal Council, the Municipal Treasurer shall calculate forthwith the amount of any overpayment to be refunded as a result of said amendment or repeal. (2)

Refunds that are required to be paid under Subsection (1) shall be paid to the registered owner of the land on the date on which the refund is paid.

(3)

Refunds that are required to be paid under Subsection (1) shall be paid with interest to be calculated as follows:

(4)

(a)

interest shall be calculated from the date on which the overpayment was collected to the date on which the refund is paid;

(b)

the refund shall include the interest owed under this Section;

(c)

interest shall be paid at the Bank of Canada rate in effect on the later of: (i)

the date of enactment of this by-law, or

(ii)

the date of the last quarterly adjustment, in accordance with the provisions of Subsection (4).

The Bank of Canada interest rate in effect on the date of enactment of this by-law shall be adjusted on the next following business day to the rate established by the Bank of Canada on that day, and shall be adjusted quarter-yearly thereafter in January, April, July and October to the rate established by the Bank of Canada on the day of adjustment.

DEVELOPMENT CHARGE SCHEDULE INDEXING 15.

The development charges referred to in Schedules “B-1” and “B-2” shall be adjusted annually, without amendment to this by-law, commencing on the anniversary date of this by-law and annually thereafter in each year while this bylaw is in force, in accordance with the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price Statistics catalogue number 62007.

BY-LAW ADMINISTRATION 16.

This by-law shall be administered by the Municipal Treasurer.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-16

Page 189 of 297

SCHEDULES TO THE BY-LAW 17.

The following schedules to this by-law form an integral part of this by-law: Schedule “A” – Summary of Development Charge Services Schedule “B-1” – Schedule of Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges for “Hard” Services Schedule “B-2” – Schedule of Residential and Non-Residential Development Charges for “Soft” Services

DATE BY-LAW EFFECTIVE 18.

(1)

This by-law shall come into force and effect on the date of its enactment.

(2)

This by-law shall continue in force and effect for a term not to exceed five years from the date of its enactment, unless it is repealed at an earlier date.

BY-LAW REPEAL 19.

By-law No. 2014-54 is hereby repealed on the effective date this By-law comes into force.

SHORT TITLE 20.

This by-law may be cited as the Development Charges By-law.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-17

Page 190 of 297

THIS By-law read a first time the xx day of August, 2019. THIS By-law read a second and third time and finally passed this xx day of August, 2019.

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Municipal Clerk

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-18

Page 191 of 297

SCHEDULE “A” SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGE SERVICES Municipal-Wide Services •

Services Related to a Highway

•

Fire Protection Services

•

Police and Other Facilities

•

Parks and Recreation

•

Library Services

•

Engineering Services – Studies

•

Community Based Studies

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-19

SCHEDULE “B-1” SCHEDULE OF RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES FOR “HARD” SERVICES RESIDENTIAL

NON-RESIDENTIAL

Single and SemiDetached Dwelling

Other Multiples

Apartments - 2 Bedrooms +

Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom

Services Related to a Highway

6,856

5,495

4,481

3,132

2,747

4.62

Fire Protection Services

1,022

819

668

467

410

0.69

Police and Other Facilities

140

112

0.09

Engineering Services - Studies

0.05

Total Municipal Wide “Hard” Services

8,102

6,493

5,295

3,701

3,247

5.45

Service

Special Care/Special Dwelling Units

(per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area)

Municipal Wide “Hard” Services:

SCHEDULE “B-2” SCHEDULE OF RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES FOR “SOFT” SERVICES RESIDENTIAL Service

NON-RESIDENTIAL

Single and SemiDetached Dwelling

Other Multiples

Apartments - 2 Bedrooms +

Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom

Special Care/Special Dwelling Units

991

794

648

453

397

0.33

(per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area)

Municipal Wide “Soft” Services: Parks and Recreation Library Services

0.02

Community Based Studies

219

176

143

100

0.14

1,281

1,027

837

585

513

0.50

Total Municipal Wide “Soft” Services

H:\South Frontenac\2019 DC\Report\Development Charges Report - Final.docx

PAGE G-20

Page 192 of 297

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Page 193 of 297

Page 194 of 297

Page 195 of 297

Page 196 of 297

Page 197 of 297

Page 198 of 297

Page 199 of 297

Page 200 of 297

Page 201 of 297

Page 202 of 297

Page 203 of 297

Page 204 of 297

Page 205 of 297

Page 206 of 297

Page 207 of 297

Page 208 of 297

Page 209 of 297

Page 210 of 297

Page 211 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 Time: 6:00 PM Location: Council Chambers

Meeting # 18 Present: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Pat Barr, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Staff: Wayne Orr, Chief Administrative Officer, Angela Maddocks, Clerk, Mark Segsworth, Director of Public Services, Louise Fragnito, Director of Corporate Services and Treasurer, Claire Dodds, Director of Development Services, Tim Laprade, Arena and Recreation Supervisor, Darcy Knott, Fire Chief, Emily Caird, Executive Assistant (for the Volunteer Recognition portion) 1.

Volunteer Recognition Award Presentations

Volunteer award recipients and their invited guest met for light refreshments prior to the actual awards presentation at 6:40 pm. Recipients for the year 2018 are Alvin Wood and Rhonda Storring.

Call to Order (regular meeting at 7:00 pm)

Resolution Resolution No. 2019-18-01 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sleeth That the Council meeting of June 18, 2019 be called to order at 7:00 p.m. Carried

Approval of Agenda

Resolution Resolution No. 2019-18-02 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Revill That the agenda be adopted as presented. Carried

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

Councillor Leonard declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 14 (a), the Accounts Payable and Payroll Listing.

Mayor Vandewal declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 11(i), Council Compensation amendment.

Scheduled Closed Session (later in the agenda)

Recess - n/a

Delegations - n/a

Public Meeting

Page 212 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 a)

Resolution Resolution No. 2019-18-03 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sleeth That a public meeting be held to provide for discussion and input on planning matters related to: • Rezoning of Concession 8, Part Lot 11, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, municipally known as Eel Bay Road (S. Clark Homes Ltd) Carried

Rezoning of Concession 8, Part Lot 11, Loughborough (Eel Bay Road) - Z-1908 - S.Clark Trudy Gravel reviewed the details for the rezoning of property in Concession 8, Part Lot 11, Loughborough District. The subject property has been operating as a resort commercial use with three rental cottages and a boat launch for many years. The lot is long and narrow and is elevated to the north and slopes southerly towards an existing marshland area which is identified as a Provincially Significant Wetland. It is located on the waterside of the intersection of Eel Bay Road and Charlie Green Road. The existing three cottages, which were very close to the top of bank and close to the high water mark, have been removed as well as the toilets and shower house. The septic tank will be removed in order to accommodate for a new septic system which has been approved by KFL&A Public Health Unit. The proposal also includes the removal and disposal of three derelict docks from the property. A new dock will be constructed from the walkway extending from the proposed house with a smaller dock to be constructed to the south where an existing gravel driveway is located. The current owner has been undertaking shoreline works including installing retaining walls on the property. This work has been undertaken with a permit from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. As the subject property is located within 120m of a provincially significant wetland, and a small portion of the subject property has been identified as including lands identified as Provincially Significant Wetland, an Environmental Impact Assessment was required to be prepared to evaluate the impact of the re-development proposal on the features and function of the wetland. In support of the rezoning application and the site plan application SP-03-19-L two Environmental Impact Assessments were prepared by Reginald Genge dated February 8, 2019 and April 29, 2019. This property is subject to site plan control because of its proximity to a Provincially Significant Wetland and the site plan application is being processed concurrently with the rezoning application. The recommendations of the EIA’s and the requirements of the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority will be captured as conditions in the Site Plan Control Agreement for the development of the property. The property is designated as Rural in the Township Official Plan. Policies of the Rural designation speak to permitting development that is consistent with maintaining the Township’s rural, natural heritage, and cultural landscape. Policies in the Environmental Sensitive Areas Section 5.2.7 (b)(ii)(3) Policies for Development and Site Alterations Adjacent to Lakes and Rivers indicates that a reduction from a setback may only be considered if it is not physically possible or environmentally desirable to meet the 30 metre setback requirement and that there will be no negative impacts to fish habitat or water quality. This portion of Sydenham Lake has been classified as provincially significant wetland (PSW) by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. Section 5.2.11 of the Official Plan indicates that an Environmental Impact Assessment will be required when considering any development or site alteration, including any planning amendments or variances within or adjacent to a Provincial Significant Wetland. Two Environmental Impact Assessments were submitted in support of the proposed development states that the redevelopment of the site with the proposed setback distances will not have an environmental impact on the

Page 2 of 9

Page 213 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 water quality of Eel Bay, the adjacent waterfront or the provincially significant wetland. The property will be rezoned from the Special Recreational Resort Commercial (RRC-26) Zone to the Special Waterfront Residential (RW-44) Zone. The RW44 Zone requires a minimum 10 metre setback for the shed and 23.7 metres for the single detached dwelling unit from the highwater mark or floodline of the waterbody (Sydenham Lake). The RW-44 Zone requires the minimum permitted setback to the front lot line of 11.95 metres for the detached garage. The setback to the highwater mark to Sydenham Lake will be reduced to 23.7 metres for the single detached dwelling unit and 10 metres for the shed from the required 30 metres. The detached garage will be increasing in height from the required 6 metres (19 ft.) to 8.84 metres (29 ft.). As the subject property is a waterfront lot that fronts onto a publicly maintained road, the application of the zoning by-law definitions makes the lot line adjacent to Eel Bay Road the front lot line. Accessory structures, such as garages and shed are permitted in the interior side yard and the rear yard. For the subject property that would normally mean that the garage and shed would be required to be placed between the dwelling and the water. The KFL&A Public Health Unit have approved a septic system to be accommodated at this location. Staff at the CRCA have indicated that they do not have any objections to the rezoning application based on their consideration for natural hazards, natural heritage and water quality and quantity protection policies. Staff recommend that the EIA recommendations be included as a condition of approval in the Site Plan Control Agreement. Comments were received from KFL&A Public Health dated June 10, 2019 indicating that they have no objections to the zoning by-law amendment. Permit LO-7-19 has been issued for the sewage system. Councillor Sutherland felt this was a positive step for this lot as the previous impact on the lake had been a concern to him. He questioned the rationale for permitting two docks as he felt this encourages more traffic in the wetland area. He felt this was the opportunity to affect change with respect to the number of docks. Trudy Gravel noted that currently three docks exist and that they could be reconstructed under the existing zoning of RRC. Mayor Vandewal inquired about the total lot coverage and Ms. Gravel indicated that this has been reviewed under the zoning. David Plumpton, 1958 Little Long Lake Rd, stated that he was highly in support of the rezoning of this property as it would cut down on the noise and rowdiness that existed previously. Simon Clark, the applicant, noted that his rationale for the second dock was the difficulty in backing his boat into the dock. He indicated that he will keep the dock away from the swampy area. A floating dock is proposed as it is shallow water and the dock could be removed in spring during the spawning season. Mr. Clark noted that there has always been a dock there but it has not bee maintained. c)

Resolution Resolution No. 2019-18-04 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Revill That an opportunity having been provided, the public meeting be closed. Carried

Approval of Minutes

Page 3 of 9

Page 214 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 a)

June 4, 2019 Council Meeting Resolution No. 2019-18-05 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sleeth That the minutes of the June 4, 2019 Council meeting be approved. Carried

June 11, 2019 Committee of the Whole Meeting Resolution No. 2019-18-06 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Revill That the minutes of the June 11, 2019 Committee of the Whole meeting be approved. Carried

Business Arising from the Minutes

Notice of Motion - Sound Levels Staff were asked to bring back a report to consider options for kennels to be exempted from the noise and animal control by-laws so long as they are properly placed and licensed with the township. A report will be presented at the next Development Services Committee meeting. Resolution No. 2019-18-07 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Revill That Staff be directed to engage professional services to determine the noise levels heard at the Snider property. Defeated

Notice of Motion - Support for a OGRA ROMA Combined Conference Resolution No. 2019-18-08 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council endorse the resolution passed by Petrolia Town Council regarding the re-establishment of an annual combined conference of the Ontario Good Roads Association (OGRA) and Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA) and that a letter is sent to the ROMA Board of Directors and OGRA Board of Directors supporting the combined conference in the future. Carried

Reports Requiring Action

Asset Management Policy Resolution No. 2019-18-09 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council adopt the Strategic Asset Management Policy. Carried

Bank Signing Authority See By-law 2019-39

Page 4 of 9

Page 215 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 c)

Credit Card Policy Resolution No. 2019-18-10 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council approve the Credit Card Use Policy and authorize the Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer to implement the changes. Carried

South Frontenac Fire & Rescue - Tanker RFP Resolution No. 2019-18-11 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council authorize the purchase of a replacement Tanker Apparatus for $391,844.18 And that a further $16,844.18 be released from the Equipment Reserve for Fire. Carried

McCall Temporary Two Dwellings on One Lot Agreement Resolution No. 2019-18-12 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to enter into the Temporary Two Dwelling Agreement with Michael John and Maddalena McCall which will allow them to live temporarily in their existing house during the construction of a new dwelling on the same lot. Carried

Roads Requiring Permanent Repair Resolution No. 2019-18-13 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Barr That permanent repairs to various road sections be undertaken in the amount of $500,000 to be funded from savings in the Petworth Culvert project, from the approved carryover of Carrying Place Road and approximately $100,000 from the Devils Saddle Culvert project; And that the Murvale Boundary Road reconstruction originally scheduled for 2021 be accelerated to 2019 with funding in the amount of $576,916 allocated from the 2019 Federal Gas Tax Top up. And that the 2021 amount budgeted for road construction be initially reduced by $576,916 with notation that the Murvale reconstruction project was accelerated to 2019 and paid for from the Federal Gas Tax Top up. Carried

Recreation Committee Restructuring Councillor Roberts proposed an amendment to the original motion to provide for a trial period with the new committee structure. Resolution No. 2019-18-14 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sleeth Amendment:

Page 5 of 9

Page 216 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 That the new committee structures be reviewed by September 30, 2020. Carried Resolution No. 2019-18-15 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Barr That Council strike a “Recreation and Leisure Facilities Committee” and a “Community Programming & Events Committee” And that this structure be put in place for a trail period of 12 months from the date of committee appointments And that staff be directed to actively advertise for committee appointments to these committees with a deadline of July 19th. Carried (as amended) h)

Operational Plan for Drinking Water Resolution No. 2019-18-16 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That the Council for the Township of South Frontenac receive the Operational Plan for the Sydenham Drinking Water System revised April 16, 2019 and authorize the Mayor and CAO to sign the endorsement of the plan. Carried

Council Compensation - Amendment Resolution No. 2019-18-17 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Barr That Council amend the Council Compensation framework, effective January 1, 2019, to provide full day meeting compensation for the Mayor at the existing rate of $150.00 per day. Carried

Committee Meeting Minutes

Corporate Services Committee meeting held April 30, 2019

Harrowsmith Beautification Committee meeting held May 1, 2019

Heritage Committee meeting of May 2, 2019 Resolution No. 2019-18-18 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That Council receives for information the minutes of the following committee meetings: • Corporate Services Committee meeting held April 30, 2019 • Harrowsmith Beautification Committee meeting held May 1, 2019. • Heritage Committee meeting held May 2, 2019 Carried

By-laws

By-law 2019-39 - Bank Signing Authority Resolution No. 2019-18-19 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Councillor Sutherland

Page 6 of 9

Page 217 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 That the following By-laws be given first and second reading: • By-law 2019-39 • By-law 2019-40 Carried Resolution No. 2019-18-20 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That By-law 2019-39, being a by-law to provide for the appointment of banking signing authorities, be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried b)

By-law 2019-40 -McCall Temporary Two Dwellings on One Lot Resolution No. 2019-18-21 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That By-law 2019-40, being a by-law to authorize the Mayor and the Clerk to execute a temporary two dwelling agreement between the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac and McCall, be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried

Reports for Information

Accounts Payable and Payroll Listing

Valleyview Estates Subdivision Agreement - Response to May 21, 2019 Delegation

Information Items

Honourable Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing, re: Bill 108 More Homes, More Choices and Development Charges Transition

Notice of Motions - not applicable

Announcements/Statements by Councillors

Councillor Roberts requested that certificates of appreciation be presented to the District Recreation Committee members for the work they’ve done over the past 20 years to improve recreation programming and facilities in the township. Council was supportive of this request and directed staff to process.

Further to the volunteer recognition celebration, Mayor Vandewal indicated that a staff report will be forthcoming with respect to changes to the volunteer recognition process for next year.

Deputy Mayor Sleeth provided an update on a recent meeting he attended with the staff from CRCA, Queens’ University and Carleton University regarding the water quality along the Rideau Canal. He indicated it has been very informative with lots of qualified researchers on hand. There is already evidence of the algae bloom at Gilmour Point.

Question of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items) - none

Closed Session

As permitted by the Municipal Act, Section 239.2, Council will move into closed session to discuss matters related to: (b)personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local

Page 7 of 9

Page 218 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019 board employees; (c)a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board;

Resolution No. 2019-18-22 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That Council move into closed session as permitted by the Municipal Act, Section 239.2 to discuss matters related to: • Personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees, • A proposed or ending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board; vesting of a failed tax sale property. Carried b)

Personal matters about an identifiable individual

Vesting of a failed Tax Sale Property

Resolution Resolution No. 2019-18-23 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Leonard That Council move out of closed session. Carried

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2019-41 Resolution No. 2019-18-24 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Leonard That By-law 2019-41, being a by-law to approve generally the previous actions of the Council of the Township of South Frontenac, be given first and second reading this 18 day of June 2019. Carried Resolution No. 2019-18-25 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That By-law 2019-41, being a by-law to confirm generally previous actions of the Council of the Township of South Frontenac, be given third reading, signed and sealed this 18 day of June, 2019. Carried

Adjournment

Resolution Resolution No. 2019-18-26 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Leonard That the council meeting of June 18, 2019 be adjourned at 8:15 pm. Carried

Page 8 of 9

Page 219 of 297 Minutes of Council June, 18, 2019

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 9 of 9

Page 220 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL CLERKS DEPARTMENT

AGENDA DATE: July 2, 2019 SUBJECT: Community and Safety Well-being (CSWB) Plan RECOMMENDATION That Council adopt the recommendation of the PSB and the Joint CAO Working Group and support a collaborative approach with the Frontenac Townships to establish a joint CSWB Advisory Committee to assist a Facilitator with drafting the Frontenac CSWB Plan; And That the joint CSWB Advisory Committee consist of a Staff member from the Frontenac Townships; a Politician from the Frontenac’s; Staff Sergeant, Frontenac Commander, OPP; one Representative from South Frontenac’s Police Services Board Representative, and Indigenous Community representative and one from each of the following sectors: Social Services, Addiction & Mental Health, Health Care, Education and Children & Youth; And That Council share in the engagement of the services of a Facilitator to coordinate the Advisory Committee and draft the CSWB Plan for Council’s consideration.

BACKGROUND The Police Services Board considered this report on June 27 and adopted its recommendations. The Police Services Act, Part XI Section 143 mandates that the Council of each lower-tier, single-tier and regional municipality shall prepare and adopt a Community Safety and Well-Being (CSWB) Plan; however, municipalities have the discretion and flexibility to develop joint Plans with surrounding municipalities. The new legislation requiring CSWB planning came into force on January 1, 2019 and municipalities have two years to prepare and adopt a Plan by January 1, 2021. Council shall establish an Advisory Committee which shall, at a minimum, consist of the following members, representing an entity that provides services in the community/municipality: a local health integration network or an entity that provides services to improve the physical or mental health of individuals in the community; Education services; Community or social services; Community or social services to children or youth; Custodial services to children or youth; an Employee of the municipality or a member of the Municipal Council; and the Commander of the detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police. The Act requires consultation with members of the public, including youth and First Nation communities in the municipality. The CSWB Plan shall identify risk factors in the municipality, including without limitation, systemic discrimination and other social factors that contribute to crime, victimization, addiction, drug overdose and suicide and any other prescribed risk factors; which risk factors the municipality will treat as a priority to reduce; strategies to reduce the risk factors, including providing new services, changing existing services, improving the integration of existing services or coordinating existing services in a different way; set out measurable outcomes that the strategies are intended to produce; plus any other issues/information that may be prescribed through Regulation. Our strength is our community.

Page 221 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL CLERKS DEPARTMENT

Each Municipal Council shall publish the CSWB Plan on the Internet within 30 days after its adoption; on & after the day of publication shall make a printed copy of the Plan available for review by anyone who requests it, in accordance with the Regulation 527/18. The Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services held CSWB Planning Webinars in March 2019. During the Webinar participants were advised that research has shown that developing and implementing strategies and programs that are proactive and focused on social development, prevention and early intervention, reduce the financial burden of crime though cost-effective approaches that have significant return on investments. It was made clear that Collaboration is key. Therefore, on May 24th the Townships’ CAOs met with OPP Commander Sharron Brown to discuss CSWB planning, as it involves taking an integrated approach to service delivery. Several sectors, agencies and organizations are the same throughout the Frontenacs. Municipalities are required to develop and implement evidence-based strategies and programs to address local priorities (i.e. risk factors, vulnerable groups, protective factors, etc.) related to crime and complex social issues on a sustainable basis. The Ministry advised that it is the goal to achieve a sustainable community where everyone is safe, has a sense of belonging, access to services and where individuals and families are able to meet their needs for education, health care, food, housing, income and social and cultural expression. As it will take approximately 1 ½ years to complete, on June 17th the Township’ CAOs, OPP Commander Brown and Deputy Clerk Deachman (Central Frontenac) met with Stephanie Gray, Facilitator to discuss a CSWB Plan Proposal as she assisted with Lanark’s Plan. The Frontenac’s CSWB Plan will include four Appendices that address the local priorities for each Township due to our diverse needs. As the Frontenacs have more than one organization/agency providing services, such as Community Services, Policing, etc. we will only have one Representative from each as part of the actual Advisory Committee; however, all service providers in the Frontenacs will be consulted and invited to provide information to ensure everyone’s needs are known. The CAOs and OPP Commander Brown recommend a joint CSWB Advisory Committee be formed and consist of a Staff member (Cindy Deachman, Central Frontenac’s Deputy Clerk – reporting back to the Frontenac Townships’ CAOs, with CAOs assisting as required); a Politician (Mayor and Deputy Warden Mayor Smith – expertise with Social Services background); Staff Sergeant, Frontenac Commander, OPP (Sharron Brown); South Frontenac’s Police Services Board Representative (David Herrington, as recommended by Commander Brown); Indigenous Community (Chief Doreen Davis); and one Representative from each of Social Services, Addictions & Mental Health, Health Care, Education and Children & Youth.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Facilitator’s estimate was obtained in the amount of $18,000 plus HST. There will also be an additional cost of approximately 15-20% (i.e. Facilitator’s travel, printing, meeting expenses – meals, etc.). Total estimated cost for each Township is $5,000 to $6,000. There will be an initial meeting in October 2019 plus approximately 3-4 meetings in 2020; followed by the Facilitator’s presentation to a joint Councils Meeting. Our strength is our community.

Page 222 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL CLERKS DEPARTMENT

The Advisory Committee are volunteer positions and will not be paid by the Municipalities. South Frontenac PSB member will receive $50 per meeting. The Frontenac Township CAOs will attend the first meeting in October 2019 to support the collaborative approach and will assist as required.

ATTACHMENTS n/a

Submitted/approved by: Wayne Orr, CAO

Our strength is our community.

Page 223 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA DATE:

July 2, 2019

REPORT DATE:

June 24, 2019

SUBJECT:

Road & Property Exchange Norman Road at Perth Road (Spicer/Postma) Pt Lot 25, Conc. 14,and part of Norman Road, Registered Plan 1451, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac

RECOMMENDATION THAT Council pass By-law 2019-42 to repeal By-law 2019-31 and to purchase lands described as Part Lot 25, Concession 14, being Part 2 on 13R22052 and to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to complete the transaction on behalf of the Township; and THAT Council pass By-law 2019-43 to repeal By-law 2019-33 and to stop up, close and transfer ownership of a portion of an unopened road being a portion of Norman Road described as Part 1, RP 13R22502, Part of Norman Road, Registered Plan 1451, Geographic Township of Loughborough, and transfer it to the abutting property owner to the south in Part 5, RP 13R16357, Part Lot 25, Concession 14, Geographic Township of Loughborough, concurrently with the realignment of Norman Road and the acquisition of Part 2, Reference Plan 13R22052 from the abutting property owner to the north.

BACKGROUND At the May 21st, 2019 meeting, South Frontenac Council approved 3 by-laws relating to the approved a request to stop up, close and sell a portion of an unused road that is part of the Norman Plan of Subdivision (RP 1451) and, in turn, purchase land for use as a road at the current intersection of Norman Lane with Perth Road. These by-laws were forwarded to the Township Solicitor, Cunningham Swan, for registration. At the time of registration it was identified that the reference plan which had been prepared to facilitate this transfer had made reference to an incorrect PIN that was not caught by the surveyor or the Land Registry Office at the time the reference plan was deposited. The surveyor determined it was faster and more efficient for us to deposit a new plan with the correct PIN showing, thereby replacing the original reference plan that was referenced in Bylaws 2019-31 & 33. The new reference plan 13R22052 (Attachment 2) now replaces the former reference plan 13R21964. As 2 of the 3 By-laws refer to the original reference plan, By-law 2019-31 and 33 should be repealed and replaced with the attached By-law 2019-42 & By-law 2019-43 which make reference to the corrected reference plan 13R22052. These once these By-laws are signed by the Mayor and Clerk, they will be forwarded along with the new reference plan (13R22052) to the Township Solicitor for registration and to fulfill the transfers.

Page 224 of 297

FINANCIAL and STAFFING CONSIDERATIONS No change from that which was presented in the May 21, 2019 report.

ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1 – Reference Plan 13R22502 (Norman Road Exchange) Attachment #2 – Report Dated May 21, 2019 from Claire Dodds Submitted by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services Approved by: Wayne Orr, CAO

Page 225 of 297

ZCHEDHFE c014\5rv14

F01

BVBJ. OI: MOBWVM

b|M

551110 51115105 511422591-030101)

Bb JV‘9J

BOVD bV|5.L OI-_

330595‘

VMD DEbO2|lED

BECEIAED

16’ S018

’)?ME

551140 51115105 5114 29s91—012e(r1)

J‘?

FOJ. S2

5rv14 1215

I BEOHIBEiH|2 bFVM 10 BE DEBOZILEDOMDEB LHE FVMDJJLFE8 VCJ.'

EMJ.\Z_J_J/\E l-.015FVMD EC|2J.|$V|$ E015 E FVMD J_|.U’E2 D|A|2|OM OI; EBOMLEMVCM0‘ 1?

b|‘VM OI-_ ZHBAEA OI-_ |:>V|:6J. OI-_ F01 S2 JV‘ COMCE22|OM

/ “T7 1

VMD b‘v’B_|_ OI-_ MOBWVMBOVD bFVM M°’ M121 |5E(3|8iEL5ED |:.|50l/1_|.EMVC O|:. 80?.LH J.OM|/12H|b

‘K.

~—’

5;,‘

-’

05 r0110H50501113H) (05005v5H1c 101v11/121115

»-

00111411101-. |—_l5OI/11El/WC BCVFEI J 3 S00

£1;

[/1

11161162

‘

\b®

W1.

/ .

‘

5.5 Ag §

2HOMM OM iH|2 bFVM Dl8J.VMCE2 ‘RVCOOBDIMVLEB VBE IM WE.Ll5E2VMDCVM BE COMAEBJEDLO I-_EEJ. BA DINDIMC BA 09098

‘

’"’

~<>

11511511:

;<_,’~’

Q50 31‘) \

‘J *

‘ \

If 1

<v) \

‘

:3 1 1:1-

-5

VI J!–R“ ,

AL.)

‘I

“B

<99”

‘°‘“

~‘_7I1/

1.a

_\J

I‘ A/.

r'\

2n15/15110152 c551151cv15=

‘m‘‘“‘‘‘‘‘‘‘

1 0515115111Hv1: .LH|2 ZDBAEAVMD b|‘VM VBE COBI5ECl VMD IM VCCOBDVMCEMILH.LHE 21115/\EA2 VCI LHE 205/\EAOB2 VCJ.’ J.HE FVMD .Ll.L|‘E2 VCL VMD J.HE BECHFVJJOMBWVDE DMDEB_LHEW’

J’

9’ ‘ l

2215 (291210

0155 v 2215 (1123)

HQ’

$013

/»

1».

W HICCIMBOM20!!»/\EA|MC

|‘E2l’|E

iHE QHBAEA MV2 COWbFEJ.EDOM J.HE 2J.H

3’

DVA OE ‘1?ME’ SOJ8’

r1-:2r15 w" H10011420142n15/15111140rm‘ 0141v1510 rv140 2n15/1511015 '

0141v1510 K114021014‘

1n1451a- 5013 FEBF

_ _ _ _ HICCIMBOM

OMi/B

VMD ZDBAEAOB

DV.LE ,

~5\1\12s5\—m<x<xK< _\

-1-

*: L)

‘\1.JC-,’ J

(JEBae)5v51 3 I

0151: B

2215 (1123)

~5\1\2_.2$2.\—m22<1\

2215 (2<z<21<) 01211115550v140

(1239) V I-~. “7 1.4 I

1._2

I–A II

-1-

‘L4

1.-

1 PH

I 1 \

697/

145 00151455

3 “I;

‘*3

Mg;mMN;5VD

14015 <31r505140= BEVBIMCB ZHOMM HEBEOM VBE CBID BEV!:$|MC2 DEB!/\ED EBOW (3132 OBEEBAVJJOME‘VMD VBE BEFVLED10 OM SOME 18' (02152) (50100) (12. M521 r014e11n05) 141110212

Ar 1/

‘ 4% é

6/\

COWbVBl2OM22HOMMIM BBVCKEJ2 VBE 10

2HOMM HEBEOM VBE HOBIXOMD/FCBOOMD D|2.LVMCE2'

VIT D|2lVMCE2

.l.HE CBOFIMD Dl2iVMCE2 CBID Dl2J.VMCE2CVM BE CVFCHFVLEDBA WnF.|Jb|‘A|MC 2HOMMOM J.HE bFVM BA J.HE COWBIMEDZCVFE I-_VCiO|$ OE. 0668122” |MJ.ECBVJ.|OM

v .51. “7l-Al

fa 1

11/

BEVBIMCZ

V2.L|£OMOW|C

COOBD|MVJ.E

LVBFE

:5 r\

“J E?’§§?“1‘
J 3315 ‘13:?) ,

Kb f (1989)
/

\5\1\ 22s9.\—m.~x<\V_\

501141 10

140151111140 (11)

511211140(W)

0155 v

132331322

29<131e’es

0151»

132555125

29130231

05,:

1325111321

29<191e'90

‘

IM iHEW2E|‘AE8’ CVMMO.L’

CO0|£D|MVJ.E8

BE ?2ED

BHOMM OM iH|2 COBMEB2 OB BOHMDVBIEB

C; ‘F

«gff, <§,/<{Jvg3.g V

..z

Lg.’

9:5;-;§‘5<9“?; vltix 3:50.139 (K
g? 313% 5,. {ml 21’:,r’_ Aosy 3’ ‘L-
:3:

»,1»«

.11 Q’

(Sn

,1;

f,_-

O55 C

05140152

1:1 I 2215

.. .. .. …

215 15 155

55 M11

M|J_ME22

.. ..

55 52 51

.. ,.

150c1<5021 150c1< 5v15

1551 51

1150145v15

. 2 .. w .. 1239 .. SEEK ..,, .. 1123

bFVM’

2n15/151 w014nw51415rv14150 2n15/1511w014n1/151415011140 2110151 21v140v150 1150145v15 21v140v150 11501451115

cvrc

J.O BE-E2iVB|’|8H

cvrcnrv150 251

w5v2n1550 01'2w” 111001142014 0'52’ 012' 15vr5H 5’ e15v140515012' 155012151550 5rv14 140’ 1121

r52r15 00'

“2w11H V23: 2W|1H2 5rv14 1215-12312 5rv14 1215-1910 5rv14 1215-19221

5x51505151v1101/15rv14 515211122 5rv14 1215-31391

2215.2 M5155 5rv14150 MH5155 0/151550150514 10 251 2152 MV2 1142n551c15141

vrr w5v2n15w51412 11155114ve1555w5141 M|J_H 5rv14 1215-51321

2215 (1101)

J.H|2

|::l’VM

l5Ebl’VCE2 J28-S1899“

BA CHVMGIMCb|M 39391-051001)

M|J.H

‘29S8J—OSOA(l’i)OM I-_VCE VMD IM 2CHED?l’E DViED ‘1?ME 18’ S018

|‘E2f’|E

W’ HICGIMBOM2?I:$/\EA|MC

HQ’

1021 ev1501145152150v0 0141v1510 K15 1151 1<114e21014’ 10x 293-2219 912 293-1392

I-_||‘E3 FO,H ~N"‘SQ

FWHJV‘<fS(3MDC |5|:>FVM L9/\

1e211e@1Lu111<361ueou’couJ

Page 226 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT DATE:

May 16, 2019

AGENDA DATE:

May 21, 2019

SUBJECT:

Road & Property Exchange Norman Road at Perth Road (Spicer/Postma) Pt Lot 25, Conc. 14,and part of Norman Road, Registered Plan 1451, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac

RECOMMENDATION THAT Council pass By-law 2019-31 to purchase lands described as Part Lot 25, Concession 14, being Part 2 on 13R21964, and to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to complete the transaction on behalf of the Township; and THAT Council pass By-law 2019-32 to dedicate Part 1 on RP13R13913, Part Lot 25, Concession 14, Geographic Township of Loughborough, municipally known as the travelled portion of Norman Lane to be a common and public highway; and THAT Council pass By-law 2019-33 to stop up, close and transfer ownership of a portion of an unopened road being a portion of Norman Road described as Part 1, RP 13R21964, Part of Norman Road, Registered Plan 1451, Geographic Township of Loughborough, and transfer it to the abutting property owner to the south in Part 5, RP 13R16357, Part Lot 25, Concession 14, Geographic Township of Loughborough, concurrently with the realignment of Norman Road and the acquisition of Part 2, Reference Plan 13R21964 from the abutting property owner to the north.

BACKGROUND At the September 4, 2018 meeting, South Frontenac Council approved a request to stop up, close and sell a portion of an unused road that is part of the Norman Plan of Subdivision (RP 1451) and, in turn, purchase land for use as a road at the current intersection of Norman Lane with Perth Road (Attachment 1) and direct staff to proceed with engaging a surveyor for the purposes of this transaction. Through 2018, staff worked with the surveyor to prepare reference plan 13R21964 (Attachment 2) consistent with the previous discussion with the needs of the Norman Subdivision, and two abutting property owners, the Spicers and the Postmas. The proposed exchange includes the sale and transfer of a portion of Norman Road which was land dedicated to the Township in the past as part of Norman Subdivision, however the municipality had never assumed the road, nor maintained it. The access to Norman Subdivision was established as a private lane that for the most part aligns with the unopened road known as Norman Road in the Norman Subdivision. Mr. Spicer wishes to purchase the unopened portion of the “jog” (surveyed as Part 1 of RP1321964) of Norman Road adjacent to his property (5 Norman Lane) for the purpose of building a garage. The traveled portion of Norman Lane at the

Page 227 of 297

intersection of Perth Road crosses land owned by the Postmas (surveyed as Part 2 of RP1321964). Copies of previous reports received from Council on this matter are listed in Attachment #3.

ANALYSIS This property exchange is beneficial to all parties involved. By acquiring the jog of Norman Road (Part 1 of RP1321964), the Spicers acquire the land they are using to access their property at 5 Norman Lane and have additional land required to construct a garage. The Postma’s are selling land to the Township that includes the travelled portion of Norman Lane. Through this exchange of land the Township is able to establish the travelled portion of Norman Lane by acquiring Part 2 of RP1321964, thereby establishing access to Norman Subdivision at a perpendicular access onto the public road which provides proper sight lines and safe ingress/egress. The property exchange involves passing of 3 by-laws:

A by-law to authorize Council to purchase the portion of land from the Postmas to re-align the road; and
A by-law to dedicate the travelled portion of Norman Lane to the Township; and
A by-law to stop up, close and transfer a portion of the Norman Road to the Spicers.

FINANCIAL and STAFFING CONSIDERATIONS No change from that which was presented in the original report:  The Spicers’ have provided a payment to the municipality of $3,146.00 to purchase Part 1 of RP13R21964  The municipality will pay the Postmas $3,146.00 to buy the portion of his property for the new road alignment  Registration cost will be divided equally between Spicer and the municipality.

ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1 – Location Map Attachment #2 – Reference Plan 13R21964 (Norman Road Exchange) Attachment #3 – Report Dated April 26, 2018 from Lindsay Mills & September 1, 2018 from Mark Segsworth Submitted by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services Approved by: Wayne Orr, CAO

Page 228 of 297

Report to Council Development Services - Planning Staff Report to Council Report Date:

June 26, 2019

Application No:

Site Plan Control Application - SP-03-19

Owner:

S. Clark Homes Ltd. (Simon & Denise Clark)

Location of Property:

Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as Eel Bay Road Purpose of Application: Review of Application for Site Plan Agreement – Single Detached Dwelling, Detached Garage with Loft and Shed, Sydenham Lake Date of Public Meeting: June 18, 2019

Summary of Recommendation It is recommended that South Frontenac Council pass a by-law to enter into a Site Plan Control Agreement with S. Clark Homes Ltd. for the proposed development of a single detached dwelling, detached garage with loft and shed on Eel Bay Road, Sydenham Lake.

Purpose of the Report The purpose of this report is to request that Council enter into a Site Plan Control Agreement with S. Clark Homes Ltd. for the development of a proposed single detached dwelling, detached garage with loft and shed on Sydenham Lake. The report includes a copy of the site plan control application, site plan drawings of the subject property, site plan control agreement and site plan by-law.

Background An application was submitted to amend the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw 2003-75 to rezone the subject property owned by S. Clark Homes Ltd. for the subject Lands from Special Recreational Resort Commercial (RRC–26) Zone to the Special Waterfront Residential (RW-44) Zone. The property consists of 1.3 acres (0.526 ha). The rezoning is required in order to establish a single detached dwelling consisting of 198 square metres (2131 sq ft) at 23.7 metres (77.8 ft) from the highwater mark, a proposed shed 8 ft by 12 ft to be located a minimum of 10 metres (32.8 ft) from the highwater mark of Sydenham Lake and a garage 30 ft by 30 ft with loft for storage to be permitted in the front yard, setback at 11.95 metres (39.2ft) from the front lot line with an increase of height to 8.84 metres (29 ft). The existing well at the northeast corner of the property will service the proposed residential dwelling. The site plan application was submitted on May 10, 2019 and has been reviewed by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority, KFL&A Public Health, staff at Public Services Department and Township Planning Staff. The site plan application is required consistent with the South Frontenac Site Plan Control By-law as the property is waterfront adjacent to a Provincially Significant Wetland.

Discussion The subject property has been operating as a resort commercial use with three rental cottages and a boat launch for many years. The lot is long and narrow and is elevated to the north and slopes southerly towards an existing marshland area which is identified as a Provincially Significant Wetland. It is located on the waterside of the intersection of Eel Bay Road and Charlie Green Road. The existing three cottages, which were very close to the top of bank and close to the high water mark, have been removed as well as the toilets and shower house. The septic tank will be removed in order to accommodate for a new septic system which has been approved by KFL&A Public Health Unit. 1

Page 229 of 297

Report to Council Development Services - Planning The proposal also includes the removal and disposal of three derelict docks from the property. A new dock will be constructed from the walkway extending from the proposed house with a smaller dock to be constructed to the south where an existing gravel driveway and boat launch are located. The current owner has been undertaking shoreline works including installing retaining walls on the property. This work has been undertaken with a permit from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority.

Agency Analysis and Comments The Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority reviewed Site Plan Control Application SP-03-19-L and Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-19-08 and provided their comments indicating that they have no objection to the approval of the applications based on their consideration for natural hazards, natural heritage and water quality and quantity protection policies. Staff recommend that the EIS recommendations be included as a condition of approval. The CRCA comments and the recommendations of the EIS have been incorporated into the Site Plan Control Agreement and Site Plan Drawings. KFL&A Public Health have indicated that they have no objections to the zoning by-law amendment. Permit LO-7-19 has been issued for the sewage system. Planning staff are satisfied that the site plan drawings and agreement meet the requirements of the Zoning By-law for the property located in the Special Waterfront Residential (RW-44) Zone.

Recommendation It is recommended that By-law No. 2019-44 to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to enter into the Site Plan Control Agreement with the owner, S. Clark Homes Ltd., for land described as Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as Eel Bay Road be passed. Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac Attachments:

Site Plan Application
Site Plan Drawings
Site Plan Control Agreement
Site Plan By-law

Page 230 of 297

.su9.

Office Use Only

Township of South Frontenac SITE PLAN CONTROL APPLICATION FORM

File Number: sp- @3- Iq -2- Date Received: haq 10,(‘1 RelatedFileNumbers: ;2–lq-(fi6-L

Application Fee: s 3? 3.m)

Paid r;l

1.O GENERAL INFORMATION

Site Plan applications typically require an agreement between the owner of the Iand(s) and the Township of South Frontenac. You must accurately identify the property owner as described on the title to the Iands affected by this proposal. Registered Owner of Subject Land Information Name:

5’z C’ t2((K i4evs’tQ:S L?

Address:

t>-b 51(:>(nHsrts (’,o

If company, identify principal(s):

)?lillcN!’?Ccpta-k/,‘AISF ?a??’-’< T

i? r< ‘AlUl&! Emailaddress: ffistsmG ,9{’[1.

Telephone: (?3 ?‘f IC>cl1o

?5?‘i3

Fax:

ApplicanUAgent Information Name:

{?=,‘5 p ?)C= *<

Telephone:

Address:

Fax:

Email Address:

Communications are to be sent to:

Owner

Agent €

Property Information

Civic(91lStreetNo.)Address: 2C)15 CE’-aArff r-!) Nearest Cross Street(s): (3"cAr{’-L-(Er (5 ?? 11,9 Lot:

Registered Plan No.: (if applicable)

Concession:

Lot/Block: PMi LOT $2

’tS{o

(FThe;;;.;i:IanNo: ,7,P, i5cl31 Description: LotArea ,

S2&l

IU:’l:-‘i’l art C’) ‘12 Ii -s

,‘5

Part No.:

Frontage mz

‘i’l l “/-

Depth s-,4-/I

Page 231 of 297 ‘To’iAtr:sh:p of EOUI-h Frc:i’tetTac Sl!e Plaii Cc?nil’cl ;‘ii)i)?ica’t?c-it’l r?ol’m

Additional Information

Please identify the names and addresses of the holders of any mortgages, charges or other encumbrances on the subject Iands.

:-r+-6TMt-// w gh* xo

Are there any easeme@s, asem7: rights-of-way or restrictive covenants affecting the subject lands? Yes € N?

If yes, describe the purpose/effect, identify the Iocation, and the name and address of the lands and/or persons benefitting from the easement, right-of-way or covenant:

ssit l or development agreements registered against these Iands? Have there been any previous si%lan Yes €

If yes, identify dates, files, and particulars:

Are the subject lands currently7Va vagant? Yes €

If No, what are the existing uses?

c-b’T?i P-{h71LS’ gslC-:J

What is the Official Plan designation of the subject Iands?

What is the zoning of the subject lands?

? Rue-hi-

($.-z(,,

Pre-Consultation

Have? ‘!)/0!J ‘5/OLJ. i consulted a Township building official, planner, or engineer regarding this application?

l’ul

NO a

Name: CtA(/25 DbDOS

oate:h(’/ltL- ?-<?t(i l

Yes

Page 232 of 297 To’i’i’ialsFtll.:i O’: SoLi’t}i Fi’ci’i(ei?r.ac .‘E::’te I%n Ccr-iit’el Apl):ica"ij0:’l r()rm

2.O PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Nature of Proposed Development/Use

€ within the mining designation

€ commercial € industrial

in 300 metres of a sensitive Iake trout lake

[!X;ithin 90 metres of a waterbody

within or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive area

€ used for a wrecking yard

within or adjacent to an environmental protection designation

€ used for hauled septage disposal

€ subject to a natural hazard

€ institutional (community facility)

€ multi-unit residential

€ Other

Additional Information

Have you filed an application for Condominium Exemption?

NO X

Yes € No. of units

7’

Does Yes

posed development include the demolition of existing buildings or parts thereof? NO €

Describebriefly: [gs<s:i(,p zvb <t6’h;o-s’??‘J-S - 71,?i=ti-2-C rg %

!ing%ilding? ili Is the proposal an addition to an existing Yes €

Describe briefly:

‘i Has app appJication been made for a building permit for the subject Iands? Yes

f)&‘VS0 ((YaIT

No Cl

irotected heritage property? Are any of the existing buildings protecIed Yes [:l

t’l B ‘y’ a.’ l Ur: ‘i a:’

l? C? ?-l ‘+

.i ’l

Page 233 of 297 Tc,vlii?is!ill) of Sou’t!1 i? t-i:yi’ite:tiac - Slte Plai’i Cor;il?cll !’.i)IJIc:allol’l Fciri’l’T

Site Statistics

Existing

Proposed

Required by Zoning By-law

Qr+

Building Area (Ground Floor Area) (m2)

‘;[‘i

;,lx’l:.

Gross Floor Area (Total All Floors) (m2) No. of Parking Spaces

t€)p

ib{i

l(,)I A

(11

No. of E3arrier-Free Parking Spaces

li.

hh’T

No. of Loading Spaces

f”%,,i ]l:,, !

Parking Area (m2)

f'4/A

g=l’i(i iv9’p, "

Building Height (m) No. of Storeys

No. of Units

Landscaped Area (m2) Open Space Area (m2) Outside Storage (m2)

Has anap Iication been submitted for rezoning or minor variance? Yes

NO €

3.O PREVIOUS USES

iee an industrial or commercial use on the subject Iand or adjacent Iands? Has there bee7

Yes !!)

No €

lfyes,specifytheus-eandthelastyearofthatuse eCn?-9 2 (l-tpe-"?-’ -‘2"/E? Has the grading of the subj t Iand been changed by adding earth or other material? YesCI

Unknown €

Has a gas station been Ioc Iocpdi on the subject Iand or land adjacent to the subject Iand at any time? YesCl

Unknown €

l’

r-.t

Page 234 of 297 ‘! cV.’nsfllp of SoL:’tFi Fron’lenac.’ S:le Pla’:: Co(lll’ol A4)p:i(.a’ilon Forl’T’. urn or Has there been petroleum or other fuel stored on the subject land or Iand adjacent to the subject Iand?

Yes €

s No EJ

Unknown €

vettIp subject Iand may have been contaminated by former uses on the site or adjacent sites? Is there reason to believe

Yes€

Unknown €

Has the Iand ever been i s ject to an environmental order such as control, stop, preventative clean-up or prohibition order? YesCI

Unknown Cl

Have you ever been advised either formally or informally by the Ministry of Environment or another source that the property is or may be contamin.ia?ed?? YesCI

Noia9

If yes, explain: If yes to any of the questions in Section 3.0, an environmental site assessment (ESA) may be required for the subject lands and possibly for the adjacent Iands. The study must be completed by a qualified professional who is approved by the Township. Consult planning staff to determine the need for such a study. ESA Report attached: Yes € No C? Title and Date of Study: What information did you use to determine the answer to these questions?

4.O ATTACHMENTS

Attach th? e followirng information and number of paper copies

{;J/"-Llegal Survey, prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor

i Existing Conditions Plan !

1 6

Site Plan

9 a Drainage and Servicing Plan

J Architectural Plans

V Landscape Plans

€ Additional Reports

€ Works Cost Estimate

Note: The above documents should be prepared with reference to Appendix 2. All large drawings must be folded to no Iarger than 27.9 x 43.2 cm.

A reduction of the site plan (21 .5 x 35.5 cm) isstoto b3,r included. CD containing all attachments

Yes €

Additional information that may be useful includes photographs, supporting studies or other information in support of this application can be provided as an attachment to this application. .i

Page 235 of 297 i osms’s’hip of Soci(h Fronte:qac ? Si(e Plari Cont:-ol Applica(iori Fon’n

5.O AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY AND STATUTORY DECLARATION The Owner/Applicant agrees to reimburse and indemnify the Township of all fees and expenses incurred by the Township to process the application. The required fee for the processing of this application shall be in accordance with the Towns,hip’s current Tariff of Fees ByLaw No. 2005-55. The required fees should be confirmed with the Township prior to the su6rriission of the application. The Township is under no obligation to process this application until fees are received.

Date

Applicant/Owner

6.0 0WNERS’ DECLARATION

Note: This must be completed by the owner. If more than one owner is listed in Section 1.O of this application, then all owners must sign this application form and the affidavit section. of

‘:?’,’-?l.’ ;-,.i’%’.-a inthe ,:;%.,?y ?7 of =’-??-’ solemnlydeclare thatallthestatementscontainedinthisapplicationfor(propertydescrjpf7on) -’%’..? ?-?’- a: .? ?? and all the supporting documents are true, and l(we) make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and complete, and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath, by virtue of the Canada Evidence Act. l agree to allow the Municipality, its employees and agents to enter upon the subject land for the purpose of conducting a site inspection that may be necessary to process this appliqation. DECLARED before me at the

a-:a? of ?-i,4h ‘<‘5:%naC in the -Y ‘# < t; ( :?i(‘1 (.S< of this

.r ‘–;

Owner/Applicant

Oc’ “<“c i g -r,-yy,

I (,!

.C xa

da70f 20t -( l MCL-Cl

Owner/Applicant

Michelle Katherine Hannah, a Commissioner, etc., Province of Oniario, for the 6orporaiion

of the Township of South Frontenac: ExoiresAoril 17 aoii

Comm:ssioner of Oaths (please print name)

i’?/lay20l2

Commissioner’s Signature/Stamp

Page 6 of 7

Page 236 of 297

hs”‘a s

? m m

Township of South Frontenac APPENDIX 2 - Checklist for Site Plan Control Application (Section 41 of the Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c.P.13, as amended)

FRO: The Township of South Frontenac By-Iaw No. 2003-25 allows the Township to control development through a site plan approval process. To assist applicants in applying for site plan approval, the following checklist is provided. Six (6) copies of this checklist must be submitted as part of the site plan approval application. The application should be prepared with reference to the document entitled Site Plan Approval Guidelines of the Township of South Frontenac which is available online at www.township.southfrontenac.on.ca, or at 4432 George St, Sydenham, Ontario, KOH 2TO. For additional information on Site Plan Control within the Township of South Frontenac, please contact the Township Planner at (613) 376-3027 or 1-800-559-5862. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for obtaining the most recent editions of the Standard Specifications and Drawings of the Township of South Frontenac and Ontario Provincial Standards and Specifications. The current revisions shall apply. CHECKLIST

[

1 . All sections of the site plan application forms filled in

All plans, drawings, reports, calculations, cost estimates etc. prepared and sealed/stamped by a registered professional (i.e. engineer, architect, Iegal surveyor as applicable)

HEI S / yPuQ 1 ?250,1 ‘1:300, 1 :400 or 1 :500 HH 4. All plans drawn at one of the following metric scales: 1 : 100, 1 :200, 10,:250,

[E]I

s. Title block on all plans showing the name of the firm or person who prepared the plan and a revision block showing the date and nature of all revisions to the original plan

HH 6. North arrow on all plans oriented toward the top of the plan E ]I 7. Geodetic data and Iocation of benchmarks specified [- H 8. Block noting revisions and dates €[€

E]H

Legal description of the property subject to site plan approval including Iot, concession, block and registered plan number

EH 10. Key map showing the location and extent of the subject Iands

l.i’.

V 11

1.)N2

Page 1 cf 4

Page 237 of 297 1’ o’vaVil S l’l :l) o’i’ S c..l Ll ll’Th F l’o rlle nBc

A P l"a e I-l [ ‘: ii’

‘-Ji’lg’(? :<i:si f’cr S:ie Piaii A[rP?‘ryvai A,?,’>pi ? ???) 0’ l ’ ( ) a:oi

Yes

All dimensions, area of property, Iocation and use of all existing buildings on the site shown on plans

Uses of abutting properties indicated for all surrounding Iands 13. All setbacks from lot Iines and between buildings/structures shown on plans

Both sides of any abutting roads or rights-of-way, any O.3 metre reserves, street widening with curb lines

(where appropriate)

}

‘I): Type and extent of all easements, both on and adjacent to the property, Iocated and Iabelled

2 V” /

Iocated and Iabelled

All existing utilities and services located and Iabelled

Yes

All natural features such as trees, water courses, rock outcrops, drainage ditches, swaIes or steep slopes
All original ground grades shown in geodetic Ievels No ‘y

Table identifying each buildings use, number of floors, all outside dimensions; building heights and yard dimensions
All proposed streets shown with right-of-way width

-,,/ ‘u

-‘S %

21 . Any services, sewage system, storm drainage, water supply system, gas or electric services located and

All parking and loading areas, spaces and aisles, whether designated as garages, carports or open parking, Iocated, labelled and dimensioned All vehicular circulation, curbs, curve radii of curbs at all street access points and driveway intersections located, Iabelled and dimensioned

a. All walkways and sidewalks Iocated, Iabelled and dimensioned

-! 25. All fire routes (if applicable) including all necessary signage and surface demarcation located, Iabelled and /’ dimensioned

ZE 26. All existing and proposed fire hydrants on or near the subject property Iocated and labelled i>7. All finished ground grades shown in geodetic Ievels

%,/ ..,/

Flow arrows shown to indicate the direction of surface vvater flow

7 29. Table of main building areas indicated in both square metres and as a percentage of total lot area :V

y -J

-,/ v’

Table with site statistics

31 . Retaining walls, protective railings, service or delivery access, extent of underground garage and ramp Iocation, stairwells, garbage collection and/or storage areas Iocated, labelled and dimensioned Loading zones (if required) Iocated, Iabelled and dimensioned

Location of the new building(s) complies with the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) formulae

V’

Signs Iocated, Iabelled and dimensioned with note/description on plan detailing height and colour(s) of sign(s) (if applicable)

Page 2 of 4

Page 238 of 297 TO’.‘4 ‘iiS h : }.) OT’ S O ll I, ?1 F l’Oi? le !-i aC

A[)PENDDy 2-Cl’;ecidlst fcr S:!e R’ari Appi’evai A.!)pl:cai:ch

Yes

Land drainage and stormwater conveyance arrangement shown, including catchbasins, soakways, ponding areas, detention controls and direction of surface flow

v

Existing and proposed grades and floor elevations shown

%} z

7,/

Surfacing and grading of the property including all surface features such as driveways, ramps, walkways, proposed edgings or curbs shown

7 %,/

All elevations referenced to a Township bench mark and to a geodetic metric datum

397Drawing with all sewers, catchbasins, and watermains and utilities that are external to the building shown %/

Yes

Elevations of all sides of all the main and accessory buildings, showing all roof structures such as penthouses, chimneys, vents, and air conditioning, with measurements shown

,,/ /

Copy of ne(,essary documents/permits from, pertinent ministries (Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Culture and/or Ministry of Natural Resources, etc.) attached
Floor plans for all floors for all buildings except where repetition is proposed (such repetition shall be noted) provided

. Exterior building materials including colours indicated

a’,

. Location of all signs, dimensions, materials and colours indicated

‘!

. Location and design of all exterior lighting including Iighting specifications indicated . Design, Iocation and construction details of any interior or exterior garbage collection and/or storage areas

‘y

Yes :

A ?street elevation" showing all elevations from the street side where the proposed development includes a group of buildings provided

All buildings, parking areas and driveways, together with any physical features, to establish relationships

/ ‘%

i with Iandscaping Iocated, Iabelled and dimensioned 49. Gardens, garden walls, walks, areas for recreation play-lots, and/or facilities located, Iabelled and

dimensioned

‘/ /

f’ ‘,

shown

. Existing trees to be preserved, transplanted or removed Iocated and identified

T 51 . Planting materials, described regarding height when mature and using standard botanical plant names l

listed

Other Iandscaping features Iocated, labelled and dimensioned

l-? 4 %)

Page 3 o’i 4

Page 239 of 297

rcs*4r:5hi:p <f S.OL,!11 Fic.?‘i+.eiqa:

Al)F E??-IIIX 2-Chi3(k?:si ‘:ar S’ie P!=ri Aipp’ cva i f!‘ip?’>lit:.=!ica

XK Servicing Report XE ‘a’ Stormwater Management Report X[E 55.’ Tree Inventory and Preservation Study X5 564raffic Impact Study XH wI 58. Hydrogeological Study EkH . Environmental Impact Study agI ?, %@iBe and Vibration Study agH . Archaeological Report K KI 763. Heritage Impact Study [5 64. Other (please specify) a. Geotechnical Assessment

1 . Environmental Site Assessment

l ’l a) If

Page 4 of 4

Page 240 of 297

13:;

.5.

.:.z..2..:..

..m__ 5…… u§…£..;

.2».

.2?

miS.

.ux»,2m

5.53

s_. 22…:

. a 5 u 52.2

25..

3….

. w

1637 ft’

m…._u.H.s………

3.523….

5221.5

n:3_:.

…..c:..3

.2.

.m.

u:n

E u«Nu…

cillnalxa.

E 25. I… as

tan

3….

a iv:

:…..;…

.6…"

..::……

.23.. ..canzmna

GA32.2

:2_fS.a

.25.

3…:

….e.;….

5……

can

.53….

cmmmm

3'4

3‘-nu"

Page 241 of 297

‘1. 1.

lO/ 12 ROOF FITCli

=f l

lflJl]! Ll UT]LITTT lLu I I 1111 11!Ul hUll I?UII 12 UTff

-W

-m

)

J!21

iLILJtllfl,l

f’

[ i

l l 11 10

]t?T,11

? j

mTl L)UT!-ill l? O

afl ffl l l 11

i W:a?i::’.!

lll’s

L l

UIILI UL? UULlluuL [ [1 ulJll lu ULIUUllUUUUUUl l LI U U U , 11 111. ll ur7t-gccc.. T?’?? llU[

lullLl

:"’l liUu?MllLLLLll

N 11 IJ !J i.

-f Clj

UFF!fflR Fl,R. u

r7r

‘v’-ri #l

T’T?

l -11

TIW

“i’:,

;N;,Homes tiii

:’:7j’.,’?.. “a;.;a,,a++;. i ? :,’ ? ,:. L ?.I ..

} ‘r;’-M-{mMiri;;%LvJrg’.

=??: ‘irvrvr.sclark)iomes:‘com a::=:’

Tl’%

PROPOSED

{

GARAGE CLG.

CLARK GARAGE /

r’

GUEST HOUSE

?JI 11 lm

20l5EEl-BAYRD.

‘0 6

NOTE: THE DRAWING 18 FOR DESIGN

INTENT ONtY. DiMENSIONe & SPECIF?CAT?ONS MAY CHANGE, REPRODuC?nON OR USE FOFI ANY PuRPOSEOThlER THAN THAT

AUTHORl2m BY Nt)-DlMENStON

ffi

l?l? L l l it

GkRAC,: F!!?. ‘%

‘zP

}

DATE:

FEBRUARY 11,2019

tsc

CALE: NTS

TOTAL SQ. FT.

FRONT ELEVATION

i465o l

? ifl -l

CIE81aN ANO DRAFTWG IS FORBIDDEN

ir 11.

?=’.’

r=’s

INI? l)lll]enslon 11 ’m”

l’DE81GN’AND DRAFTING 00

I, w vr ‘u - n u d i m d e s i q n . c o m ?

Page 242 of 297

11 (’-=)

-l!

3’l’-Oa

[T’?e ?z?rc;ra?ae’;T;’-c?s?? 1(?‘7

l—I. il

y,il Ji

l’

l l l I

]

S?J

t l’

l l

‘.‘i"lltlllGl;I !?ll.‘C’e” STAI’S

lil

GARAGE

4;%?5p.

——J

2e!- l I ?x2e:’- : l “/ l 9’-6’

3:’,d

ii.:

10’-0? CEILING

‘fl’;’-+-,.%%?—-,-%.,:11:il l la

l;-).

(41rls..’)

)11 l

{o thb C

’l<

ffl

ltF.‘fl& /?hh@ ;&?l ;q f* &ms ba’? ;m’? :31

(11

-wv:w?lclarkh’ames cow ..’

PROPOSED

?-?= n

7’-2?x5’-e{’

;

lan DiNFR

WORK SHOP

{)l

“l

)

ail’ sshs?

l’

5(’.!11

-l

’n

?l!

CLARK GARAGE /

,j ——-V

I’ l

C il

GUEST HOUSE

’l

–i

i?-1

k-11

L-.1

21 l(I

1, il

L–..i

-?I

i+l k=!

‘?i:j$

,)ri

l?l m

?’.?

I-

Pjia!l ?el!’-’?? ; J!’-‘aa ?’ ?iK%;l ?#?‘I’

705C’

;

PORCH

l l

‘-l

l l

11’ 11’ li 11’ ,,l

I I

ii’

l.-I

‘!

NCT’:: l

‘2TCGS

5’O"x5’-O?

!111::111111

TIIE DRAWING IS FOR D’:SIGN lNTENTONLY.DIMENSIONS& 3PECIFICATlONS WAY CHAFIGE. REPRO€UCTIONORlJSEFORANY PuRPOSH OTHEI:! THAN THAT AuTHORl2ED EIY NU-D!}A(:NSION

-S

il,

i;?

l-)

10!,:d 5iiQl0,{

2015 EEL BAY RD.

ll—

DESIGN AND DRA.FTING IS

r–?i

lr-’–’–,

-==!!,

-’l

i, p

11!i

J’

1, l-l 11

:r-??k?O.ri.Cl?Cp. l?

FORBIDDEN

u DATE:

FEBRUARY 11, 2019

r LOFT PLAN

GARAGE PLAN

FLOOR AREA = 590 SQ.FT.

FLOOR AREA = 875 SQ.FT. TOTAL FLOOR AREA = 1465 SQ.FT.

SCALE: NTS

l l

TOTAL SQ. FT.

1465

’l

lNu Dimensionl l DESIGN AND DRAFTING .?

J.www.nudtmdes{(ln.eom

Page 243 of 297

€

Page 244 of 297

SITE PLAN AGREEMENT Made this ___________ day of ___________________, 2019 BETWEEN: S. CLARK HOMES LTD. Hereinafter called the “Owner” OF THE FIRST PART -andTHE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC Hereinafter called the “Municipality” OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Owner is the registered owner in fee simple of certain lands located in the Township of South Frontenac (the “Lands”); AND WHEREAS it was a condition of consent that the Owner enter into this site plan agreement with the Municipality on the terms set out; AND WHEREAS the Municipality is authorized to enter into this agreement and register it against the title to the Lands pursuant to section 41 of the Planning Act; NOW THEREFORE WITNESSETH that in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties agree each with the other as follows: 1.

The Owner covenants that the Owner is the Owner in fee simple of the Owner’s lands Described in Schedule “A” attached hereto.

The Owner covenants and agrees with the Municipality as follows: 2.1

General 2.1.1

That no development beyond that approved through zoning by-law amendment No. 2019-45 will be permitted within the 30 metre restrictive area from the high water mark, except as approved by the the Municipality.

2.1.2

That development shall be in accordance with the Site Plan Drawings, attached hereto as Schedule “B”.

2.1.3

That the uses on the subject property are limited to the single detached dwelling, garage with loft and shed.

2.1.4

That the two docks are to be constructed and maintained as per the Site Plan Drawing and that approval has been provided from Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority.

2.1.5

That any in-water construction and maintenance of the dock shall not occur between March 15th and July 15th to ensure that there is no interference with spawning of fish.

Page 245 of 297

3.1

Environmental Protection 3.1.1

That the dock may be located central on the shorefront once the foreslope has been stabilized with armor stone and with a pedestrian stairway to the dock. The steep foreslope is to be restabilized and re-naturalized using amor stone and low shrubs consisting of juniper bushes, cedar trees, dogwood or ornamentals along the toe of the slope along the water’s edge.

3.1.2

That the foreslope restoration work and dock location must be reviewed and approved by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority.

3.1.3

That the grass strip on the road side of the marsh area be renaturalized by planting native tree species approximately 7 to 10 metres apart and may include a mixture of white cedar, white spruce and maples in order to deter access into the marsh from the road while promoting wildlife use of the marsh.

3.1.4

That no disturbance or intrusion into the marsh area from any side is permitted.

3.1.5

That during and after the construction period there shall be no filling or false grading of excavated materials within the 30m setback from the lake or the wetland. The exception will be for allowance for landscaping materials for the final grade next to the residence and for reclamation of the footprints of the three demolished cottages.

3.1.6

That a permit will be required from the CRCA at the building permit stage as per the Ontario Regulation 148/06 Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses as development is regulated within 120 metres of a provincially significant wetland.

3.0

This agreement shall be registered against the title to the Lands and the Municipality shall be entitled to enforce its provisions against the Owner and any or all subsequent owners of the Lands.

4.0

If the Owner fails or refuses for any reason to comply with any requirements of this agreement, the Owner shall be in default and the Municipality may, on seven (7) days’ notice, require the Owner to remedy the default, failing which the Municipality may, without further notice and without prejudice to any other rights and remedies available to it, do such things and perform such work as is necessary to rectify the default.

5.0

Any account rendered by the Municipality for work done shall be paid by the Owner within thirty (30) days of the day of billing, and, if the Owner fails to pay, interest shall be charged on the amount outstanding at the rate of one and one quarter (1.25%) per months (15% per annum) on the first day of each calendar month following the date the account was due. Any payments received on accounts rendered shall be applied first to any outstanding interest, which may have accrued, and the balance shall be applied to reduce the principal amount outstanding.

6.0

If the Municipality incurs any expense arising out of the terms of this Agreement, the Municipality may recover the amount in like manner as municipal taxes or by action, pursuant to Section 42.7 of the Municipal Act.

Page 246 of 297

7.0

All costs necessary to fulfill any condition of this agreement, and all costs incurred by the Municipality in connection with the preparation, execution, registration or enforcement of this Agreement shall be paid by the Owners.

8.0

This Agreement shall ensure to the benefit of and be binding upon the personal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first written above. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED In the presence of:

WITNESSS

SIMON CLARK - PRESIDENT S. CLARK HOMES LTD. I HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BIND THE CORPORATION

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC Per:

RON VANDEWAL – MAYOR

ANGELA MADDOCKS – CLERK

Page 247 of 297

SCHEDULE “A” THE LANDS PART LOT 11, CONCESSION 8, PART 5 13R15931, GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF LOUGHBOROUGH, TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC, COUNTY OF FRONTENAC MUNICIPAL ADDRESS EEL BAY ROAD

Page 248 of 297

SCHEDULE “B” DRAWING LIST SITE PLAN DRAWING

HOUSE ELEVATION

EEL BAY ROAD, PREPARED BY IBW SURVEYORS, DATED APRIL 30, 2019, REV. 1 SCALE 1:250 2 OF 2 EEL BAY ROAD, S. CLARK HOMES LIMITED, DATED APRIL 22, 2019, SCALE AS NOTED, PREPARED BY ATKINSON HOME HARDWARE BUILDING CENTRE

GARAGE ELEVATION PLAN EEL BAY ROAD, S. CLARK HOMES LIMITED, DATED FEBRUARY 11, 2019, SCALE NTS, PREPARED BY NU DIMENSION DESIGN AND DRAFTING

Page 249 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING

Report Date:

June 25, 2019

Application No:

Z-19-08

Owner:

S. Clark Homes Ltd.

Location of Property:

Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as Eel Bay Road Purpose of Application: Rezone land from the Special Recreational Resort Commercial (RRC–26) Zone to the Special Waterfront Residential (RW-44) Zone to establish a single detached dwelling, a detached garage with loft and shed Date of Public Meeting: July 2, 2019

Recommendation It is recommended that the by-law rezoning Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as Eel Bay Road be passed.

Proposal An application has been submitted to amend the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw 2003-75 to rezone the subject property owned by S. Clark Homes Ltd. for the subject Lands from Special Recreational Resort Commercial (RRC–26) Zone to the Special Waterfront Residential (RW-44) Zone. The property consists of 1.3 acres (0.526 ha). The rezoning is required in order to establish a single detached dwelling consisting of 198 square metres (2131 sq ft) at 23.7 metres (77.8 ft) from the highwater mark, a proposed shed 8 ft by 12 ft to be located a minimum of 10 metres (32.8 ft) from the highwater mark of Sydenham Lake and a garage 30 ft by 30 ft with loft for storage to be permitted in the front yard, setback at 11.95 metres (39.2ft) from the front lot line with an increase of height to 8.84 metres (29 ft). The existing well at the northeast corner of the property will service the proposed residential dwelling.

Background The subject property has been operating as a resort commercial use with three rental cottages and a boat launch for many years. The lot is long and narrow and is elevated to the north and slopes southerly towards an existing marshland area which is identified as a Provincially Significant Wetland. It is located on the waterside of the intersection of Eel Bay Road and Charlie Green Road. The existing three cottages, which were very close to the top of bank and close to the high water mark, have been removed as well as the toilets and shower house. The septic tank will be removed in order to accommodate a new septic system which has been approved by KFL&A Public Health Unit. The proposal also included the removal and disposal of three derelict docks from the property. A new dock will be constructed from the walkway extending from the proposed house with a second smaller dock to be constructed to the south where an existing gravel driveway is located. The current owner has been undertaking shoreline works including installing retaining walls on the property. This work has been undertaken with a permit from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. Environmental Impact Assessments were submitted in support of the rezoning application as the property is within 120m of a provincially significant wetland. The assessments concluded that the redevelopment of the site will not have a negative impact on the water quality of Eel Bay. The site plan application is being processed concurrently with the rezoning application. The recommendations of the EIA’s and the requirements of the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority are captured as conditions in the Site Plan Control Agreement for the development of the property. The proposed zoning by-law amendment will permit the development of a single detached dwelling, a detached garage with loft and storage shed with the provisions for waterfront residential lots.

Page 250 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING

Public Meeting A public meeting was held under the Planning Act on June 18, 2019. A member of the public spoke at the meeting in support of the application. A member of Council raised questions about 2 docks being permitted as the RW Zone normally permits one dock. Planning staff are able to support a second dock as the applicant has undertaken an EIA to consider the environmental impact of this development on the subject property which concluded it would have no negative impact on the water quality of the lake. It is recognized through the site plan that the dock is smaller in size and only permitted at the end of the existing boat ramp on the subject property.

Summary A comprehensive report reviewing this zoning by-law amendment against the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, the County of Frontenac Official Plan and the South Frontenac Official Plan was provided to Council in advance of the June 13, 2019 public meeting. As this rezoning is consistent and conforms to the Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, the County of Frontenac Official Plan and the South Frontenac Official Plan and Zoning By-law, it is recommended Council approve this application by passing the attached by-law. Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac Attachments:

Zoning By-law 2019-45

Page 251 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Report Date: Application No:

June 25, 2019 Z-19/06

Owner:

Jeff Curtis and Marie-Josee Landry

Location of Property:

Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 4775 Carrying Place Road Purpose of Application: Rezone severed land from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-42) Zone and rezone the retained lot from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-43) Zone as a condition of consent application S-92-18-S

Date of Public Meeting: April 2, 2019

Recommendation It is recommended that the by-law rezoning Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 4775 Carrying Place Road be passed.

Proposal An application has been submitted to amend the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw 2003-75 to rezone the subject property owned by Jeff Curtis and Marie-Josee Landry for the severed lands from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-42) Zone and the retained lot from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-43) Zone as a condition of consent application S-92-18-S. The rezoning is required in order to fulfill condition 9 of the consent application. The applicants propose to create a 1 hectare (2.47 acres) severed lot (north lot) with 61 metres (200 ft) of frontage along Carrying Place Road and 106 metres of frontage along Dog Lake and to establish a location for a single detached dwelling at 30 metres from the highwater mark, with the septic system being required to be located 40 metres from the highwater mark. The retained lands (south lot) are required to be rezoned in order to fulfill condition 10 of consent application S-92-S as the property consists of approximately 1.3 hectares (3.2 acres) in area with approximately 106 metres of frontage along Dog Lake and 229 metres of road frontage and does not meet the requirements of the Rural (RU) Zone. The retained lands previously contained a barn structure which has been removed from the property. An existing derelict cottage remains on the retained lands approximately 5 metres from the waterfront and is identified to be removed in order to accommodate a new residential dwelling which the applicants propose to construct at 30 metres from the highwater mark. The applicants noted that the new dwelling will be an improvement to the property as opposed to renovating the existing cottage which has legal non-complying status. The consent application S-92-18-S was processed by the Township in November 2018.

Background The Rideau Waterway Development Review Team (RWDRT) required as a condition of the consent approval that the severed parcel be rezoned to establish a setback of 40m for the severed (north) lot. The current owners had indicated in correspondence submitted with the rezoning application that the property was surveyed subsequent to receiving provisional consent of the Committee of Adjustment and to locate the 40 metre setback to the highwater mark on the severed parcel. The applicants’ expressed concerns that establishing a 40 metre setback on the severed lot does not allow for any reasonable or preferable building envelopes and in their application requested to build a dwelling at the 30 metre setback as permitted by the Township’s Official Plan. Staff have further reviewed the severed and retained building lots and have determined that the 40 metre setback to the highwater mark can be achieved for the severed lot. In review of the retained lot, it appears more difficult in accommodating for the 40 metre setback to the highwater mark for the proposed residential dwelling and detached garage. Planning staff are able to support a 30m setback from the highwater mark for the retained lot. The applicants have proposed a septic system to be located at 40 metres from the

Page 252 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

highwater mark for the severed and retained lands as reviewed by the KFL&A Health Unit and recommended by the RWDRT. Planning staff had reached out to the applicants prior to the April 2nd, 2019 public meeting. At that time the applicants indicated concerns with the proposed rezoning as recommended (40m setback from the highwater mark for the severed lot and 30m setback for the retained lot) and expressed that they wished to establish a 35m setback for the severed lot. At the April 2nd, 2019 Council meeting, Council indicated support for the planning recommendation of applying a 40m setback from the highwater mark for the severed lot and 30m setback for the retained lot, consistent with the recommendation of the RWDRT. Planning staff have worked with the applicant over the past few months. Recent correspondence from the applicant, Mr. Curtis, has indicated that he has decided to proceed with the severance and rezoning consistent with the recommendations of planning staff (40m setback from the highwater mark for the severed lot and 30m setback for the retained lot). A By-law has been prepared consistent with the recommendation of planning staff.

Public Meeting A public meeting was held under the Planning Act on April 2, 2019. Neighbours of the subject property were in attendance on behalf of the property owners. The neighbours are supportive of the redevelopment of the subject property.

Summary A comprehensive report reviewing this zoning by-law amendment against the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, the County of Frontenac Official Plan and the South Frontenac Official Plan was provided to Council in advance of the April 2, 2019 public meeting. The zoning by-law amendment as drafted in By-law 2019-46 is consistent and conforms to the Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, the County of Frontenac Official Plan and the South Frontenac Official Plan and Zoning By-law, it is recommended Council approve this application by passing the attached by-law. Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac

Page 253 of 297 Minutes of Police Services Board April, 11, 2019 Time: 9:00 AM Location: Council Chambers

Present: David Herrington, Mike Nolan Frontenac OPP Staff: Jen Coles, Sergeant Staff: Wayne Orr, Chief Administrative Officer, Emily Caird, Executive Assistant Absent: Deputy Mayor Ron Sleeth

Call to Order

The CAO called the meeting to order at 9:06 am.

Attendance

Deputy Mayor Ron Sleeth was absent.

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

There were no declarations of pecuniary interest.

Swearing in of Board Members

The CAO in swore Mike Nolan as the Community Appointee and David Herrington as the Provincial Appointee.

Election of Chairman and Vice Chair - Call for Nominations

The CAO called for Nominations for a Committee Chair. David Herrington nominated Deputy Mayor Sleeth for the position of Chair. Mike Nolan seconded the nomination. The CAO noted that Deputy Mayor Sleeth would be the Committee Chair.

The CAO called for nominations for the Committee Vice Chair. Mike Nolan nominated David Herrington. David Herrington accepted the nomination and thanked Mike Nolan for his support.

Review of Rules & Procedures

Information for new Board members The CAO gave an overview of Board procedures and rules as outlined in the attached report. He highlighted the unique board structure and the fact that the group meets four (4) times annually with one evening public meeting at the end of the year.

Page 254 of 297 Minutes of Police Services Board April, 11, 2019 7.

Approval of Agenda

Motion Resolution No. 2019-PSB-04/11-01 Moved by Mike Nolan Seconded by David Herrington THAT the agenda be adopted as presented. Carried

Approval of Minutes

November 15, 2018 - Regular Meeting

November 15, 2018 - Annual Public Meeting Resolution No. 2019-PSB-04/11-02 Moved by Mike Nolan Seconded by David Herrington THAT the minutes of the following meetings be approved:  November 15, 2018 - Regular Meeting  November 15, 2018 - Annual Meeting Carried

Presentations/Delegations - n/a

Correspondence

Zone 2 Update 2019 from the Town of Carleton Place The CAO spoke to the Zone 2 Updates and noted that the next Zone meeting was scheduled for April 26th in Carleton Place. He explained that the meeting locations rotate around the zone and that he expected this upcoming meeting would have a strong focus on the Community Safety and Wellbeing plan. The CAO noted that if any of the board members were interested in attending, to let staff know and they could be registered for the event.

Important Changes to Policing in Ontario The CAO spoke to Bill 68 that was passed on March 26th, 2019. He noted that this bill involved many changes including several that affect policing in Ontario. He gave a brief overview of the attached report from Hicks Morely, which included, but was not limited to, the following:    

Police Services Boards shall consist of 5 members; Members will be required to take mandatory training and; A Police record check will be required for board members; A Board diversity plan must be prepared and adopted

Mike Nolan inquired if the OPP already have a Diversity Plan in place. Sgt. Coles confirmed that they do. The CAO noted that he would share more on any affecting changes when he knew more. c)

2019 Court Security and Prisoner Transportation Grant Update The CAO reviewed the update with the Board and noted that the Township does not have high costs associated with this service.

Letter from the Honourable Sylvia Jones - Minister of Community Safety &

Page 255 of 297 Minutes of Police Services Board April, 11, 2019 Correctional Services The CAO noted that the letter from Minister Jones encourages everyone to embrace the new Community Safety and Well Being Planning Framework. He looked to David Herrington to share his thoughts with the Board. David Herrington interpreted the plan as not trying to re-invent the wheel, but instead, focusing on bringing together more services in order to reduce poverty, loneliness, homelessness, and other social issues. He noted that it seemed the plan was encouraging awareness as opposed to looking at issues within separate silos. David Herrington expressed concerns with the lack of budget allocated to this project. He noted that currently services appears to be adequate but that more coordination among entities would improve the system dramatically. David Herrington explained that the initiative has its merits and that each Township would be best served by identifying a focal point to address in the community wellness area. The CAO explained that at the last meeting of the CAO’s, Central Frontenac Township and North Frontenac Township both expressed interest in utilizing joint initiatives in regards to community wellness, as opposed to doing the same initiative three times separately. He noted that the next steps included involving Staff Sgt. Brown, as her involvement is required in accordance with the Act. e)

Minister Sylvia Jones Sworn in as the Solicitor General

Financial

The CAO explained to the Board that there is not an abundance of financial data associated with this Board aside from the monthly bill for the OPP and the RIDE program funding from the provincial government.

Detachment Commanders Report

Police Services Board Quarterly Reports: October - December 2018 Records Sgt. Jen Coles spoke to the 4th quarter report provided by Staff Sgt. Brown, and then opened the floor to questions from the Committee. Upon reviewing the statistics, David Herrington inquired about what constituted “Crimes against another person.” Sgt. Coles explained that the most common occurrence under this category is different forms of Harassment. She noted that most of the numbers come from online and social media based harassment cases, but other forms include domestic harassment as well. Sgt. Coles also noted that it was not clear if the increase was a result of more actual occurrences or just more situations being reported. Sgt. Coles also spoke to the other most common crime category within the Township - Property Crimes - Theft under. This category constitutes a lot of vehicle break ins and low value lefts. Mike Nolan inquired if the hamlets were the prime area for these types of crimes. Sgt. Coles noted that it can be but not always, she explained that the most recent string of thefts actually took place along Bedford Rd in Sydenham and all of the cottage lanes running off it. Sgt. Coles noted that it is often less about the location and more to do with it being a crime of opportunity. She explained that a lot of small thefts go unreported until neighbours start to talk to each other. Mike Nolan noted that he was part of a lake association and that this is not a topic that they ever discuss. The CAO noted that in his experience, reports of Thefts Under tend to spike in the spring when people return to their cottages for the season. Sgt. Coles agreed with the CAO and noted that she anticipated reports to increase within the next

Page 256 of 297 Minutes of Police Services Board April, 11, 2019 month. Mike Nolan noted the value in the provided statistics and spoke to sharing the data on theft with the community. The CAO explained that Mike Nolan could also request that the local detachment Community Safety Officer give a presentation as well. Sgt. Coles spoke to the topic of drug crimes and how it is not a large issue in the Township, however, some issues tend to sprawl from the Kingston area. She noted that currently Methamphetamine is the biggest drug being used in the Township since the legalization of marijuana. Mike Nolan inquired if there had been any identified methamphetamine labs in the Township - Sgt. Coles responded not to her knowledge. She explained that it was not out of the realm of possibilities as one had recently been discovered in a neighboring rural municipality. The CAO inquired about clearance rates and that they represent charges and not necessarily convictions. Sgt. Coles confirmed that was correct and that when the clearance rates were converted into statistics, the data becomes slightly skewed. Collision Summary The CAO reviewed the report in relation to Collisions. Sgt. Coles noted that 164 of the Motor Vehicle Collisions in the Township were animal related. She explained that the highest ranking areas were the main corridors including but not limited to Road 38, Perth Rd, and Westport Rd. She noted that this was the first time that Westport Rd has made the list. Mike Nolan noted that he had spoken to Staff. Sgt. Brown about speed related issues on Perth Rd. He noted that he hoped to explore the option of more animal friendly signage as he felt this area in particular constitutes a wildlife sanctuary. He inquired about the authority on signage decisions. The CAO explained that Council and municipal staff determine signage and that the TACT system is used to determine speed limits. He noted that wildlife proves a challenge on most roads in a rural environment like South Frontenac. Mike Nolan stated that he does not see a correlation between reduced speed limits and actually reducing driver driving speeds, he explained that the true challenge is with changing the way people see the road and the consequences of their speeds. He explained that drivers may start to see the road differently if there was more signage notifying them of the natural environment and abundance of wildlife. Sgt. Coles stated that changing driver behavior would solve many problems, however, finding a strategy that accomplished this has always been a challenge. She welcomes any new options the committee could propose. This prompted Mike Nolan to inquire about how to make these changes. The CAO encouraged him to contact Mark Segsworth and start there. Sgt. Coles noted that the OPP have a civilian analyst that could help to provide statics and hot spot locations for the committee. Mike Nolan noted that this would help to determine patterns and pin point locations for increased signage. The CAO reviewed the overall summary report and the response hour changes from year to year, specifically the increase of hang up 911 calls. Sgt. Coles noted that many of these were the result of cell phone pocket dials. David Herrington inquired as to if the dispatcher calls back. Sgt. Coles explained that if there is a valid call back number available then the operator will automatically call back and they still send out a response vehicle as well. David Herrington thanked Sgt. Coles for her report. 13.

Committee Reports - n/a

Other Business

Page 257 of 297 Minutes of Police Services Board April, 11, 2019 a)

OPP Suicide Rate David Herrington noted that he had recently read that the OPP suicide rate is higher than the general public and he inquired as to what our community is doing to deal with this issue and support the local detachment. Sgt. Coles noted that they have access to an EAP program and that WSIB is now covering more PTSD claims as well. She explained that the struggle is still with getting people to use the program and reach out for support. Sgt. Coles noted that the OPP have stepped up their strategy towards wellness planning. David Herrington noted that this was an ongoing problem and was pleased to know that the OPP are trying to take a proactive approach. Sgt. Coles explained that the Frontenac detachment is an extremely close and supportive detachment where it is easier to form strong bonds.

Public Discussion - n/a

Date & Time of Next Meeting:

June 27, 2019 at 9:00 am in Council Chambers

In Camera - n/a

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 am.

Page 258 of 297

BellRock Hall May 16, 2019. Present: Celine, Cynthia, Terry, Debbie

Treasurer report: Income: Cash donation $88.80 ; Euchre $32; Rentals: $250.80; Dowker $ 457.40 TOTAL : $799.00

Expenses: Water tests (two) $132.80; Transfer to bank account: $200; Fuel $167.39; Misc $5.00; Sub‐TOTAL: $506.19 Also—fixed expenses approx $300 (taxes, insurance) TOTAL: approx. $806.19 P. Cash balance: $848.72 Bank acc’t $2293.13 Township acc’t. $100 approx. ‐‐Need to transfer more to township acc’t. by the end of May. Note : last Hydro bill was >$300 due to un‐intentional turning on of heaters……Furnace room is now locked. Minutes April 17: Approved.

Old Business: Water testing: due in late May; Terry to do it next week before the Sparks come for their weekend. Community Grant application: Approval from township $2500. Composter bought. Terry will investigate computer, printer install/internet access. Community garden: We need to schedule a work‐bee to get the garden going. Terry will let us know when they have disassembled the playground structure (to reuse for beds) and give us an idea of whatever other materials we need to build them. We will aim for the first week of June to schedule the bee.

Upcoming fund‐raisers/community events: Authors’ night; nothing new Muddy Waters catered dinner; Date: July 20 5:30. Terry to get price structure from the restaurant for wings, fries, coleslaw. We will do dessert. PorchPilots dance June 22 7pm: Liquor license purchased. ($150). We need to buy beer, wine. Canadian, Budweiser, Coors. Red/White wine. “Solo” cups. Soft drinks. Fingerfoods. Chelsea available to serve. Tickets (UPS printed). $10 each. Roadway signs. Final plans to be done at June 13 meeting. Variety Show: Still recruiting. Paint night, Psychic night: Still in progress Repair Cafe June 23: Publicity well under way. Organisers Mary and Peter deBassencourt said there is quite a lot of interest in the one upcoming in Sharbot Lake and expect we will be able to do ok here. We should try to recruit some ‘fixers’ for the event. Kitchen. Cookies: Debbie. Arrange at June 13 meeting.

Page 259 of 297

New Business: Historic status of Hall: Debbie has been in touch with a town councillor about the possibility of getting the hall status recognised as a heritage building. Has been given a couple of names of people to consult in order to get some advice on how to proceed with this (Doug Morey, Alan Boyce). Will follow up.

UPCOMING BOOKINGS: Repair Cafe June 23 Dinner (tentative) July 20.

Next meeting: June 13.

Page 260 of 297

/3/^z

SM£^A!L S^r£’.

j^^TftlcF

7«^i£ IfFff

f{fc/t£ft Tir^

^0}1.

r/fl)£’.

j_e_i3, o

PLftc£’.

GrLEfl O^M£A

^r_

Ijftjt^

f^rff/oftNc. e. ’ ^., y ^^^ ^ ff^reftW ^ <’^ft/&0sAAA-SA±f^ ^J^^^^I^A. ^u^Ai^J-’^^^^±^M£j^An^c^^Af^tLC^_ &L(£e. r

Cfi^L rs,

ff/ft-f/e

^Evii~i._

e> ^£>£^

S^cJ^A/ft-

P o -^!L6_eAs^ ^

&. (\P£jg.

ft-T /^_2A ot>A<-

J?io^^

r. ft-^-£A_m^>l££Ii^£^=^

fs\ i ^‘k T’£-‘z_

Ru»ftf{Q

_£-^IL y-~5KS , -2. 0 / <? Loic, Ui E0^, r£^ ,

^^S-s-T^

T” ft-^f^rt^^ J~AL^

/n/A’^r^s. <? fcc”^s>^e ^y f/)yi^EP

i^£w fft<_^£f5__-S, _ c fi-^fi-ftff- O/i-y

A c,c^£/)

j 7£/v\ $

ri-

e>i{^w, r

M^ft-^A9T_

/s?iQ^AM_^-tU)-i^-tt-e^’-l^E£e^

To 6£ Oo^E , Qf^iiK <?^»., ^ ££/Z^L2i^-a_£^21__fcL <0 ^E K, enl 7c^’. (fl. ^ft-C. K

ft ,££/£/>

-TUJLV I^T

7^-v-£Aj^ft-j±^-£j0^L

? ^f/‘i. l£S,_

jo! i .

$:6s^f<\

-^ 1//ffs^W

JQ^£J^2^J’ w E^^I£^ 7ft fi^/>7’_ TWLCMfipfl-‘fPi. ii)-^. L, £.t. o^ofD

6V i^£e- °_’±L^6^c^,

^-A-A-Lt^ ’ lA. f^r^f"

S^ftp^^fi^’ ^t-Hsoi-

^6//oot. uj M .^l'7l T^ft f5Y-re^’ ^Hic-M. e^-flfi^

Page 261 of 297

y? ofy-^i-i/ff 39^1 -/-^yy/-/^y7 3y<

~~:yT^^^~~WWJ~~^^~~^~^TT^

-ff^‘ffyayyy

‘-TJ^ITTW

1 T<3 /

~~VyVSr~~l~¥T~

~~/^g (f.?o’wp. 7yT? / y^fj~~^

‘ofJjT\VJS

~~^^7^’yo\n~~J~~V

ayr"^w

j77yw7Tyno. c<^ ^

10^r9m^l~^rj^r3g^ ^ra~T~~j(gP7(f^o-i^ $ ^7+/^ »o0M-i-i Id 331 /g ~V3ft o ST “7 V’jT. r’ a Vs/ WVff/v fl ^.S ij. yg/’^ tf7’ir-^

-fV^”, e>J y h -TfT^–?7^ ’ lt^- {, oj. ^~T<?-^^77

~~1^7o^^yTT^iurT^^^~~^^T^j3^y^~‘or’ry yj/^rf/i? ~^> ^7 J. ^ 47-T;7^Z$ i:’-’- o^KS^^d -iT-ff^mM- jjwy’-y ?/^6S-7-r*ro -(/

7-y^5^

a,vF~?-/^-7-^J 77

7,°^

rt? 0-7-7 tfyr -o3: -7Tr’ff~tfyff

w-H’sgyvinr^~c^iw-L^

M I ^’^ ^H-i. PTXO’. E/" 3

7^^

‘7-7 iTofT^

VMr’QV

-l’?^ -VJX? -T/y^^yJ.

~sl’?^U.

Page 262 of 297

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2019-42 A BY-LAW TO PURCHASE PROPERTY BEING PART 2, 13R22052, PART OF LOT 25, CONCESSION 14, IN THE DISTRICT OF LOUGHBOROUGH, TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC. WHEREAS the Township of South Frontenac wishes to realign the traveled portion of Norman Road with lands under the ownership of the Township, AND WHEREAS the abutting owner has agreed to transfer land including the traveled portion of Norman Road, AND WHEREAS an agreement has been reached with abutting owner for the purchase of the property, NOW THEREFORE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC, BY ITS COUNCIL, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

That By-law 2019-31 shall hereby be repealed.
That the Council of the Township of South Frontenac agrees to purchase lands described as Part Lot 25, Concession 14, and a Part of Norman Road Registered Plan No. 1451, being Part 2 on 13R22052 for a sum of $3,146 and the Township will be responsible for any surveying cost and reasonable legal fees incurred by the abutting owner; and
That the Mayor and Clerk are authorized to sign the necessary documents to complete the transaction on behalf of the Township, including any nonsubstantive amendments that may be required. Dated at the Township of South Frontenac this 2nd day of July 2019. Read a first and second time this 2nd day of July 2019. Read a third time and finally passed this 2nd day of July 2019. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 263 of 297 TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2019-43 BEING A BY-LAW TO STOP UP, CLOSE AND SELL A PORTION OF NORMAN ROAD, REGISTERED PLAN NO. 1451, BEING PART 1 OF REFERENCE PLAN 13R22052, GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF LOUGHBOROUGH: SPICER

WHEREAS, the Municipal Council of the Township of South Frontenac may pass a by-law to stop up, close and sell any highway or part thereof pursuant to the Municipal Act, section 34(1): AND WHEREAS Council is prepared to waive the requirements under the Township of South Frontenac’s Notice By-law No. 2016-73, Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac exempted the advertising of the proposal to close the said road; AND WHEREAS the said road is not used as a publically travelled road; AND WHEREAS no objections have been received to the road closing; NOW THEREFORE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY ITS COUNCIL, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.

THAT By-law 2019-33 shall hereby be repealed.

THAT the portion of road being part of Norman Road, Registered Plan No. 1451, Geographic Township of Loughborough, being Part 1 of Reference Plan 13R22052, shall be stopped up and closed and conveyed to the abutting property owner to the south in Part 5, Reference Plan 13R16357 Part Lot 25, Concession 14, Geographic Township of Loughborough (Spicer) concurrently with the realignment of Norman Road and the acquisition of Part 2, Reference Plan 13R22052 from the abutting owner to the north.

THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute such documents as are required, including any non-substantive amendments that may be required; and

THAT this By-law shall come into force and take effect upon registration of this By-law. Dated at the Township of South Frontenac this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a first and second time this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a third time and finally passed this 2nd day of July, 2019. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 264 of 297

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2019-44 BEING A BY-LAW TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND THE CLERK TO EXECUTE A SITE PLAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC AND S. CLARK HOMES LTD. WHEREAS a Site Plan and Site Plan Control Agreement have been prepared to the satisfaction of the Township of South Frontenac; NOW THEREFORE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY ITS COUNCIL, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.

THAT the Mayor and the Clerk are hereby authorized to execute a Site Plan Control Agreement between the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac and S. Clark Homes Ltd., a copy of which is attached hereto forming part of this By-law.

THAT this By-law and Agreement shall be registered on title of the property described as Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as Eel Bay Road.

THIS BY-LAW shall come into force and effect in accordance with Section 41 of the Planning Act 1990, either upon the date of passage or as otherwise provided by the said Section 41.

Dated at the Township of South Frontenac this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a first and second time this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a third time and finally passed this 2nd day of July, 2019. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 265 of 297

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2019-45 Being a by-law to amend By-law 2003-75, as amended, to rezone land from the Special Recreational Resort Commercial (RRC–26) Zone to the Special Waterfront Residential (RW-44) Zone, Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, Township of South Frontenac: S. Clark Homes Ltd. WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of the Section 34 of the Planning Act, RSO 1990 as amended, the Council of a Municipality may enact by-laws regulating the use of land and the erection, location and use of buildings and structures thereon; AND WHEREAS By-law 2003-75 being the Zoning By-law regulates the use of land and the erection, location and use of buildings and structures within the Township of South Frontenac; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac considered all written and oral submissions received on this application, the effect of which helped Council make an informed decision; NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac by its Council, hereby enacts as follows: 1.

THAT Schedule “B”, to Zoning By-law Number 2003-75 as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zoning from the Special Recreational Resort Commercial (RRC–26) Zone to the Special Waterfront Residential (RW-44) Zone for those lands shown on the attached map designated as Schedule “1”.

THAT Zoning By-law Number 2003-75, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding a new section RW-44 (Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 RP13R-15931, District of Loughborough, municipally known as Eel Bay Road) to read as follows: RW-44 (Part Lot 11, Concession 8, Part 5 15931Loughborough District – S. Clark Homes Ltd.)

RP13R-

Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8, or any other provision of this By-law to the contrary, on lands zoned the Special Waterfront Residential Zone (RW-44) Zone, the following provision applies: Zone Regulations a. Permitted Uses i) Two docks, subject to the approval of the appropriate authority b. Setback to the highwater mark of Sydenham Lake (Minimum) i) Single detached dwelling unit 23.7 metres (77.8 ft.) ii) Shed (108 sq ft maximum) 10.0 metres (32.8ft.) c. Structures permitted in the front yard (Minimum setback from front lot line): i) Detached garage 11.95 metres (39.2ft.) d. For Accessory Buildings Not Attached to the Principle Building i) Building Height (Maximum) 8.84 metres (29 ft.) All other provisions of this by-law shall apply.

Page 266 of 297 3.

THIS BY-LAW shall come into force in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act, 1990, as amended, either upon the date of passage or as otherwise provided by said section 34. Dated at the Township of South Frontenac this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a first and second time this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a third time and finally passed this 2nd day of July, 2019. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 267 of 297 Schedule 1

This is Schedule “1” to By-law No. 2019-45 Passed this 2nd day of July, 2019 MAYOR________________________________________________ CLERK____________________________________________ ____

Page 268 of 297

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2019-46 Being a by-law to amend By-law 2003-75, as amended, to rezone severed lands from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-42) Zone and rezone retained lands from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-43) Zone, Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac: Jeff Curtis and MarieJosee Landry WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of the Section 34 of the Planning Act, RSO 1990 as amended, the Council of a Municipality may enact by-laws regulating the use of land and the erection, location and use of buildings and structures thereon; AND WHEREAS By-law 2003-75 being the Zoning By-law regulates the use of land and the erection, location and use of buildings and structures within the Township of South Frontenac; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac considered all written and oral submissions received on this application, the effect of which helped Council make an informed decision; NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac by its Council, hereby enacts as follows: This by-law shall apply to the severed lands and retained lands created through consent application S-92-18-S. The lands are located in Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 4775 Carrying Place Road 1.

THAT Schedule “C”, to Zoning By-law Number 2003-75 as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zoning for the severed lands from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-42) Zone and rezone the retained lot from Rural (RU) Zone to the Special Residential Waterfront (RW-43) Zone for those lands shown on the attached map designated as Schedule “1”.

THAT Zoning By-law Number 2003-75 as amended, is hereby further amended by adding a new section RW-42 (Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac – severed parcel S92-18-S), to read as follows: RW-42 (Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington – Curtis & Landry – severed parcel S-92-18-S) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8, or any other provision of this By-law to the contrary, on lands zoned Waterfront Residential Zone RW-42, the following provision applies: Zone regulations a. Setback from highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody (Minimum) i) Buildings 40 metres (131ft.) ii) Septic 40 metres (131ft.) b. Frontage 61 metres (200ft.) All other provisions of this by-law shall apply.

THAT Zoning By-law Number 2003-75 as amended, is hereby further amended by adding a new section RW-43 (Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac – retained parcel S92-18-S), to read as follows:

Page 269 of 297 RW-43 (Part Lot 25, Concession 10, District of Storrington – Curtis & Landry – retained parcel S-92-18-S) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8, or any other provision of this By-law to the contrary, on lands zoned Waterfront Residential Zone RW-43, the following provision applies: Zone regulations a. Setback from highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody (Minimum) iii) Buildings 30 metres (131ft.) iv) Septic 40 metres (131ft.) A garage is permitted to be located in the front yard, located 15 metres from the front lot line (Carrying Place Road). All other provisions of this by-law shall apply. Dated at the Township of South Frontenac this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a first and second time this 2nd day of July, 2019. Read a third time and finally passed this 2nd day of July, 2019. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 270 of 297 Schedule 1

This is Schedule “1” to By-law No. 2019-46 Passed this 2nd day of July, 2019 MAYOR________________________________________________ CLERK____________________________________________ ____

Page 271 of 297

Payment Listing For the period of June 19, 2019 to July 2, 2019

Accounts Payable Payment Listing: For the period of June 19, 2019 to July 2, 2019 Payroll Payment Listing: Pay Period #19-13

Pay date June 19, 2019

99,746.46

For the period of June 2, 2019 to June 15, 2019 Council Honorarium:

Pay date June 28, 2019

17,855.11

For the period of June 1, 2019 to June 30, 2019 Total Payments

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that Council receive for information the listing of the Accounts Payable and Payroll for the period ending July 2, 2019 in the amount of

117,601.57

Submitted by: Mark Foster - Accounting Clerk Approved by: Tracey Pritchard - Acting Deputy Treasurer

117,601.57

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

Ranges: Cheque Date:

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

9:09:23 AM

From: 2019-06-19

To: 2019-07-02

Page:

Page 272 of 297

Distribution Types Included: PURCH, MISC

10 GG 0035 TaxSB-EP Cheque EFT000000011515

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

LIMESTONE DISTRICT SCHOOL 2019 JUNE LEVY 2019 JUNE LEVY

Total EFT000000011515

Total TaxSB-EP

Amount $1,242,897.44 $1,242,897.44

$1,242,897.44

0036 TaxSB-ES Cheque EFT000000011509

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

ALGONQUIN AND LAKESHORE 2019 JUNE LEVY 2019 JUNE LEVY

Total EFT000000011509

Total TaxSB-ES

Amount $114,129.81 $114,129.81

$114,129.81

0037 TaxSB-FP Cheque EFT000000011510

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

CONSEIL DES ECOLES PUBLIQUES 2019 JUNE LEVY 2019 JUNE LEVY

Total EFT000000011510

Total TaxSB-FP

Amount $6,949.70 $6,949.70

$6,949.70

0038 TaxSB-FS Cheque EFT000000011511

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

CONSEIL SCOLAIRE CATHOLIQUE DU 2019 JUNE LEVY 2019 JUNE LEVY

Total EFT000000011511

Total TaxSB-FS

Amount $9,278.13 $9,278.13

$9,278.13

1000 Cheque EFT000000011541

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

Amount

CULLIGAN 31322TI

Total EFT000000011541 EFT000000011550 2019-07-02

Water

9152

GREENSHIELD PEST CONTROL INC Treatment for Cluster Fly

258668

HAVEN HOME ENTERPRISE INC Service Call

2019128 2019147

J & J LANDSCAPING Grass Cutting Grass Cutting

2019-1139

KINGSTON PLATE & WINDOW GLASS Screen re-roll

55234 55234

XCG CONSULTANTS LTD. Drinking Water Sampling Drinking Water Sampling

Total EFT000000011550 EFT000000011551 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011551 EFT000000011553 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011553 EFT000000011558 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011558 EFT000000011593 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011593

Total

$52.56 $52.56 $279.84 $279.84 $277.80 $277.80 $21.88 $21.88 $43.76 $128.15 $128.15 $101.76 $113.00 $214.76

$996.87

1100 Counc Cheque 070299 Total 070299 070315

Total 070315 EFT000000011587

Date 2019-07-02

Inv #

Vendor

Description

GANAOQUE & DISTRICT HUMAINE SOCIETY DONATION J.PRITCHARD Memorial Donation J.Pritchard

2019-07-02

Amount $67.54 $67.54

TROPHY HOUSE 6074 6009

Name Tag + Name Plate Plaques For Volunteers

2017

TROUSDALE’S FOODLAND Food for Vol. Recognition

2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011587

Total Counc

$37.65 $139.41 $177.06 $307.61 $307.61

$552.21

1250 Clk Cheque EFT000000011536

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Description

Amount

CDW CANADA INC SRD6734

Total EFT000000011536 EFT000000011588 2019-07-02 222821 Total EFT000000011588

Vendor

Black+Colour Imaging Kit TROUSDALE’S HOME HARDWARE Packing Tape

$283.97 $283.97 $12.69 $12.69

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

Total Clk

Page:

Page 273 of 297 $296.66

1275 Fin Cheque 070313 Total 070313 EFT000000011528

Date 2019-07-02

Inv #

Vendor

Description

QUEENS UNIVERSITY-IRC 11820-LK-24724 Change Management Course L.F.

2019-07-02 23470

BAYRIDGE PRINTER PROS Black Toner-Reception

Total EFT000000011528

Total Fin

Amount $2,632.02 $2,632.02 $477.25 $477.25

$3,109.27

1280 HR Cheque 070296

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 12048

Vendor

Description

CORNERSTONES MANGEMENT SOLUTIONS LIMITED CAO Recruitment

Amount

Total 070296

$6,410.88 $6,410.88

Total HR

$6,410.88

Total GG

$1,384,620.97

20 PP&P 2100 Fire Cheque 070301 Total 070301 070330 Total 070330 EFT000000011517

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Description

4594

KINGSTON FIRE AND RESCUE Q2 Dispatching Fees

446

TOWNSHIP OF CENTRAL FRONTENAC Fit Tester Machine

29828

BOULTON SEPTIC/LARMON’S Holding Tank Pumped

A2139858 A2132626

ABELL PEST CONTROL INC. 19/05 Pest Control 19/05 Pest Control

146586 146769

AJ STONE COMPANY LIMITED Boots 2X Gated Wye Valve

32472

BLACK DOG TIRE & LUBRICANTS Tire

2177

CAMERON MECHANICAL Pump Testing

440813

FIRE SERVICE MANAGEMENT Wash+Repair

131666

FRASSO AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE Oil Change

2019135 2019150 2019137 2019154 2019160 2019130 2019152

J & J LANDSCAPING Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting

KS25261 KS25287 KS25247

KENWORTH ONTARIO - KINGSTON Safety + Radio Repair Safety+Brake Shoes Safety+Brakes+Battery

2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011517 EFT000000011518 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011518 EFT000000011521 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011521 EFT000000011529 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011529 EFT000000011533 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011533 EFT000000011546 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011546 EFT000000011548 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011548 EFT000000011553 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011553 EFT000000011556 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011556 EFT000000011560 2019-07-02

Amount $9,056.64 $9,056.64 $4,728.77 $4,728.77 $244.22 $244.22 $48.61 $39.40 $88.01 $141.45 $5,353.91 $5,495.36 $446.96 $446.96 $3,444.58 $3,444.58 $373.64 $373.64 $111.31 $111.31 $28.75 $28.75 $25.44 $25.44 $36.63 $36.63 $28.49 $210.13 $525.15 $1,194.68 $3,622.10 $5,341.93

LEONARD FUELS 2706-998891 1057-1010708 1057-1013406 1057-1013359 1057-1014304 1057-1014305

Total EFT000000011560 EFT000000011561 2019-07-02

664.4L @.899 105.20L @1.1142 71.10L @1.1495 86.05L @1.1142 56.28L @1.2381 38.0L @1.0965

4810066-00 1248981-00

LEVITT-SAFETY LIMITED Oxygen Mask Compressor

2100832460 2100831833

MESSER CANADA INC. Oxygen Oxygen

155166

M&L SUPPLY, FIRE & SAFETY 46X Couplings

Total EFT000000011561 EFT000000011562 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011562 EFT000000011563 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011563

Vendor

$607.81 $117.13 $81.72 $95.82 $69.76 $41.63 $1,013.87 $199.24 $33,529.92 $33,729.16 $399.60 $96.40 $496.00 $11,287.22 $11,287.22

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

EFT000000011582

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

2019-07-02 K612332 K613617 K613616

SWISH MAINTENANCE LIMITED Soap Garbage Bags Cleaning Supplies

6411

TROUSDALE’S FOODLAND Water

Total EFT000000011582 EFT000000011587 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011587

Total Fire

Page:

Page 274 of 297 $40.70 $51.33 $493.62 $585.65 $59.80 $59.80

$76,713.25

2110 Cvc# Cheque EFT000000011578

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

Amount

SIGNS PLUS 3148 3147

Civic Blade Street Sign

Total EFT000000011578

Total Cvc#

$9.16 $82.43 $91.59

$91.59

2400 Police Cheque 070287

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

MINISTER OF FINANCE-POLICE SERVICES 110706191243097 19/06 Policing Services

Amount

Total 070287

$250,492.00 $250,492.00

Total Police

$250,492.00

2605 Build Cheque EFT000000011586

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 6083-551570 6083-551570

Vendor

Description

TOWN AND COUNTRY AUTO SUPPLY Oil Filter

Total EFT000000011586

Total Build

Amount $32.26 $7.30 $39.56

$39.56

2620 Anml Ctl Cheque EFT000000011513

Date 2019-06-28

Total EFT000000011513 EFT000000011557 2019-07-02

Inv #

Vendor

Description

FRONTENAC MUNICIPAL LAW SF-AC-2019-JUNE 19/06 ANIMAL CONTROL KINGSTON HUMANE SOCIETY SF_KHS POUND_19-05 19/05 Pound Services

Total EFT000000011557

Total Anml Ctl

Amount $3,256.19 $3,256.19 $434.14 $434.14

$3,690.33

2640 Bylaw enf Cheque EFT000000011513

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

FRONTENAC MUNICIPAL LAW SF-P-2019-JUNE 19/06- PARKING BYLAW SF-P-2019-JUNE 19/06- PARKING BYLAW

Total EFT000000011513

Total Bylaw enf

Amount $457.92 $634.98 $1,092.90

$1,092.90

Total PP&P

$332,119.63

30 Trans 3000 PW OH Cheque 070304

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Amount

LEMMON, JESSE SHOCKS

Total 070304 EFT000000011519

Description

2019-07-02 IN0018207

Shocks- Ins. Claim AINLEY GRAHAM & ASSOCIATES LTD Engineering Services

Total EFT000000011519

Total PW OH

$415.89 $415.89 $178.08 $178.08

$593.97

3010 Cheque 070292

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Total 070293 070298 Total 070298 070300 Total 070300 070302

Description

Amount

A-1 LOCKSMITHS 302803

Total 070292 070293

Vendor

2019-07-02

Install Used Trim

210443 210859

ATKINSON HOME BUILDING CENTRE Pick+Sunscreen+Batteries Foam Sealant

5325

FRANK’S DRILLING & BLASTING Drilling + Blasting

73417990

GOODYEAR CANADA INC. 6X TIRES

21432

KINGSTON AUTO GLASS Windshield

2019-07-02

$162.82 $162.82 $72.20 $27.44 $99.64 $89,528.45 $89,528.45 $11,707.06 $11,707.06 $407.04

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

Total 070302 070303

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

Total 070310 EFT000000011517

Page 275 of 297 $407.04

2019-07-02 710681819 710691240 710669845 710722111 710722111

Total 070303 070310

Page:

2019-07-02

LAFARGE CANADA INC Gabion Stone Gabion Stone Gabion Stone Gabion Stone Gabion Stone

MOON, BRAD TREE REPLACEMENT

2019-07-02 29987

BOULTON SEPTIC/LARMON’S Patching

A2185621

ABELL PEST CONTROL INC. Pest Control

70001900

AIR LIQUIDE CANADA INC. Oxygen

5-77662

ARMTEC CANADA CULVERT Culverts+ Couplers

14571

AUTO ELECTRIC RE-BUILDERS Starter

33405

BLACK DOG TIRE & LUBRICANTS 4X Tires

Total EFT000000011517 EFT000000011518 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011518 EFT000000011520 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011520 EFT000000011523 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011523 EFT000000011525 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011525 EFT000000011529 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011529 EFT000000011537 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011537 EFT000000011538 2019-07-02

Uniform Cleaning Supplies Uniform Cleaning Supplies Uniform Cleaning Supplies Uniform Cleaning Supplies

219568 220725 226594 227832

COCO PROPERTIES CORP Gravel Gravel Gravel Gravel

W 1316

CROSSIRON TRUCK & EQUIPMENT Engine Light On

157961

CUNNINGHAM SWAN CARTY Legal Fees

9184

D.MARTIN WELDING & FABRICATING 12X Grates

771

GILBERT & SON CONSTRUCTION INC. Truck Rentals

P31484 P31480

JOE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT INC. Trackless Parts Broom Core

9306788540 9306770764 9306767232

KENT AUTOMOTIVE Fittings Fittings Nuts+Tubes+Bulb+Connectors

Total EFT000000011538 EFT000000011540 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011540 EFT000000011542 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011542 EFT000000011545 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011545 EFT000000011549 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011549 EFT000000011554 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011554 EFT000000011555 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011555 EFT000000011560 2019-07-02

$2,892.02 $2,892.02 $69.72 $69.72 $35.32 $35.32 $2,007.28 $2,007.28 $534.24 $534.24 $1,214.89 $1,214.89 $16.85 $258.62 $10.16 $32.37 $16.85 $221.99 $10.16 $71.61 $638.61 $227.51 $352.60 $109.01 $663.75 $1,352.87 $61.06 $61.06 $152.64 $152.64 $2,442.24 $2,442.24 $2,930.69 $2,930.69 $1,031.01 $811.54 $1,842.55 $125.77 $244.80 $356.42 $726.99

LEONARD FUELS 1056-1018556 1058-1010513 1058-1010724 1058-1012988 1058-1012432 1058-1013951 1058-1014279 1058-1014576 1058-1019061 1058-1016918 1058-1017024 1058-1018552 1058-1018874

Total EFT000000011560 EFT000000011562 2019-07-02

Lubes 97.00L @1.1673 60.30L @ 1.1496 101.99L @1.1495 80.96L @1.1495 80.96L @1.1495 12.81L @1.2381 90.28L @1.0965 110.27L @1.1407 14.97L @1.2823 111.09L @1.1407 100.25L @1.1142 86.00L @1.1142

2100832940

MESSER CANADA INC. Gases

K88956

MAGNACHARGE BATTERY CORP 12V Battery

Total EFT000000011562 EFT000000011564 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011565

$651.51 $651.51

CINTAS 884264628 884264628 884264629 884264629 884266490 884266490 884266491 884266491

Total EFT000000011564 EFT000000011565 2019-07-02

Tree Replacement

$179.08 $355.31 $188.41 $992.72 $525.45 $2,240.97

MCNICHOLS CONSTRUCTION LTD 19/06/14-SCANLAN Tri Axle+ Hoe Ram Rental

$55.19 $113.26 $69.32 $117.23 $93.05 $117.85 $15.87 $98.89 $125.74 $19.23 $126.69 $111.62 $95.76 $1,159.70 $276.44 $276.44 $182.27 $182.27 $21,873.31 $21,873.31

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

EFT000000011568

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

2019-07-02 5193722 5193896 5193720

ONTARIO HOSE SPECIALTIES LIMITED Rags Hose+Assembly Hose+Assembly

142610

PAT’S RADIATOR SERVICE LTD. Alignment

Total EFT000000011568 EFT000000011570 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011570 EFT000000011571 2019-07-02

Page:

Page 276 of 297 $9.85 $34.37 $88.68 $132.90 $111.94 $111.94

PETRIE FORD 273215 272840 272840

Total EFT000000011571 EFT000000011573 2019-07-02

Oil Oil Oil

$50.31 $33.54 $16.77 $100.62

Trailer Harness Assorted Parts 6X Shackles+ Hammer Hydraulic Oil Wrench Set

$9.15 $50.40 $60.98 $122.09 $127.18 $369.80

PRINCESS AUTO 1179275 1179275 1178188 1188867 1188867

Total EFT000000011573 EFT000000011574 2019-07-02 579

PRO-TECH TRAINING SERVICES INC. 5X Traffic Contol Training

11351 11351

R. THURSTON TECHNOLOGIES Replace Antenna Radio Repair

Total EFT000000011574 EFT000000011576 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011576 EFT000000011578 2019-07-02

$432.48 $432.48 $99.02 $86.50 $185.52

SIGNS PLUS 3148

Total EFT000000011578 EFT000000011581 2019-07-02

2X Truck Numbers

S-0059324 S-0059364

SWEET’S SAND & GRAVEL Cat Hoe Rental Gravel

352692KI 352767KI

RUSH TRUCK CENTRES International Part Valve Assy+Connector

PS040666512 WO040657686

TOROMONT INDUSTRIES LTD. Cat Fluid Replace U-Joints

6083-549174 6083-550855 6083-550138 6083-549834

TOWN AND COUNTRY AUTO SUPPLY Filters Oil 12V Battery Battery Charger

2162 7802

TROUSDALE’S FOODLAND Water Cream+Facial Tissues Water

93655 93650

TROUSDALE’S HOME HARDWARE Cooler+ Bug Spray ABS Cement

Total EFT000000011581 EFT000000011584 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011584 EFT000000011585 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011585 EFT000000011586 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011586 EFT000000011587 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011587 EFT000000011588 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011588 EFT000000011589 2019-07-02

$10.18 $10.18 $2,320.13 $13,794.28 $16,114.41 $182.22 $188.97 $371.19 $87.83 $506.26 $594.09 $67.97 $38.72 $170.76 $814.07 $1,091.52 $59.80 $9.64 $29.94 $99.38 $47.81 $8.84 $56.65

TW PATCHING 988315

Total EFT000000011589 EFT000000011590 2019-07-02 511-302364 896-933156 173-236199 173-236480 511-302189 173-237342 173-237131 173-236461

Patching UNIVERSAL SUPPLY GROUP Ball Joint Rotor+Brake Air Brake Parts Solenoid Valve Ball Joint Brake Parts Coolant hoses Cleaner

Total EFT000000011590

Total

$7,314.00 $7,314.00 $185.18 $184.54 $53.09 $158.89 $236.03 $145.50 $186.14 $10.16 $1,159.53

$173,334.54

3115 Bvr Dms Cheque 070293

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 210446

Vendor

Description

ATKINSON HOME BUILDING CENTRE Insect Repellent

Total 070293

Total Bvr Dms

Amount $11.69 $11.69

$11.69

3210 Brushing Cheque EFT000000011581

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 S-0058990

Total EFT000000011581

Total Brushing

Vendor

Description

SWEET’S SAND & GRAVEL Brush Cutter

Amount $7,006.18 $7,006.18

$7,006.18

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

Page:

Page 277 of 297

3215 Drainage Cheque 070291

Date

Inv #

2019-06-28

Vendor

Total 070303 EFT000000011523

Amount

SNIDER, PERCY 19/05/23-18

Total 070291 070303

Description

2019-07-02

Flagging

710681819 710722111

LAFARGE CANADA INC Gabion Stone Gabion Stone

5-77661

ARMTEC CANADA CULVERT 6X Culverts+ 8X Couplers

2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011523 EFT000000011567 2019-07-02

$239.27 $239.27 $350.77 $177.17 $527.94 $9,125.68 $9,125.68

O. BETTSCHEN 42405

Gravel

Total EFT000000011567

Total Drainage

$91.58 $91.58

$9,984.47

3235 Sidewalks Cheque EFT000000011517

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 29462A

Vendor

Description

BOULTON SEPTIC/LARMON’S Flagging

Total EFT000000011517

Total Sidewalks

Amount $442.66 $442.66

$442.66

3310 Hardtop Patching Cheque EFT000000011567

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

Amount

O. BETTSCHEN 42551

Total EFT000000011567 EFT000000011591 2019-07-02 3944

Cold Patch WILLIAMS HOT MIX LTD 73.89 MT Hot Mix

Total EFT000000011591

Total Hardtop Patching

$2,764.82 $2,764.82 $7,418.01 $7,418.01

$10,182.83

3320 should maint Cheque EFT000000011538

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 219568

Total EFT000000011538 EFT000000011567 2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

COCO PROPERTIES CORP Gravel

Amount $1,496.75 $1,496.75

O. BETTSCHEN

Total EFT000000011567

$166.22 $166.22

Total should maint

$1,662.97

42522

Recycled Asphalt

3405 Washout Cheque EFT000000011538

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 220725

Total EFT000000011538 EFT000000011567 2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

COCO PROPERTIES CORP Gravel

Amount $256.00 $256.00

O. BETTSCHEN 42405 42470 42522 42559 42380 42476 42393

Total EFT000000011567 EFT000000011581 2019-07-02 S-0059364

Gravel Gravel+ Recycled Asphalt Recycled Asphalt Recycled Asphalt Recycled Asphalt Gravel Gravel SWEET’S SAND & GRAVEL Gravel

Total EFT000000011581

Total Washout

$781.14 $829.25 $158.33 $155.12 $149.39 $1,105.46 $1,509.37 $4,688.06 $379.34 $379.34

$5,323.40

3415 dust layer Cheque EFT000000011566

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 INV0073826 INV0073825 INV0073821 INV0073813 INV0073812 INV0073836 INV0074475 INV0074108 INV0074090 INV0074080 INV0074079 INV0074073 INV0074069 INV0074058 INV0073555 INV0073547 INV0074152

Vendor

Description

MORRIS CHEMICALS INCORPORATED Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride Calcium Chloride

Amount $4,666.97 $4,735.08 $4,729.85 $4,857.34 $4,766.52 $3,857.09 $2,870.71 $6,717.49 $6,413.60 $2,556.33 $6,417.08 $2,569.51 $2,548.79 $6,336.74 $4,653.00 $4,726.35 $4,735.08

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

Total EFT000000011566

Page:

Page 278 of 297 $78,157.53

Total dust layer

$78,157.53

3425 Gradng & Grvl resurf Cheque EFT000000011567

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

Amount

O. BETTSCHEN 42470

Total EFT000000011567 EFT000000011581 2019-07-02 S-0059364

Recycled Asphalt SWEET’S SAND & GRAVEL Gravel

Total EFT000000011581

Total Gradng & Grvl resurf

$985.11 $985.11 $254.83 $254.83

$1,239.94

3601 Barricds & Sfty Matls Cheque 070308 Total 070308 EFT000000011527

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

26702

MCCULLOUGH METALS LTD. Metal for Sign Insert

24228662

BATTLEFIELD EQUIPMENT RENTALS Sign- “Men Working”

2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011527

Total Barricds & Sfty Matls

Amount $35.62 $35.62 $296.72 $296.72

$332.34

3615 Street signs Cheque EFT000000011578

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

Amount

SIGNS PLUS

Total EFT000000011578

$80.29 $14.25 $94.54

Total Street signs

$94.54

3148 3147

2 Street Signs Street Sign

3625 RR cross mnt Cheque EFT000000011534

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 11112299

Vendor

Description

CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY 19/06 Flasher Contract

Amount

Total EFT000000011534

$744.00 $744.00

Total RR cross mnt

$744.00

3650 Street Lights Cheque EFT000000011577

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

Amount

R.W. ELECTRIC

Total EFT000000011577

$283.81 $283.81

Total Street Lights

$283.81

36544

19/05 Streetlight Repair

3800 Crssng Guards Cheque EFT000000011539

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 87500

Vendor

Description

COMMISSIONAIRES SECURITY SOLUTIONS Crossing Guards

Amount

Total EFT000000011539

$1,135.91 $1,135.91

Total Crssng Guards

$1,135.91

Total Trans

$290,530.78

40 Env 5105 Garb coll Cheque 070291

Total 070291 070307

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

SNIDER, PERCY 19/06 DISPOSAL -FUEL 19/06 DISPOSAL -FUEL 19/06 DISPOSAL 19/06 DISPOSAL

2019-07-02 22560

Total 070307 EFT000000011508

2019-06-28

Vendor

Description 19/06 DISPOSAL Fuel Adj 19/06 DISPOSAL Fuel Adj 19/06 DISPOSAL 19/06 DISPOSAL

MADDOCKS ENGINEERING 8X TyeDee Bins

BOULTON SEPTIC/LARMON’S COLLECTION 19/06 COLLECTION 19/06 COLLECTION19/06-FUEL COLLECTION 19/06- Fuel Adj.

Total EFT000000011508

Total Garb coll

Amount $152.15 $125.61 $11,940.74 $9,856.55 $22,075.05 $9,483.33 $9,483.33 $12,197.80 $155.43 $12,353.23

$43,911.61

5110 Gab disp Cheque EFT000000011516

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Description

WHALEY, GEORGE 19/06 DISPOSAL 19/06 DISPOSAL

Total EFT000000011516 EFT000000011532 2019-07-02

Amount $1,935.80 $1,935.80

CAMBIUM INC. 2019-26971

Total EFT000000011532

Vendor

PFAS Sampling+Analysis

$16,067.90 $16,067.90

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

Total Gab disp

Page:

Page 279 of 297 $18,003.70

5205 Recyc Coll Cheque 070291

Total 070291 EFT000000011508

Date 2019-06-28

2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

SNIDER, PERCY 19/06 DISPOSAL -FUEL 19/06 DISPOSAL -FUEL 19/06 DISPOSAL -FUEL 19/06 DISPOSAL 19/06 DISPOSAL 19/06 DISPOSAL

Description 19/06 DISPOSAL Fuel Adj 19/06 DISPOSAL Fuel Adj 19/06 DISPOSAL Fuel Adj 19/06 DISPOSAL 19/06 DISPOSAL 19/06 DISPOSAL

BOULTON SEPTIC/LARMON’S COLLECTION 19/06 COLLECTION 19/06 COLLECTION19/06-FUEL COLLECTION 19/06- Fuel Adj.

Total EFT000000011508

Total Recyc Coll

Amount $164.14 $143.12 $152.77 $12,881.10 $11,232.19 $11,989.49 $36,562.81 $10,492.73 $133.70 $10,626.43

$47,189.24

5305 HHW Cheque EFT000000011530

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

20190093

BRENDAR ENVIRONMENTAL INC. 19/05 HHW Services

3894

SYDENHAM LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS Black Mulch

Total EFT000000011530 EFT000000011583 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011583

Amount $7,112.31 $7,112.31 $81.95 $81.95

Total HHW

$7,194.26

Total Env

$116,298.81

70 Cem 7000 Health Cheque EFT000000011512

Date 2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

D G YOUNGE CONCRETE BURIAL VAULTS SERVICES 19/06 SERVICES 19/06

Total EFT000000011512 EFT000000011543 2019-07-02 2234 2234 2234 2234

D G YOUNGE CONCRETE BURIAL VAULTS 19/05 Cemetary Services 19/05 Cemetary Services 19/05 Cemetary Services 19/05 Cemetary Services

2019138 2019156 2019133 2019157 2019155

J & J LANDSCAPING Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting

Total EFT000000011543 EFT000000011553 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011553

Amount $875.14 $875.14 $356.16 $534.24 $356.16 $122.11 $1,368.67 $45.79 $45.79 $274.75 $274.75 $24.93 $666.01

Total Health

$2,909.82

Total Cem

$2,909.82

80 Rec 8000 Rec Cheque 070293 Total 070293 070295 Total 070295 070297 Total 070297 070318 Total 070318 070319 Total 070319 EFT000000011514

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

2019-06-28

ATKINSON HOME BUILDING CENTRE Bit+ Post Concrete

19-7976

CADUCEON ENTERPRISES INC. Microcystin

Amount $38.65 $38.65 $68.69 $68.69

FISHER, DAVE 19/06/17-STORR REC

19/06/17-STORR REC

$32.47 $32.47

WEBSTER, LOIS 19/06/13-BEDFORD REC

19/06/13-BEDFORD REC

$32.47 $32.47

WEBSTER, RICHARD 19/06/13-BEDFORD REC 19/06/13-BEDFORD REC LEONARD, ELIZABETH 19/06 MAINTENANCE 19/06 MAINTENANCE

Total EFT000000011514 EFT000000011517 2019-07-02 29936 29935

BOULTON SEPTIC/LARMON’S Holding Tank Pumped Holding Tank Pumped

6346 6325

ASSELSTINE HARDWARE Contact Cement+Dock Leg Caps Watering Can

Total EFT000000011517 EFT000000011524 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011524 EFT000000011531 2019-07-02

Description

211291 2019-07-02

2019-07-02

Vendor

BROWN, DONNA 19/06/13-BEDFORD REC 19/06/13-BEDFORD REC

$32.47 $32.47 $142.50 $142.50 $244.22 $244.22 $488.44 $13.00 $8.13 $21.13 $32.47

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

9:09:23 AM

Total EFT000000011531 EFT000000011544 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011544 EFT000000011547 2019-07-02

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

FOX, KEVIN 19/06/17-STORR REC

2019139 2019140 2019141 2019142 2019143 2019144 2019145 2019146 2019158 2019159 2019151 2019127 2019126 2019125 2019124 2019129 2019128 2019131 2019132 2019134 2019136 2019149 2019148 2019147

Page 280 of 297 $65.00 $65.00 $32.47 $32.47 $81.41 $20.35 $64.11 $235.57 $91.58 $213.70 $30.53 $35.62 $87.51 $131.78 $81.41 $30.53 $35.62 $213.70 $235.57 $131.78 $21.88 $81.41 $87.51 $75.30 $122.11 $122.11 $75.30 $21.88 $2,328.27

19/06/17-STORR REC

$32.47 $32.47

474.0L @.9707

$468.20 $468.20

LEONARD FUELS 0838-1006247

PANTREY, AMANDA 19/06/17-STORR REC 19/06/17-STORR REC

Total EFT000000011569 EFT000000011579 2019-07-02

$65.00 $65.00

SLEETH, SARAH 19/06/21-48

Total EFT000000011579 EFT000000011580 2019-07-02

19/06/17-STORR REC

J & J LANDSCAPING Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting Grass Cutting

KOT, JOHN 19/06/17-STORR REC

Total EFT000000011559 EFT000000011560 2019-07-02 Total EFT000000011560 EFT000000011569 2019-07-02

9 $32.47

DILLABOUGH, LEE 19/06/13-BEDFORD REC 19/06/13-BEDFORD REC

Total EFT000000011547 EFT000000011553 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011553 EFT000000011559 2019-07-02

Page:

Cleaning

SMITH, ROBERTA 19/06/17-STORR REC 19/06/17-STORR REC

Total EFT000000011580 EFT000000011582 2019-07-02 K613689 K612566

SWISH MAINTENANCE LIMITED Cleaning Supplies Cleaning Supplies

93706 222829 93608 93688 223035 303925 93486 222799 223007 223007 93802 93802

TROUSDALE’S HOME HARDWARE Rope Fridge Cement Mixer+Pail Cement Mixer+ Parts for Bench Screws 2X Spring Hinge Cable Ties+ Lube Chalk Reel+ Screws Bit+ Blade+ 50X Wedge Anchor Bit+ Blade+ 50X Wedge Anchor Canada Flag Canada Flag

55234 55234 55234 55234

XCG CONSULTANTS LTD. Drinking Water Sampling Drinking Water Sampling Drinking Water Sampling Drinking Water Sampling

Total EFT000000011582 EFT000000011588 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011588 EFT000000011593 2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011593

Total Rec

$420.00 $420.00 $32.47 $32.47 $190.52 $168.78 $359.30 $9.15 $1,068.45 $521.90 $289.10 $8.12 $48.82 $22.36 $0.95 $56.82 $56.82 $36.62 $36.62 $2,155.73 $113.00 $113.00 $113.00 $101.76 $440.76

$7,288.96

8025 Day Cmps Cheque EFT000000011587

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 1861

Vendor

Description

TROUSDALE’S FOODLAND Sunscreen+Bandaids

Total EFT000000011587

Total Day Cmps

Amount $51.91 $51.91

$51.91

8030 Cda Day Cheque 070282 Total 070282 070283 Total 070283

Date 2019-06-28

2019-06-28

Inv #

Vendor

Description

Amount

BANDY, JILLIAN CANADA DAY 2019

Editing Posters

$100.00 $100.00

CODE, JEFF CANADA DAY 2019

Storr. Can. Day Entertainment

$600.00 $600.00

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

9:09:23 AM

070284 Total 070284 070285 Total 070285 070286 Total 070286 070288 Total 070288 070289 Total 070289 070290 Total 070290 070311 Total 070311 EFT000000011522

2019-06-28

2019-07-02

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

Total EFT000000011552 EFT000000011592 2019-07-02

Page 281 of 297

DELINE, JO ANN CANADA DAY 2019

Pony Rides+Petting Zoo

$650.00 $650.00

KING, CHARLIE CANADA DAY 2019

Sound System

$750.00 $750.00

KNIGHT, JANET CANADA DAY 2019

Cookie Making Materials

$300.00 $300.00

PARKS, PATRICIA CANADA DAY 2019 BBQ Supplies

$300.00 $300.00

REVELL, TOM CANADA DAY 2019

Band- Jack and the Gang

$700.00 $700.00

SAUNDERS, JOE CANADA DAY 2019

Red Rose-Music Coodination

$850.00 $850.00

THE NOT SO AMATEUR AMATEURS 2019 CANADA DAY 3X Machines+2X Face Painters

2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011522 EFT000000011552 2019-07-02

Page:

$696.00 $696.00

A PARTY CENTRE 58649

Canada Day Equipment

$1,669.37 $1,669.37

HOWE, MIKE 19/03/29-WIX.COM

Canada Day Website

$205.38 $205.38

WOOD, ALVIN 19/06/14-BROCHURES

Can. Day Brochures

$398.88 $398.88

Total EFT000000011592

Total Cda Day

$7,219.63

8210 VCA Cheque 070293 Total 070293 070305 Total 070305 070306

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

205173

ATKINSON HOME BUILDING CENTRE Limestone Screenings

2019026

LINGEN, DEBORAH Mail Flyers

2019-07-02

Total 070317 EFT000000011526

2019-07-02

Amount $58.52 $58.52 $124.93 $124.93

LINGEN, ROY 2019027

Total 070306 070317

Description

Summer Flyers

VERONA/HARTINGTON SOFTBALL ASSOCIATION 2019 DONATION-VCA Donation- Helmets/Face Masks

2019-07-02

$257.91 $257.91 $500.00 $500.00

BABCOCK, CHET 2019031

Potting Soil for Barrels

Total EFT000000011526

Total VCA

$50.78 $50.78

$992.14

8230 SF Rides Cheque EFT000000011572

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 43893

Vendor

Description

PRIMETIME CUSTOM 300X Lakes+Trails Hats

Total EFT000000011572

Total SF Rides

Amount $2,014.85 $2,014.85

$2,014.85

8245 BCHC Cheque 070316

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

TYENDINAGA PROGANE Tank Rental

Amount

Total 070316

$66.14 $66.14

Total BCHC

$66.14

255357

8405 Ver&Dis Hist Cheque 070294

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

Amount

BOYCE, ALAN 19/06/10 19/05/24

BL#20- 4X Rasberry Computers BL#21 Past Perfect Support

Total 070294

$619.72 $438.14 $1,057.86

Total Ver&Dis Hist

$1,057.86

Total Rec

$18,691.49

90 Plan 9000 Plan Cheque 070314

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02

Vendor

Description

STORRINGTON LIONS CLUB 19/10/03- Hall Rental Deposit

Amount

Total 070314

$100.00 $100.00

Total Plan

$100.00

19/10/03

System:

2019-06-27

User ID:

mfoster

9:09:23 AM

Township of South Frontenac CHEQUE DISTRIBUTION REPORT

Total Plan

Page:

Page 282 of 297 $100.00

99 9999 Cheque 070312

Date

Inv #

2019-07-02 5074088

Total 070312 070322 Total 070322 070325 Total 070325 070326 Total 070326 070327 Total 070327 070328 Total 070328 EFT000000011575

2019-07-02

Description

PRECISION INDUSTRIES 3" Maniford Plus

MCMASTER, MARY 2019 TAX REFUND Tax Refund LAWSON ROBERT BLAIR 2019 TAX REFUND Tax Refund

2019-07-02 CRADJ5562-1

BURNS AMANDA MICHELLE TAX REFUND

CRADJ5563-1

SONNEVELD BRYAN CORNELIS Tax Refund

CRADJ5565-1

PAPAZIAN WALTER JOHN Tax Refund

635014 635013 635012 635011 634909 634908 634912 634911 634753 634801 634800 634799 634803 634802 634907 634967

ROSEN ENERGY GROUP P 1198.0L CLR @.9607 F 1797.9L MKD @.8277 F 2498.0L CLR @.9607 F 1202.2L GAS @1.0062 F 933.2L MKD @.8167 F 2062.1L CLR @.9497 B 881.2L MKD@.8167 B 848.7L CLR @.9497 SUN 1098.0L CLR @.9787 F 1403.4L MKD @.8367 F 3281.8L CLR @.9697 F 2246.1L GAS @.9802 P 721.9L MKD @.8367 P 1414.7L CLR @.9697 F 1495.5L GAS @.9932 SUN 447.9L CLR @.9407

2019-07-02

Total EFT000000011575

Vendor

Amount $46.85 $46.85 $292.06 $292.06 $2,427.67 $2,427.67 $36.30 $36.30 $116.58 $116.58 $129.44 $129.44 $1,171.17 $1,514.31 $2,442.07 $1,230.94 $775.55 $1,992.85 $732.35 $820.20 $1,093.52 $1,194.89 $3,238.37 $2,240.38 $614.64 $1,395.97 $1,511.46 $428.75 $22,397.42

Total

$25,446.32

Total

$25,446.32

Total

$2,170,717.82

Page 283 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

PLANNING AGENDA DATE: REPORT DATE:

July 2, 2019 June 25, 2019

SUBJECT:

2nd Quarter – 2019 Planning Activity Report

SUMMARY: The below tables reports the activity in the delivery of Planning Services within the Development Services Department between April 1, 2019 and June 25, 2019. The activities outlined below have been completed by the Planning Assistant, Planner and Director of Development Services. Inquiries Phone Inquiries Inquiries

Other Development Services Matters

Totals

146

April

Clearing Conditions & Existing Applications 44

May June

133 167

67 55

15 20

215 242

2nd Quarter Total

393

166

603

1st Quarter Total

392

431

Year to Date

785

191

1034

Other Development Services Matters

Monthly Totals

42 43 30 115

505 674 664 1843

Email Inquiries Inquiries

April May June 2nd Quarter Total

258 498 542 1298

Clearing Conditions & Existing Applications 205 133 92 430

1st Quarter Total

917

375

131

1423

Year to Date Total

2215

805

246

3266

Page 284 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

PLANNING Walk-in Inquiries – New Inquiries April May

Data not collected 84

Inquiry about Existing Application Data not collected 54

Data not collected 16

Total Walk-in Inquiries Data not collected 154

77 161

20 74

5 21

102 256

*161

*74

*21

*256

June 2nd Quarter Total Year to Date Total

Other Inquiries

*no data was collected in the 1 Quarter. Development Services. Development Services Staff began tracking and reporting walk-in inquiries in May 2019. Pre-consultation Meetings

April May June 2nd Quarter Total 1st Quarter Total

Number of Meetings this Quarter 29 23 30 82 59

Year to Date Total

141

Consent Applications

April May June 2nd Quarter Total 1st Quarter Total Year to Date Total

Complete Applications Submitted 2 0 5 7 4 11

Applications Heard by Committee 2 0 0 2 4 *6

5 consent applications are scheduled on the July 2019 Committee of Adjustment agenda

Minor Variance Applications

April May June 2nd Quarter Total 1st Quarter Total Year to Date Total

Complete Applications Submitted 2 6 2 10 6 16

Applications Processed 2 6 0 8 6 *14

2 applications were deferred and are scheduled on the July 2019 Committee of Adjustment agenda

Page 285 of 297

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

PLANNING Zoning By-law Amendment Applications* Complete Applications Submitted 2 0 0 2 6 8

April May June 2nd Quarter Total 1st Quarter Total Year to Date Total

Applications Declared Complete & Processed 2 0 0 2 6 8

Site Plan Control Applications 

Two site plan control application was submitted in the 2nd quarter of 2019. A total of three site plan control applications have been prepared to date this year.

Development Agreements  

17 development agreements were prepared by Township Planning Staff in the 2nd Quarter of 2019. A total of 28 development agreements have been prepared to date this year. 13 agreements were prepared to fulfill conditions of draft approval for either a minor variance or consent application. 4 development agreements were prepared to fulfill conditions of consent.

Certificates of Official Issued (Finalizing Consent Applications)  

11 severance applications were finalized by the Planning Assistant clearing all conditions of the consent and issuing the certificate of official in the 2nd quarter of 2019. . A total of 37 consent applications have been finalized to date this year. Certificates of Official are forwarded to the applicant’s lawyer to register the severance and finalize the transfer of land.

Other Applications & Planning Activities  



1 Road Closing Application has been processed (Spicer). Prepared a letter to the County to clear conditions of Draft Plan Approval for McFadden Road Plan of Subdivision. County gave Final Approval to the McFadden Road Plan of Subdivision on May 3, 2019. The Subdivision Agreement has been registered and the first lot is under construction. Shield Shores Plan of Condominium Application was recommended with conditions to the County for draft plan approval in April 2019. The County granted draft plan approval in May 2019. No appeals were received. The developer has begun working towards clearing conditions of draft plan approval. Draft Plan Extension for Cranberry Cove and Johnston Point Plans of Condominium were considered by Township Council. County Council granted a one year extension to draft plan approval for both condominiums on June 19, 2019.

SUMMARY: Email Inquiries – Year to Date Phone Inquiries – Year to Date Walk In Inquiries – Year to Date (May/June) Pre-consultation Meetings – Year to Date Applications Processed - Year to Date Submitted/approved by: Prepared by:

3266 1034 256 141 37

Claire Dodds, Director of Development Services Michelle Hannah, Planning Assistant & Trudy Gravel, Planner

Page 286 of 297 Ministry of the Solicitor General

Ministère du Solliciteur général

Office of the Fire Marshal and Emergency Management

Bureau du commissaire des incendies et de la gestion des situations d’urgence

25 Morton Shulman Avenue Toronto ON M3M 0B1 Tel: 647-329-1100 Fax: 647-329-1143

25 Morton Shulman Avenue Toronto ON M3M 0B1 Tél. : 647-329-1100 Téléc. : 647-329-1143

June 24, 2019

Your Worship Ron Vandewal Township of South Frontenac P.O. Box 100, 4432 George St. Sydenham, ON K0H2T0 Dear Mayor: It is the responsibility of municipalities to ensure they are in compliance with the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act (EMCPA). The Office of the Fire Marshal and Emergency Management (OFMEM) has reviewed the documentation submitted by your Community Emergency Management Coordinator (CEMC) and has determined that your municipality was compliant with the EMCPA in 2018. The safety of your citizens is important, and one way to ensure that safety is to ensure that your municipality is prepared in case of an emergency. You are to be congratulated on your municipality’s efforts in achieving compliance in 2018. I look forward to continuing to work with you to ensure your continued compliance in 2019. If you have any questions or concerns about the compliance monitoring process, please contact your Emergency Management Field Officer. Sincerely,

Jon Pegg Chief of Emergency Management cc:

Darry Knott - CEMC Teresa Alonzi - Field Officer - Loyalist Sector

Page 287 of 297

From: Meela Melnik‐Proud [mailto:meelamelnik@hotmail.com] Sent: June‐21‐19 10:01 AM To: councillorrevill@gmail.com; Morey, Doug douggmorey@gmail.com; councillornroberts@gmail.com; patbarr1@aol.com; rgruttan@gmail.com; rayleonard1952@gmail.com; sfcron.sleeth@gmail.com; Ron Vandewal rvandewal@southfrontenac.net; 7846elbe@gmail.com; Wayne Orr worr@southfrontenac.net Cc: Evonne Potts evonne.potts@gmail.com; Matthew Rennie mattrennie27@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Frontenac County decision to extend the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium. June 21, 2019 Re: Frontenac County’s 8-1 vote, June 19, 2019 to extend the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium. Dear Mayor and Councillors; It is with deep concern that we forward you the following three items in regard to our County delegation:

Open Letter of Public Concern asking County to Deny Extension of Johnston Point.
Letter to Frontenac County, Donnelly Law, June 18, 2019
Notes delivered in our County delegations. On behalf of concerned residents, we would like to extend a heartfelt thank you for your recommendation to the County to deny this extension. We applaud your bold, corrective, and precedent setting action to prioritize protecting and restoring Johnston Point’s natural value. Your decision sends a strong message that at stake is lack of protection for one of the richest and most significant representations of biodiversity and natural heritage features in Ontario. The County’s decision sends the opposite strong message, endorsing this residential development at further cost of municipal resources and taxpayer dollars, and demonstrating the erosion of our democratic right to ensure that our elected officials can make decisions in the best interests of those who elected them. We would especially like to extend our appreciation to Councillor Revill for eloquently representing the Township at the County meeting to uphold and reinforce the Township Council’s decision. Without him, there would have been no representation on County Council to express the best interests of South Frontenac Council or the concerned public. His thoughtful and logical explanation to County Council, asking them to support the Township’s recommendation, was lost in the County discussion and decision that voted 7-1 to approve the extension, 8-1 if you count the extra vote given to Mayor due to the Township’s large population. In regards to our delegations, we were advised by the County Clerk that “Council will only be receiving information that pertains to the extension of draft plan approval and not issues related to the development itself (including conditions and enforcement of conditions). Much of the materials that you have provided reference past discussions dating from 2016 and 2018 and have been previously addressed by County Council through your deputation at the April 18, 2018 Council meeting. The materials also include matters outside of the jurisdiction of Council, specifically with respect to the walking bridge which you were previously denied a deputation for that reason.” We believe that the information we submitted clearly reflects and/or provides clarity on your comments made in response to Magenta’s Township delegation, and that it is absolutely necessary to address the many planning, implementation, and enforcement issues that have been left hanging with our previous delegations and our presentations to the OMB. Our many outstanding issues are all framed by Magenta’s failure to sign back last year’s draft condominium agreement. It is the legal opinion of Donnelly Law that “This is an egregious breach of planning protocol and skates very close to bad faith. It is a clear indication of a lack of sincerity with respect to fulfilling the Conditions… The clear inference to be drawn from this activity is that MWDC does not respect the planning process, Planning Act, Conservation Authorities Act, the Condominium Act, the Endangered Species Act or the will of Township Council. In conclusion, how is it that MWDC has earned the trust of County Council and the privilege of having its approval extended? There are no legal grounds for granting the approval, and a number of planning, legal and moral principles that warrant a denial of the extension application. Finally, after five years of failing to meet the Conditions, advancing “a change in management” is an extremely weak rationale for needing more time.” Respectfully, Meela Melnik-Proud, Evonne Potts and Matt Rennie

Page 288 of 297

June 15, 2019 Re: Magenta Waterfront Development Corp. Application for Extension, Johnston Point Plan of Condominium Dear Warden and Frontenac County Councillors; We are writing to respectfully ask the County not to grant an extension to the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium following the June 4, 2019 decision from Township Council. Gavin Marshall, of Magenta, has stated that they “haven’t had operational control or responsibility for this project until roughly late March” - a few short months ago. The fact is Magenta applied for the Plan of Condominium in June 2014 – five years ago, and in March 2015, three years ago, Magenta appealed Johnston Point to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on the Township’s failure to make a decision on Johnston Point within 180 days. Magenta has had three years to meet their environmental commitments as ruled by the OMB. By their own admissions, they have failed to do so. As Magenta expressed in delegation to Township Council, “Environmental standards could not be more elevated. It is unfortunate and regrettable and deplorable that the project, and those standards have not been respected here before.” Magenta’s appeal to the OMB. Their internal legal disputes with the previous Project Manager. Their failure to obtain the necessary approvals and authorizations before initiating development and site alteration activities. Their unwillingness to sign the Condominium agreement to allow the Township and County access to the property. Their delays in obtaining a permit under the Endangered Species Act. These actions, lacking transparency and due diligence on the part of Magenta, have cost the Township hundreds of staff hours and thousands of taxpayers dollars without any return to the municipality. In February 2019 - 4 months before the June 2019 expiry date of the Johnston Point Agreement - concerned residents reported unauthorized development work and vegetation removal directly in Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) in regard to the installation of the Lot 6 walking bridge. It is what raised the issue of this extension over which Mayor Vandewal “assured Council that he would not support any extension to the Johnston Point agreement at the County.” (Minutes, Township Council Meeting, February 19, 2019). On June 4, 2019, Township Council voted 6-2 to recommend the County deny Magenta’s application for extension. It was a decision that was not made lightly. Township Council struggled to find a way to endorse this extension. Their denial is the result of their careful consideration of this request after five years of direct engagement and dealings with this condominium proposal in good faith. We thank them for their decision. We trust that, as South Frontenac’s representative to the County, Mayor Vandewal will honor his promise, and that County Council, as final authorities, will support Township Council’s recommendation and reinforce their position on the extension denial. Respectfully, Concerned Members of the Public

Page 289 of 297

Meela Melnik-Proud Matt Rennie Evonne Potts Prof. Roel Vertegaal, PhD Heather Gregg Philippa Fugler Anne Fisher Bob Fugler Roel Vertegaal Joe Pater Nada Beamish Brian Ward Dianne Dowling Kevin Kapler Nona Mariotti Karla Finlay Wren Montgomery Karl Hammer Carolyn Tanner Cynthia Fiber Mabyn Armstrong Kim McGlynn Sharon Singer Diane Koen Helen Bartsch Keith Bartsch Jeffy Parsons-Sheldrake Sharon Dunn Amanda Michelle Burns Rick Bell Jan Wood Larry Wood Kathleen Clayton Stephanie Howie Joe Scott Clayton Potts Michael Holiday Stephanie Amanda Lynn DeGeer-Ostrom Sue Saulnier Justin Potts Jeff Ingle Roxanne Ouellette Dennis Lake Wendy Harris

Page 290 of 297

Erin Elizabeth Jeff Kleinlagel Kevin Weaver Janza Giangrosso Soph Rae Annie G. Robinson Max Donwell Jan Fox Linda Sullivan Young Sarah Harmer Jennifer Mallon Delina Campbell Melo Tracey Tallen-McGinn Anthony Cameron Sharilyn Normand Ken Barry Don Cranston Elsie Desrosiers Ric Peterson Leslie Wood Melanie Serson Susan Smethurst Debra Cole Isa Knor Jane Brown Ralph Brown Meredith MacKenzie Roy Chan George Proud Sally Blasko Charlie Cumpson Hailey Cumpson Andrea Cumpson Orrie Cumpson Sue Saulnier Sue Peters Jeff Peters Garnet Peters Hayden Peters Kevin Timmons Margie Mackenzie Neil Koheil Tony Oulette

Page 291 of 297

David R. Donnelly, MES LLB david@donnellylaw.ca June 18, 2019 Sent via email to jamini@frontenaccounty.ca Jannette Amini Clerk, Manager of Legislative Services Frontenac County 2069 Battersea Road Gleburnie, ON K0H 1S0 Re:

Magenta Waterfront Development Corp Permit Loughborough Lake, Frontenac County

Dear Ms Amini, Donnelly Law (“we” or the “Firm”) represents Protecting Ontario’s Wildlife Inc. (“POW” or the “Respondents”) regarding the proposed Magenta Waterfront Development Corp. (“MWDC”) Permit for activities with conditions to achieve overall benefit to the species – Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) s. 17(2)(c) (the “Permit”). MWDC has conditional zoning for a 15-unit condominium development and 1,100 metre roadway on Johnston Point on Loughborough Lake, in South Frontenac Township. Development is conditional on MWDC satisfying 50 Conditions of Approval, including obtaining a Permit for habitat loss, which has never been disclosed. We attach our client’s letter to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forests regarding this Permit. We write at the request of POW to offer an opinion regarding the County of Frontenac’s legal options when considering MWDC’s request for an extension. Our first conclusion is that it is entirely at the discretion of County Council whether to grant or deny the extension. That being said, as a request to Council, the onus falls squarely on the applicant, MWDC, to convince Council that an extension is necessary on compelling grounds. There are five significant principles or reasons for denying the request.

t. 416 572 0464  f. 416 572 0465  276 Carlaw Ave  Suite 203  Toronto  Ontario  M4M 3L1

P A G

Page 292 of 297

First, County Council almost always defers to the local municipality when making such a site-specific decision. The reasons for this are many, most importantly, local Councillors most often have the best sense of the needs of constituents and lay of the land, so to speak, with respect to environmental issues. This principle of local deference has a long history in municipal government. My understanding is that the Council of the Township of South Frontenac, after listening carefully to residents, and the delegation of Gavin Marshall, of MWDC, voted to deny the extension. Nothing in the way of an extraordinary or compassionate reason was put forward to grant the extension. Council exercised its discretion reasonably and voted to deny the extension. That vote should be respected, in the absence of any new and compelling reason to negate Township’s decision. Second, there has been considerable reticence on the part of MWDC to sign back the draft condominium agreement. This refusal has put Township and Staff in the impossible position of having to monitor and enforce any of the conditions in place without the benefit of that agreement e.g. site access. This is an egregious breach of planning protocol and skates very close to bad faith. It is a clear indication of a lack of sincerity with respect to fulfilling the Conditions. Third, the extension should be denied based on the conduct of MWDC to date. MWDC failed to obtain the necessary approvals and authorizations before initiating development and site alteration activities. As Magenta expressed in its recent delegation to Township Council, “Environmental standards could not be more elevated. It is unfortunate and regrettable and deplorable that the project, and those standards have not been respected here before.” The principle of deterrence is an important one in society, and especially so in enforcement and protection. Granting this extension would surely stand out as a reward or tacit condonation of bad behaviour. It has been demonstrated on numerous occasions that site work has been conducted in sensitive environmental areas without permission. The Respondents and Township councillor voiced concerns MWDC: o o o

Undertook heavy road construction activity and blasting without approval immediately following the April 4, 2016 OMB hearing; Conducted unauthorized vegetation removal in the 30 metre “Environmental Protection Buffer” around the shoreline, documented last March 2018; and Illegally installed a walking bridge on Lot #6 without a building permit from the Township or CRCA permit, in February 2019.

The clear inference to be drawn from this activity is that MWDC does not respect the planning process, Planning Act, Conservation Authorities Act, the Condominium Act, the Endangered Species Act or the will of Township Council. In conclusion, how is it that MWDC has earned the trust of County Council and the privilege of having its approval extended? There are no legal grounds for granting the 2 Donnelly Law  t. 416 572 0464  f. 416 572 0465  276 Carlaw Ave  Suite 203  Toronto  Ontario  M4M 3L1

P A G

Page 293 of 297

approval, and a number of planning, legal and moral principles that warrant a denial of the extension application. Finally, after five years of failing to meet the Conditions, advancing “a change in management” is an extremely weak rationale for needing more time. That change came long after the period for responding to the Township’s requests had expired. Development projects of this complexity and sensitivity should be professionally managed and executed. If that has not been the case to date, Council should be more inclined to stop the development. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 416-572-0464, or by email to david@donnellylaw.ca, cc’ing alexandra@donnellylaw.ca should you have any concerns. Yours truly,

David R. Donnelly Attachment (1) cc.

M. Melnik-Proud S. Harmer E. Potts G. Miller

3 Donnelly Law  t. 416 572 0464  f. 416 572 0465  276 Carlaw Ave  Suite 203  Toronto  Ontario  M4M 3L1

P A G

Page 294 of 297 Ms. Meela Melnik-Proud and Mr. Matt Rennie will address Council with respect to the Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval for the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium. [See Recommend Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer clause e)]. Presentation by Ms. Melnik-Proud and Mr. Rennie Slide 1. Warden Higgins and County Councillors. Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you in regards to this important matter. For those of you who know Matt, you would know that, he is a ‘regular’ at the South Frontenac evening meetings. It is unfortunate that due to his day job he is unable to be here with me. Slide 2. Gavin Marshall, of Magenta, has stated that they “haven’t had operational control or responsibility for this project until roughly late March” - a few short months ago. The fact is Magenta applied for the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium in June 2014 – five years ago. For five years, concern residents have continued to work in good faith and our community’s best interest to provide you with solid, community knowledge and independent expert information, to assist in decision-making on Johnston Point in a timely, effective, open and fair manner. The purpose of today’s delegation is to bring forward our presentation, another public letter of concern, and another legal opinion from Donnelly Law all regarding the issue of extension. With them, we respectfully ask you to support and reinforce our Township’s recommendation to deny extension to the conditions of draft plan. We learned only a few days ago that due to the Township’s large population, South Frontenac has 3 votes on the extension, and that two of those votes are cast by our Mayor, and one by Councillor Revill as our other representative. To our mayor, Councillor Vandewal, we ask you to honor your February 19 promise that “assured your Council that you would not support any extension to the Johnston Point agreement at the County.” th

It is our understanding that there are no formal requirements for our two Township representatives, to vote in a manner that aligns with our Township Council’s 6-2 decision on denial. There is however an expectation that you will represent your fellow Councillors here at County and respect and honour their hard decisions. Slide 3. To Councillor Revill we say thank you. Your Township Council has made a clearly reasoned recommendation that denying this extension is in the best interests of South Frontenac and the County as a whole. It did not make this decision lightly. You, and your fellow South Frontenac councillors struggled to find a way to endorse this extension. Your Council’s recommendation for denial is the result of careful consideration of this recent extension request and five years of direct engagement and dealings with Magenta. Magenta is still seeking the Overall Benefit permit issued under the Endangered Species Act NOT for the main purpose of protecting species at risk on Johnston Point. By definition of this 17(2)(c) Permit, it is to allow for threatened and endangered species on Johnston Point to be killed, harmed or harassed, or their habitat to be damaged or destroyed, so that this otherwise prohibited Draft Plan of Condominium can proceed. We are two of many people who share a common goal of protecting and restoring Johnston Point’s species at risk and its unique natural heritage environment. We are two of many people who recognize the inherent natural value of this property that will be irreversibly lost should an Overall Benefit Permit be implemented. What is at stake is one of the richest and most significant representations of biodiversity and natural heritage features in Ontario. By definition of the Overall Benefit Permit alone– this development will have serious, irreversible impact on this highly sensitive environment that provides habitat to multiple species at risk and is of natural and scientific interest identified for protection by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry in 1993. Three years ago, Matt and I made a stand at the OMB appeal on Johnston Point to ensure this perspective be given full consideration. Three years ago, Magenta was certainly not asking for a time extension. Rather, they made an appeal to the OMB on the Township’s failure to make a decision on this Plan of Condominium in 180 days. It was in the particular face of mounting

Page 295 of 297 public and Township concern over species at risk. In the 10 minutes we have for delegation, there is time only to note that, three years ago, at the April 2016 OMB appeal hearing we specifically requested “that this case be dismissed based on the fact that the 180-day clause invoked by the Developer specifically aimed at avoiding due process.” SKIP TO SLIDE 19: Slide 19: In the 10 minutes we have for delegation, there is only time to note that 5 threatened and endangered species have since been documented by independent surveys, none of which had been identified in the EIAs, and only two of these species at risk are addressed by the benefit permit. Slide 20: As we understood it, the Township and County mandate was protecting Johnston Point’s species at risk and natural heritage environment, not allowing it to be damaged or destroyed in a trade off for Overall Benefit elsewhere in Ontario. Slide 21. We lost our bid for party status, but our information and statements as participants led to the explicit ruling of the OMB on June 28, 2016 that “Conditions of Draft Plan Approval will ensure that matters of Provincial interest as well as the public interest is appropriately addressed and duly safeguarded … that the necessary approvals and/or permissions are appropriately obtained.” Slide 22. Magenta has had three years to meet these commitments as ruled by the OMB. By their own admissions, they have failed to do so. As Magenta expressed to Township Councillors, “Environmental standards could not be more elevated. It is unfortunate and regrettable and deplorable that the project, and those standards have not been respected here before.” Magenta’s appeal to the OMB. Their internal legal disputes with the previous Project Manager. Their repeated failure to obtain the necessary approvals and authorizations before initiating development and site alteration activities. Their unwillingness to sign the Condominium agreement to allow the Township and County access to the property. Their delays in obtaining the Overall Benefit Permit. These actions, lacking transparency and due diligence on the part of Magenta, have cost the Township hundreds of staff hours and thousands of taxpayers dollars without any return to the municipality. We hold that South Frontenac Council did not “fail’ to approve an extension. They made a fully informed decision with logical explanation and significant reason. Magenta applied for the Overall Benefit Permit over 1 ½ years ago. At that time over 2400 people signed a Petition calling for this development to stop. With that petition we provided authorities with the best expert opinion we could find on this matter – that of Gord Miller, our former Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. Mr. Miller warned then that in this “extreme case of conflicting values – between species at risk conservation and residential development … On Johnston Point, the species and habitat loss will be absolute.” I leave you with this concern, on behalf of a concern public, and I am happy to answer any questions.

Page 296 of 297

Ms. Evonne Potts, President, Battersea Loughborough Lake Association, will address Council with respect to the Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval for the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium. [See Recommend Reports from the Chief Administrative Officer clause e)] Magenta delayed the Johnston Point project by providing an Environmental Impact Assessment that was proven to have glaring errors and omissions in it. Magenta delayed providing the MNRF with species at risk information, and when they finally did provide the information it was insufficient, which in turn delayed the permitting process. Magenta has delayed signing back a Condominium Agreement that they asked for, and that would allow Township and County staff to monitor the development. Magenta has delayed producing a copy of a critical permit, citing a legal dispute with a partner as the reason for the delay. Magenta has delayed in obtaining a building permit for an illegal walking bridge that has already been built in provincially significant wetland. Our Township knows all of the above. And so much more. Magenta’s actions or inactions are the only reasons why the Johnston Point project has been delayed. No one else is to blame. Not the Township, not the County, the MNRF, the CRCA, Magenta’s consultants or their former project manager. Hiring a consultant who has never publicly found a live species at risk on site delayed this project. Getting into a legal dispute with a partner, who is also their former project manager delayed this project. But, these were Magenta’s business decisions, and poor business decisions are not sufficient reason to grant an extension. Producing inaccurate documents, not being able to produce critical ones, failure to sign back, for over a year, an agreement that was issued in good faith, not obtaining proper authorizations or approvals, are sufficient reasons to deny this extension. Our Township does not want this happening in our Township. You would not want this happening in your Township. Frontenac County should not want this happening in their County. Today is the day to send a message that you hear the concerns of your Townships, and that Frontenac County, only allows, responsible development.

Page 297 of 297

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2019-47 A BY-LAW TO CONFIRM GENERALLY PREVIOUS ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC. THEREFORE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC, BY ITS COUNCIL, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.

The actions of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac at its Council Meeting of July 2, 2019 be confirmed.

Execution by the Mayor and the Clerk of all Deeds, Instruments and other Documents necessary to give effect to any such Resolution, Motion or other action and the affixing of the Corporate Seal to any such Deed, Instruments or other Documents is hereby authorized and confirmed.

This By-law shall come into force and take effect on the date of its passage.

Dated at the Township of South Frontenac this 2 day of July, 2019. Read a first and second time this 2 day of July, 2019. Read a third time and finally passed this 2 day of July, 2019.

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

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.